I don't like The Beatles, am I the only one?

[Petrushka]

While the odd "hand grenade" may have been been thrown, we all seemed to have reached a consensus:

• Not all of us like The Beatles. I do like them but many others don't.
• Our taste in music is often influenced by what was popular in our teens.
• We can except each others views.

Too boring. I'm off to read the latest on the New Jersey UFO stoush and Silver sounds different to Copper bun fight.

We shouldn’t except everything done by spell checkers.

 

[kchap]

We shouldn’t except everything done by spell checkers.

I can accept your correction!

 

[Soandso]

what getting girls to scream at them? Elvis and Frank did that.

The screaming of music female fans was initially deliberately instigated and caught on as if mass hysteria. Stories from Sinatra's rise to fame include wet fan seat cushions after the show. Performance film of early Elvis "The Pelvis" don't show us his extreme gyrations which so excited unsspecting white girls. Elvis' older show manager first planted screaming girls knowing how they boosted Sinatra's name. As I recall the Beatles manager deployed some screaming girls at an early stage as well.

 

[sonitus mirus]

The Beatles were not just famous because of their songs (though their catchy tunes and pop-friendly melodies did help). They became more of a cultural event than just a band. Their style, their looks, and the endless media coverage made them seem larger than life, and they showed up at a moment when everyone seemed ready for something fresh. Either way, all that hype meant not everyone was going to love them. If you’re someone who does not like the Beatles, it might have less to do with the music itself and more to do with the way their image was pushed onto the world.

 

[BeeKay]

Can’t stand them. Dunno why, simply does not click with me. Maybe because it’s hardly any different from all the boring pop stuff we suffer from ever since they started this mess. Should be banned even in elevators.

 

[sonitus mirus]

Can’t stand them. Dunno why, simply does not click with me. Maybe because it’s hardly any different from all the boring pop stuff we suffer from ever since they started this mess. Should be banned even in elevators.

What about the Monkees? Maybe you just don't like mainstream stuff? I mean, the music is catchy, and it sounds pleasant to most people.

 

[BeeKay]

What about the Monkees? Maybe you just don't like mainstream stuff? I mean, the music is catchy, and it sounds pleasant to most people.

The Who kinda works for me. But will prefer Jazz any second.
To be clear, just my weird perception of the world. Happy to suffer when others enjoy their stuff

 

[Bjorn]

I never understood why the Beatles were so popular. Grew up listening to them a lot because of the popularity back then but never really liked them. Had a few ok songs and many very much overrated. For example do I find Yellow Submarine an incredible annoying child song.

 

[sonitus mirus]

I never understood why the Beatles were so popular. Grew up listening to them a lot because of the popularity back then but never really liked them. Had a few ok songs and many very much overrated. For example do I find Yellow Submarine an incredible annoying child song.

Certainly, but I would venture to say that many Beatles aficionados would agree that Yellow Submarine was childish. Their music encompassed an incredibly eclectic range of songs. I loved the Abbey Road album, but the song, "Maxwell's Silver Hammer", while foot-tappingly enjoyable, was quite silly to me from a lyrical perspective.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I am not a particular Beatles fan but at least their music was varied and in a lot of cases quite interesting.

 

[Mal]

I never understood why the Beatles were so popular. Grew up listening to them a lot because of the popularity back then but never really liked them. Had a few ok songs and many very much overrated. For example do I find Yellow Submarine an incredible annoying child song.

I also find Yellow Submarine annoying, but it's unfair to judge the Beatles on a less-than B side "let's give Ringo a go..." production.

I think the Beatles initially produced OK pop songs, but after a few years started generating timeless classics. I scanned down "the #1 album" today wondering which I'd pick as the first timeless classic - I decided on "Yesterday" and, yup, there it was - wonderful. Actually it was the best I ever heard it! Thumbs up for the 2015 remix.

 

[Randyman...]

The Beatles are hit and miss for me (mostly miss). Certainly appreciate them as musicians - Ringo is very underrated IMNSHO, and they have some good-to-great songs. Had some fun times with the "Number Nine" thing in HighSchool on my buddy's dad's Bose system and some "adjuvants". Even back then, I didn't think very highly of that Bose system

 

[Mal]

Can’t stand them. Dunno why, simply does not click with me. Maybe because it’s hardly any different from all the boring pop stuff we suffer from ever since they started this mess. Should be banned even in elevators.

Many of the early songs might be labelled as "just more boring pop stuff" by those (like me) who have listened to too much boring pop stuff - but as they started it should they be blamed? Aren't succeeding artists at fault for copying them? And what about much of their later work? Doesn't sound like boring pop stuff to me. Play it in elevators, make people's lives more interesting.

 

[sonitus mirus]

The Beatles were extremely influential in their time.

“Tomorrow Never Knows,” the final track on their 1966 album Revolver, is a great example of that influence. Primarily composed by John Lennon, it showcased the band’s growing interest in psychedelia, Eastern philosophy, and inventive recording techniques. Drawing on Timothy Leary’s adaptation of The Tibetan Book of the Dead, the song carries a meditative, otherworldly mood that felt completely new back then.

From a production standpoint, “Tomorrow Never Knows” was a big step forward. Producer George Martin and engineer Geoff Emerick experimented with tape loops, reversed guitar parts, and fed Lennon’s voice through a Leslie speaker, creating an eerie, swirling vocal effect. Instead of following the usual chord patterns of pop music, the track relies on a single chord and Ringo Starr’s steady, hypnotic drum beat—another choice that set it apart from the era’s standard sound.

This spirit of experimentation didn’t stop with Revolver. Soon after, the band recorded “Strawberry Fields Forever,” which also broke with traditional song structures through layered arrangements, unconventional techniques, and introspective lyrics. Taken together, these tracks paved the way for the psychedelic era that followed, showing how The Beatles consistently pushed music forward and made a lasting impact on popular culture.

Music was much different back then, and the changes we see today can, in part, be traced back to The Beatles and their willingness to rewrite the rules.

 

[Mal]

“Tomorrow Never Knows,” the final track on their 1966 album Revolver...

Just listened to it from the "Super Deluxe" 2023 production on Amazon Music - there are three takes of this number! "Take 1" is a fascinating contrast - it sounds as if Paul is laughing on a Kazoo, making fun of John's seriousness, and Ringo's drum work is completely astounding! Did John feel he was being made fun of and upstaged?

 

[BeeKay]

Many of the early songs might be labelled as "just more boring pop stuff" by those (like me) who have listened to too much boring pop stuff - but as they started it should they be blamed? Aren't succeeding artists at fault for copying them? And what about much of their later work? Doesn't sound like boring pop stuff to me. Play it in elevators, make people's lives more interesting.

Do to elevators whatever you want, I’ll go for the stairs
Beatles in a nutshell:
Yes, revolutionary for their time. Maybe setting the path for others. Maybe we’d less to endure today if more interesting bands had played their role.

Anyway … boring rhythm, boring voices, boring message. Just hype. Lame.

 

[sonitus mirus]

The Beatles likely weren’t as overly serious or self-important as many have made them out to be. They had been playing together since they were teens.

 

[sonitus mirus]

Do to elevators whatever you want, I’ll go for the stairs
Beatles in a nutshell:
Yes, revolutionary for their time. Maybe setting the path for others. Maybe we’d less to endure today if more interesting bands had played their role.

Anyway … boring rhythm, boring voices, boring message. Just hype. Lame.

Pretty much every popular musical artist in a nutshell.

 

[BeeKay]

Pretty much every popular musical artist in a nutshell.

Exactly. Good for teens. Once you grew up …

 

[sonitus mirus]

Exactly. Good for teens. Once you grew up …

They were often viewed as a “boy band,” with hordes of screaming teenage girls fueling the Beatlemania phenomenon.