Did you know that Paul in 1966 had the idea of making Revolver without guitars.
Rock music had barely been invented, and The Beatles were already having such ideas.
This is why they were the best pop act of the 20th century
Share you favorite Beatles facts itt
Why Don't We Do It in the Road was inspired by a scene of monkeys copulating that Paul witnessed in India.
>>127101441 (OP)>>127103203Did you know The Beatles were hated on /mu/ before 2016? It's true. You probably wouldn't have liked it
>>127103213There's no we or collective and nobody's your "friend" here. There is just anon.
Shut the fuck up nigga. I'm trying to bust a FAT ass nut to Olivia Rodrigo.
>>127103213did you know idgaf what anons here think about music unless they're introducing me to some or shedding light on some?
The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all time are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all time. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics, instead, are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way) therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers.
In a sense, the Beatles are emblematic of the status of rock criticism as a whole: too much attention paid to commercial phenomena and too little to the merits of real musicians. If somebody composes the most divine music but no major label picks him up and sells him around the world, most rock critics will ignore him. If a major label picks up a musician who is as stereotyped as can be but launches her or him worldwide, your average critic will waste rivers of ink on her or him. This is the sad status of rock criticism: rock critics are basically publicists working for major labels, distributors and record stores. They simply highlight what product the music business wants to make money from.
Hopefully one not-too-distant day, there will be a clear demarcation between a great musician like Tim Buckley who never sold much, and commercial products like the Beatles. At such a time rock critics will study their rock history and understand which artists accomplished which musical feat, and which simply exploited it commercially.
>>127103213Don't you ever get tired of shouting at clouds, old man?
