Give the Beatles their due

[Gawain of Orkeny]

I was there too, then, Gawain. Though I grew up in Motown, where we took notice of the Liverpudlians, but thought they were just stealing our guys' stuff.

Nah your just a kid Look everyone didnt think the Beatles were the end all and their early stuff certainly included a lot of Motown covers. They were big fans of the sound.

Heres maybe a better take on it.

The Beatles were to rock music what Louis Armstrong was to jazz. Both artists began by studying and thoroughly assimilating artists that had come before. By doing so, they essentially created their respective art forms, by combining what had previously been isolated characteristics of individual artists into cohesive approaches to music. And they both went on to symbolize and advance their respective art forms, having such monumental influences that it would be impossible for any later artists to be untouched by their work.

The Beatles began by studying a broad set of musical influences, including early Rock and Roll, Blues, Rhythm & Blues, Country & Western, girl groups, Phil Spector's Wall of Sound, and Broadway show tunes. They went on to exemplify and solidify all of the aesthetic elements of rock music discussed in this book.

First on the list of The Beatles' many talents were the songwriting skills of Lennon and McCartney. Unlike most of their contemporaries, they were not content to simply throw three chords together and cobble together a melody. They took the songwriting craft very seriously, and as a result, their compositions were often covered by other recording artists, in vocal and instrumental forms. Their songs were varied, with each effort standing on its own as a unique achievement.

Next on the list of their gifts were their voices. John and Paul both had wonderful singing voices: expressive, controlled, flexible and attractive. But all four of them could sing to some degree, and their harmonies and multi-layered vocals were hallmarks of their style. Again, as with their compositions, the uses they made of their vocals were many and varied, with differing arrangements on every song.

Perhaps their strongest talent, especially in the context of a rock aesthetic, was their ability to find the perfect expression of each song in the studio. While many rock groups took a loose, bluesy, improvisational approach to their music, the Beatles took a more formal, structured approach to their recordings. Every element of a track was worked out to perfectly blend with and complement the other elements of the song. In this sense they were like painters. Every sound on a track was like a brush stroke placed on canvas by a master: existing for its own sake, but also for its relationship to all the other components of the work, ultimately achieving a perfectly balanced whole. The Beatles were probably the rock group that best captured the spatial nature of rock music, its existence in two dimensions: length and depth. Every musical element was perfectly formed and positioned as part of this two-dimensional landscape. As Paul McCartney commented in a recent interview, after re-listening to the Beatles hits that made up the 1 compilation: “The main thing I thought as a craftsman was how well structured the songs were — that there was nothing that shouldn't have been on them, and you couldn't have put one extra thing on.” (McCartney 2001) (McCartney 2001)

The easiest way to understand this element of their art is to listen to practically any recording of a Lennon and McCartney tune recorded by someone else, and then compare it to the original recording released by The Beatles. Other recordings retain the beauty of the original compositions, yet no matter how well intentioned, sound flat by comparison. This is because they are missing an entire dimension of the original recording: the drumming, the bass patterns, the rhythm guitar, the vocal arrangements. For The Beatles, these other elements were not mere window dressing, not just ornamentation added to the underlying composition — these were essential elements of their art. In this regard, Ringo and George, while not prolific songwriters or frequent singers, were essential to The Beatles' music. Both were versatile musicians in that they were able to play in whatever style best supported the material being recorded, subsuming their personal styles into the demands of the work at hand. At the same time, they both had keen abilities to add something unique and wonderful to each song, adding to and complementing the other musical elements.

Another element that contributed to the Beatles' music was their awareness of a broader expanse of artistic endeavor. John had gone to art school, and produced writings and drawings. The Beatles often attracted, and hung out with, artists and students. As Paul indicates below, art was part of who they were.


We were always slightly studenty. We used to make fun of the other bands who weren't. I received a poetry book once, in Hamburg: Yevtushenko. A girlfriend sent it to me.... The point was that we had a book of poetry; it was part of our equipment. It was part and parcel of what we all liked — art. (Beatles 2000)


Finally, what also separated The Beatles from many of their lesser contemporaries was a relentless desire for discovery and experimentation. They were never content to stop at a particular plateau and set up camp — as soon as they had explored a new territory, they were ready to push on to something new. They were the Lewis and Clark of rock music, forever wanting to find new frontiers.

The evolution of The Beatles' recorded output from 1963 to 1969 not only gave focus and meaning to this particular group's musical efforts, but to all of rock music. Because of their unequaled commercial, cultural and aesthetic stature, they were able to act as leaders for the rock community during their recording career. While this evolution resulted in distinct differences between recordings produced at different phases of their career, each phase has its own virtues, and almost all of their recorded work is worth repeated listening

LINK

they are dated now and there were and are better bands.

Im afraid you also are not giving the Beatles their due. Sgt Peppers, the White Album and Abbey Road for instance sound as fresh and new today as they ever did. Thats why teens still are discovering the Beatles today. I still cant think of a better band. Music certainly has gone down hill from the 60s and early 70s not up. There are no better groups today. That was the golden age of rock.

They made rock respectable.

In the end they were what they set out to be . The Gilbert and Sullivan of rock,

[Geoffrey S]

Im afraid you also are not giving the Beatles their due. Sgt Peppers, the White Album and Abbey Road for instance sound as fresh and new today as they ever did. Thats why teens still are discovering the Beatles today. I still cant think of a better band. Music certainly has gone down hill from the 60s and early 70s not up. There are no better groups today. That was the golden age of rock.

They made rock respectable.

In a way, yes, I suppose I'm not giving them their due. It took me an awful long time to actually start listening to the Beatles, and having heard many good bands strongly influenced by them I can imagine the perception was somewhat dulled. But I'd certainly not say there are no better groups today, though nothing has ever been quite as revolutionary in commercialising the rock genre; listen to many a well-known modern rock act, be it Modest Mouse, Oasis, or Blur and there are certainly many influences, so I'd agree with you that the Beatles were fundamental. But no better groups? That is selling the somewhat less mainstream formations short, in which I've heard many a unique and brilliant sound. The best band of all times is in my opinion Godspeed You! Black Emperor, closely followed by Mogwai, both relatively recent formations.