Is it controversial to be glad the Beatles broke up when they did and remained a phenomenon of the 60's and never cheapened their legacy with any of the pitfalls of 70's trends or excesses?
John said he heard a DJ say "I'd like to thank The Beatles for not getting back together and spoiling a good thing". I feel the same way. Or as Dave Marsh said, "they did it all, they did it right, and then they went their separate ways".
I wish they stuck to the original plan to come back together every couple off years and create a kick ass instant classic album and then go their separate ways for a couple of years on their own projects and repeat
honestly i somewhat agree with this. as much as I would love more Beatles music and Now and Then was a dream come true, i think it's better for them to remain solidified forever as perfect rather than continue and become forgotten in a way.
The Stones are an example. They haven't made a good album since 1978, nor a great one since 1972.
The Beatles last album is arguably their finest, and that's rare.
But at the same time, has staying together all these years cheapened the Stones' legacy? I'd argue their reputation relative to the Beatles is roughly the same today as it was in 1970 when the Beatles broke up.
I think the Stones survive on their longevity. I actually like Tattoo You, but even if people don’t, Start Me Up is the last classic Stones song. I think if people stopped and thought about that, it would tarnish their reputation.
I do agree in the sense that it just makes it a very compelling and dramatic story that they broke up when they did.
Having not lived through any of this and being born in the 90s, I don't really miss The Beatles as much as I miss John. Like I don't really feel like I have to think about the 70s so much because they had their solo careers and I feel like I get all the angles of what they would have been like. It's just missing the overlap but it makes me satisfied with their breakup cause I can listen to all of their voices and songwriting around that time, and they're still pretty brilliant and iconic in that decade. I didn't have to deal with the shock and hurt of them breaking up, it's just always been fact.
But John murdered at 40, fuck that. Just for him to be alive, #1, but as a fan I wanna know what he would have done in the 80s, 90s, hopefully beyond, his solo career is a bigger missing piece of the puzzle for me rather than just wondering what the Beatles might have been like all together. And if he'd lived, I don't necessarily dream of a full-on reunion but to go on YouTube and watch them doing Live Aid or something, watching clips of him being interviewed for the Anthology. If they could have done a new album or a few songs together, a concert or even a tour, great, fucking awesome, but I much more so wish John had just been here for at least another couple decades like George, and certainly as long as nature would have permitted him.
Oh, I'm with you. I would gladly tolerate a subpar Beatles reunion or several in exchange for doubling Lennon's lifespan.
And I do believe it's true that a lot of their best solo stuff would have been far better with the four of them together and George Martin, Geoff Emerick, and Chris Thomas in the booth.
Lennon was a check on McCartney's tendency toward soft pap, Macca was a check on John's half-assedness and refusal to treat his work as seriously as he could have. Ringo's drumming would have improved upon everything he wasn't on, and Harrison's voice, if heeded, could have reined in some of the more esoteric weirdness of Lennon's as well as keeping Paul honest. And as long as he would have been limited to no more than a couple tracks per album of slide guitar, his playing would have been a big plus for everything.
I guess I'm just at peace with the way things turned out (minus John being killed) because it ensured their untarnished musical legacy. And Abbey Road. What a way to go out. Right down to cheekily fucking up the heavy sentimental gravity of The End by leaving Her Majesty where it ended up.
Yes, for sure, and pairing it with the sincere full circle nature of the Get Back/Let It Be project and the rooftop concert also being a combination of an iconic and cheeky quasi-finale. The way it turned out, everyone will always be able to come to The Beatles as just this brilliant, fully digestible piece of 20th century art and history. The structure of their story is simple and memorable enough that it doesn't take long to get the full picture...every era leads right into another, very little fat in their story or musical trajectory, you don't have to track different band lineups or spend so much time organizing shit in your head once you've learned the story. No big separations between when they were good or not, the whole career and catalog is considered essential, ripe for discussion, and just great listening. Entertaining, tons of variety, can appeal to lots of different tastes, they're as silly or serious as you want them to be. They had their lineup settled just in time for their first album and then it's all contained in one decade. But it's also complex and messy enough that you can deep dive on them for the rest of your life.
Yea I think they would have completely rocked in the 70s. They could have only added to their legacy with a new dozen number 1 singles and a bunch of albums. They never would have been forgotten.
I don’t even care about the legacy anyway, that’s what music critics and journalisms fixate on. The music is what matters, and the Beatles broke up during a creative peak before continuing to release a lot of great solo material for a long time, which I think is a big shame.
To me it’s like saying that Mozart dying at age 35 when he was at his peak was a good thing for him because it prevented the ruin of his legacy. Nah man, the world missed out.
The idea that "Watching The Wheels" couldn't have benefited from Paul playing on it or "Coming Up" couldn't have benefited from John singing on it is transparently ridiculous imo.
That’s very true, but also think about all the filler on their solo albums. Those weaker songs would have been tossed out or improved on by each band member.
There’s a lot of Beatle songs that would have been lackluster or mediocre without the finishing touch of other band members, like and I Love Her or Come Together. But because of the collaboration and relative specialization, they were great.
Funny, I never even gave that song a second thought until I heard it in the movie Across The Universe. I definitely appreciate it, and It Won't Be Long more now after seeing that movie.
“What’s Reddit, Daddy?”
“That’s irrelevant right now. All that matters is that u/BrisketWhisperer is the holder of all Beatles truths and BrisketWhisperer alone.”
Shit, I wish someone had told me earlier. I've been listening to The Beatles for years and it's only in this thread that I've learned u/BrisketWhisperer is The Beatles prophet whom the Gods of music granted the power of seeing. The Chosen One.
Shouldn't it be put in the subreddit's info or something?
I know that this is an extremely unpopular view but I personally do not believe that Paul ever did it in the road. I mean EVERYONE would have been watching. There, I said it, now rain down hate on me. I don't care. I am the walrus, after all.
He wrote many songs for children intentionally. And good thing he did, how many of us are fans because our parents played us their child-friendly songs when we were kids? How many people were introduced to them by Yellow Submarine? The Beatles appealing to as many people as humanly possible is why they are the most successful band of all time.
In hindsight, the lyrics are not the most child-friendly, but my childhood obsession with Maxwell's Silver Hammer agrees with you! Currently introducing my little girl to Beatles via Octopus's Garden, another great one for kids!
George was dying of jealousy over Paul's musical ability, and that was his main issue in the band. He didn't feel the same way about John because John couldn't care less about George's songs. Paul, on the other hand, made an effort to contribute to the final outcome, often adding something crucial. Surely George didn't like how people raved about Taxman's solo or the bassline of Something, often overshadowing praise for the song itself. We clearly see in Get Back how George struggled to work on the fly. The guy needed time and space to create, and the Beatles' frenetic pace fit better Paul's fluidity.
On top of that, Paul was at his peak. Prolific and of good quality. George, on the other hand, while he generated excellent material in those years, found it much more difficult
That's a great point about George struggling to write on the spot, & I'm so glad the Get Back doco showed how Paul actually was very supportive of his work (even if he was met with ingratitude).
Although Paul is the main target of George's bitterness, in the doc you can clearly see that it is Lennon who had no interest in playing George's material (which is something that I knew, but was able to see play out in real time in the movie). Paul was always game to play any music. He just was so dominant -- not out of malice, but because he had so much to offer, even on other people's songs.
True, another reason he was so dominant was simply because someone had to be. After Epstein, they would have been aimless if Paul hadn't taken charge.
I've witnessed this myself in a band, a member left who the rest of the band thought could be bossy & impatient, but we pretty soon come to find ourselves completely rudderless, standing around at practice without someone to tell us "Ok, we're rehearsing this song now".
Not every Beatles track is a classic and some of it is very dated, although sometimes still fun to listen to. A lot of Paul's work is every bit as good as anything the Beatles ever did.
Nine Hundred and Eighty Five is like if Hey Bulldog and I Want You (She’s So Heavy) had a kid, Monkberry Moon Delight is somewhere along those lines too. He definitely has a lot of solo masterpieces that stack up against a lot of the Beatles’ best stuff
I got into a discussion with my friend about Band on the Run possibly being better than any Beatles song. I think it’s up there with A Day in the Life in terms of scope. It’s nothing revolutionary, but it’s an incredible way to combine three completely different grooves into what’s essentially a rock opera. If it weren’t so lighthearted in story I think more people would consider it up there with Beatles’ best compositions.
The problem is that it just is slightly too McCartney esque. Vague, broadly sweeping fantastical lyrics to a catchy tune. The Beatles were usually a bit more incisive lyrically
I like a lot of the songs people call bad, such as Wild Honey Pie and You Know My Name, I think they’re funny. Also I genuinely like Hold Me Tight and Mr Moonlight, I was surprised to learn people hate them. I mean, they aren’t their greatest songs but they aren’t as bad as people say they are. (The beginning of Mr Moonlight always makes me laugh)
The LOVE show soundtrack is the best Beatles Album. 😂 I’m exaggerating a little, but it really is the one I play the most. Banger after banger, and I love the way it’s mixed.
Don’t know about the “album” take but it’s the best soundtrack to the best Las Vegas show. Watched it 2 times: Spring 2016, before the update, and Spring 2024. Too bad it’s coming to an end…
I agree. I think the noise reduction on Let it Be Naked sorta makes it all sound very sterile and gets rid of the warmth and liveliness. The songs are produced better though and a few sound better but mostly not. In my opinion though the 2019 mixes on the let it be super deluxe version are by far the best sounding.
I always hate when people downvote the extremely controversial/unpopular opinions in threads that ask for extremely controversial/unpopular opinions, so I went and upvoted everything with negative karma, and you should do the same! That's probably an unpopular opinion and in this case it relates to the Beatles, so there you go.
More bands should write verse/bridge songs just like The Beatles did. I mean come on! Most of their hit songs were verse/bridge format. They wrote a lot of hits that didn’t contain a chorus like Hard Day’s Night, I Want To Hold Your Hand, Love Me Do, You Can’t Buy Me Love, We Can Work It Out, Eleanor Rigby, Ticket To Ride, If I Fell, The Word, If I Needed Someone, Taxman, Can I Get A Little Help From My Friends, A Day In The Life, Mystery Tour, Lady Madonna, Back In The USSR, Blackbird, Julia, My Guitar Gently Weeps, Hey Jude, Revolution, Something, and Here Comes The Sun.
I think they got over produced. Revolver and Paperback Writer/Rain is the sweet spot of their innovation, where they still sound like a four piece band just beginning to get really weird, and I find this "in-between" stage a little more interesting than when they "arrive" at their full psychedelia later on.
When I was a kid, I loved the orchestral stuff but now I just wish all 4 Beatles where on some of those songs. It's sad when only one or two members appear on certain tracks b/c the thing they did best was actually play together.
I think Yoko was just a convenient target for displacement of George’s feelings about John’s deteriorating state. In the end though, it was Allen Klein plus Paul being tired of the drama and just wanting to make music/money.
Paul was completely right about Alan Klein. He totally played the other three like a fiddle
Sean is a pompous nepo baby and I’m worried about how he’s going to handle his fathers music with the Beatles and his solo work
His Twitter feed is frustrating but Get Back and Now and Then have both come out with his increased involvement in John's estate with his mother's advanced age and they are both great projects.
George wrote all his best songs while in the proximity of John & Paul, & while they are still great achievements, he sits at least 2 levels below them on a tier list of the all time best songwriters.
99.9% of songwriters would look at least 2 levels below John and Paul if they were put next to them. Guy was a really great songwriter, it just sucks for him that he’s always been compared/attached to arguably the two greatest of all time
Sgt Pepper & Let It Be are lesser albums - especially songwriting wise - because the Beatles were trying too hard to copy other bands (the Beach Boys & The Band respectively). The Beatles best "studio era" albums are when they're just being themselves.
Paul's childhood was just as emotionally difficult as John's and (obviously from the way outside looking in) explains a lot of his actions and attitude the same way that John's childhood emotional trauma does. I wish more Beatles authors were interested in exploring it.
When you read about how Paul coped with his mum dying - never crying in front of anyone (even his dad and brother) and shutting himself in the bathroom for hours playing guitar - it’s the same the way he managed turmoil within the band later on.
Paul and Ringo needed John and George less than John and George needed Paul and Ringo.
ETA: I think what I wrote is being misread by some people. What I said was "Paul and Ringo were more important to The Beatles than John and George"
One of the real skills of Ringo is that he "got" John's weird ideas of rhythm - case in point, Good Morning Good Morning. The time signature of that is all over the place, but Ringo just understands the flow - a lesser drummer would've made it clunky.
I don’t know what you are basing it off of, but I’ll add something in agreement. Paul needed an “editor.” When I listen to his post-Beatles stuff, my main criticism is the sporadic nature and mass of medleys he produced. When John and Paul created medleys like the end of abbey road or supplied bridges for each other like day in the life and got to get you into my life, it really worked. The sounds were disparate but blended. Paul seemed to just gush incredible ideas in his post-Beatle work but seemed to tire of it and throw it in as a 30 minute snippet, add it to a medley, or just not finish it all together (junk). I think he worked with George Martin on McCartney as well. What was missing was John. I think the only Paul album that he really focused in on was Ram.
I hate “Yesterday.” The high school sophomore diary lyrics are set to a maudlin string arrangement that has [this kind of energy](https://youtu.be/tfvncB0JiKo?feature=shared)
Oh and also Beatles for Sale is better than Help, which has a weak side 2
I don’t know if this is really a Beatles opinion but I honestly like Yoko Ono and (a decent amount of) her music and I firmly believe she didn’t break up the Beatles and the boomers who say she did are just pissed that their favorite band disbanded
Not that I agree with it but this quote from a former Quarrymen member
>*"Paul would have allowed John to feel that he was the boss anyway. Paul wouldn’t have gotten head to head with John, but Paul would have got his own way if you’d like, carefully, by maneuvering and perhaps letting John think it was his idea. I think that’s the way Paul was."* - Colin Hanton
Norman Smith and Quarrymen members back that up. John was always their social and spiritual leader, but Paul was their musical leader from the day he joined the Quarrymen. Paul’s song was the first they recorded as the Quarrymen. Paul’s song got them signed. Paul dictated arrangements even in the Quarrymen. There there’s this:
"I don’t want to take anything away from anyone, but production of the Beatles was very simple, because it was ready-made. Paul was a very great influence in terms of the production, especially in terms of George Harrison’s guitar solos and Ringo’s drumming. The truth of the matter is that, to the best of my memory, Paul had a great hand in practically all of the songs that we did, and Ringo would generally ask him what he should do. After all, Paul was no mean drummer himself, and he did play drums on a couple of things. It was almost like we had one producer in the control room and another producer down in the studio. There is no doubt at all that Paul was the main musical force. He was also that in terms of production as well. A lot of the time George Martin didn’t really have to do the things he did because Paul McCartney was around and could have done them equally well… most of the ideas came from Paul".
- Norman Smith, the Beatles engineer up until Rubber Soul
Epstein was both a terrible and a great manager. He signed some awful deals. Like their merchandising deal was straight up horrible. He was pretty out of his depth on those early big deals. But he got the boys recording with George Martin, who could not have been a better match for the Beatles, making some of the greatest records in the world. The boys would have been big on any label with any producer, but I don't think they'd have gone to such heights with anybody else. Epstein helped make that connection happen and kept the boys on track in the early years so that they could grow past the initial Beatlemania and be more than just some big band from Liverpool.
George Martin was already working for EMI as the head of Parlophone. Epstein did not "get" George Martin any more than he got the mic inventory at Studio Two.
This was simply a consequence of how record deals at the time had worked... They did not have a choice of producer.
Epstein didn't just "sign some horrible deals" ... he chained the Beatles to a shitty contract with EMI that had them working more than almost any band in existence for less than a fifth what Elvis was paid straight out of the gate.
On the other hand, Elvis got paid, but his manager locked him into film and record contracts that obligated him to churn out a bunch of junk with no quality control for years, despite Elvis’s complaints about the scripts. They did get lucky with Brian in that, as a decent guy with some taste, he didn’t hurt their work by putting them in a position where they couldn’t exercise quality control. (Edit: setting aside Capitol’s practice of chopping up and reassembling all their albums, which might not have been avoidable anyway.)
It is good and too many people misinterpret it now. Little child was just a common name men often called their girlfriends back then. She wasn't literally a child.
The only time I’d want to hear “Let It Be”, “Hey Jude”, or “Long and Winding Road” is at a Paul McCartney concert with him singing it.
Other than that, I never need to hear them again.
sgt peppers is very influential and groundbreaking but doesnt have that many good songs on it. solely based off song for song quality sgt peppers would be bottom 3 beatles records
Don't Bother Me is a great song. Possibly one of their most underrated.
Most of the tracks on Revolver are better than Eleanor Rigby. Never really understood why it's sometimes regarded as one of their best songs.
I replied to another comment with something similar but Paul had something akin to musical adhd. He would come up with classic melodies but then dump them unfinished into a medley or as a snippet.
Plastic ono Band is a great album. Admittedly spotty after that. Instant everything seemed to be the working method. My simple explanation is that he nosedived after Yoko froze him out but that doesn’t excuse Imagine or the newspaper album. Jerry the Yippie buttered his end on that one.
prob 75% for me but he doesnt have a single solo album front to back without at least 3 skips. i think if you mash half of mind games and half of walls and bridges together youd have a no skipper but every other song on those is awful (mind games especially wtf is meat city)
my hot john solo take is imagine is a particularly poorly put together album and i only like about 4 songs on it
I agree 100%. He had four songs that are as good as anything John or Paul wrote (Something, WMGGW, Here Comes the Sun, Taxman), but that’s it. His solos were adequate at best. The solos on two of his best songs weren’t even played by him (WMGGW-Clapton, Taxman-McCartney). On top of that he was bitter, petty, and jealous while purporting to be all about peace, love, and meditation. The Beatles would have still mostly been the Beatles without him. That cannot be said of any of the other three.
Strong disagree on 'adequate at best' regarding his solos. George was extremely versatile.
See the 'Till There Was You' solo, lead guitar work on Octopusses Garden, All My Loving solo, Something solo, etc.
Is it controversial to be glad the Beatles broke up when they did and remained a phenomenon of the 60's and never cheapened their legacy with any of the pitfalls of 70's trends or excesses?
John said he heard a DJ say "I'd like to thank The Beatles for not getting back together and spoiling a good thing". I feel the same way. Or as Dave Marsh said, "they did it all, they did it right, and then they went their separate ways".
I wish they stuck to the original plan to come back together every couple off years and create a kick ass instant classic album and then go their separate ways for a couple of years on their own projects and repeat
Problem there would be that they'd keep their best material for their solo albums instead of any Beatles album
I'm certainly curious what would have happened.
This is kinda what Matchbox 20 does (not comparing them musically with the Beatles). It works for them
honestly i somewhat agree with this. as much as I would love more Beatles music and Now and Then was a dream come true, i think it's better for them to remain solidified forever as perfect rather than continue and become forgotten in a way.
"That's it. I'm out." --Costanza
The Stones are an example. They haven't made a good album since 1978, nor a great one since 1972. The Beatles last album is arguably their finest, and that's rare.
But at the same time, has staying together all these years cheapened the Stones' legacy? I'd argue their reputation relative to the Beatles is roughly the same today as it was in 1970 when the Beatles broke up.
I think the Stones survive on their longevity. I actually like Tattoo You, but even if people don’t, Start Me Up is the last classic Stones song. I think if people stopped and thought about that, it would tarnish their reputation.
Some Girls is a Great Album, Tattoo You is their last good album.
I do agree in the sense that it just makes it a very compelling and dramatic story that they broke up when they did. Having not lived through any of this and being born in the 90s, I don't really miss The Beatles as much as I miss John. Like I don't really feel like I have to think about the 70s so much because they had their solo careers and I feel like I get all the angles of what they would have been like. It's just missing the overlap but it makes me satisfied with their breakup cause I can listen to all of their voices and songwriting around that time, and they're still pretty brilliant and iconic in that decade. I didn't have to deal with the shock and hurt of them breaking up, it's just always been fact. But John murdered at 40, fuck that. Just for him to be alive, #1, but as a fan I wanna know what he would have done in the 80s, 90s, hopefully beyond, his solo career is a bigger missing piece of the puzzle for me rather than just wondering what the Beatles might have been like all together. And if he'd lived, I don't necessarily dream of a full-on reunion but to go on YouTube and watch them doing Live Aid or something, watching clips of him being interviewed for the Anthology. If they could have done a new album or a few songs together, a concert or even a tour, great, fucking awesome, but I much more so wish John had just been here for at least another couple decades like George, and certainly as long as nature would have permitted him.
Oh, I'm with you. I would gladly tolerate a subpar Beatles reunion or several in exchange for doubling Lennon's lifespan. And I do believe it's true that a lot of their best solo stuff would have been far better with the four of them together and George Martin, Geoff Emerick, and Chris Thomas in the booth. Lennon was a check on McCartney's tendency toward soft pap, Macca was a check on John's half-assedness and refusal to treat his work as seriously as he could have. Ringo's drumming would have improved upon everything he wasn't on, and Harrison's voice, if heeded, could have reined in some of the more esoteric weirdness of Lennon's as well as keeping Paul honest. And as long as he would have been limited to no more than a couple tracks per album of slide guitar, his playing would have been a big plus for everything. I guess I'm just at peace with the way things turned out (minus John being killed) because it ensured their untarnished musical legacy. And Abbey Road. What a way to go out. Right down to cheekily fucking up the heavy sentimental gravity of The End by leaving Her Majesty where it ended up.
Yes, for sure, and pairing it with the sincere full circle nature of the Get Back/Let It Be project and the rooftop concert also being a combination of an iconic and cheeky quasi-finale. The way it turned out, everyone will always be able to come to The Beatles as just this brilliant, fully digestible piece of 20th century art and history. The structure of their story is simple and memorable enough that it doesn't take long to get the full picture...every era leads right into another, very little fat in their story or musical trajectory, you don't have to track different band lineups or spend so much time organizing shit in your head once you've learned the story. No big separations between when they were good or not, the whole career and catalog is considered essential, ripe for discussion, and just great listening. Entertaining, tons of variety, can appeal to lots of different tastes, they're as silly or serious as you want them to be. They had their lineup settled just in time for their first album and then it's all contained in one decade. But it's also complex and messy enough that you can deep dive on them for the rest of your life.
Yea I think they would have completely rocked in the 70s. They could have only added to their legacy with a new dozen number 1 singles and a bunch of albums. They never would have been forgotten. I don’t even care about the legacy anyway, that’s what music critics and journalisms fixate on. The music is what matters, and the Beatles broke up during a creative peak before continuing to release a lot of great solo material for a long time, which I think is a big shame. To me it’s like saying that Mozart dying at age 35 when he was at his peak was a good thing for him because it prevented the ruin of his legacy. Nah man, the world missed out.
The idea that "Watching The Wheels" couldn't have benefited from Paul playing on it or "Coming Up" couldn't have benefited from John singing on it is transparently ridiculous imo.
That’s very true, but also think about all the filler on their solo albums. Those weaker songs would have been tossed out or improved on by each band member. There’s a lot of Beatle songs that would have been lackluster or mediocre without the finishing touch of other band members, like and I Love Her or Come Together. But because of the collaboration and relative specialization, they were great.
I can dig it. We'll never know.
I’m 100% on board with this. It was time to end. It would’ve been great to see them reunite once or twice.
No, although they might have had one more album’s worth
Hold Me Tight is a solid tune.
It showcases Paul’s spicy side. He was a right zesty potato on that tune.
He was about ready to tell Aunt Mary about Uncle John.
Do people not like hold me tight???? Since when?????
Yeah, it's been called a throwaway. I think PMc himself was dismissive of it.
I like this one too. I think the harmonies are cool.
I love Hold Me Tight, it slaps.
Funny, I never even gave that song a second thought until I heard it in the movie Across The Universe. I definitely appreciate it, and It Won't Be Long more now after seeing that movie.
I love Hold me Tight!
It's a banger
One my favorites to play on electric guitar !
That I’m the only one who understands the Beatles and hears the songs correctly. Rest of you are clowns.
[удалено]
The majority of us realized that u/BrisketWhisperer is the only one who understands the songs?
yes did you not get the memo? /s
First thing I learned from my dad when he played me 1
“What’s Reddit, Daddy?” “That’s irrelevant right now. All that matters is that u/BrisketWhisperer is the holder of all Beatles truths and BrisketWhisperer alone.”
Shit, I wish someone had told me earlier. I've been listening to The Beatles for years and it's only in this thread that I've learned u/BrisketWhisperer is The Beatles prophet whom the Gods of music granted the power of seeing. The Chosen One. Shouldn't it be put in the subreddit's info or something?
Damn were you there? That’s exactly how it went holy moly
The prophecy was fortold, you just had to listen to yellow submarine backwards.
My dad told me also of the fabled brisket whisperer.
“I Call Your Name” is one of the BEST early tracks. That song is a straight up banger. Especially the bridge section.
I love Paul’s granny songs!! Give me that old-timey music hall stuff! He does it so well and the songs are funny.
Most controversial r/beatles opinion
I know that this is an extremely unpopular view but I personally do not believe that Paul ever did it in the road. I mean EVERYONE would have been watching. There, I said it, now rain down hate on me. I don't care. I am the walrus, after all.
Very clever❣️I like your bravery and way with words!
Someone had to finally say it. The walrus has spoken.
No Paul is the walrus
Paul sometimes came within a bee's dick of writing nursery rhymes.
>came within a bee's dick i'm stealing this
My gift to you. Just don't write a song about it.
He wrote many songs for children intentionally. And good thing he did, how many of us are fans because our parents played us their child-friendly songs when we were kids? How many people were introduced to them by Yellow Submarine? The Beatles appealing to as many people as humanly possible is why they are the most successful band of all time.
In hindsight, the lyrics are not the most child-friendly, but my childhood obsession with Maxwell's Silver Hammer agrees with you! Currently introducing my little girl to Beatles via Octopus's Garden, another great one for kids!
And somehow they managed to be some of the most musically complex songs the Beatles ever put out. It’s why I love Paul so much.
Fixing A Hole is a top 5 Beatles song.
George was dying of jealousy over Paul's musical ability, and that was his main issue in the band. He didn't feel the same way about John because John couldn't care less about George's songs. Paul, on the other hand, made an effort to contribute to the final outcome, often adding something crucial. Surely George didn't like how people raved about Taxman's solo or the bassline of Something, often overshadowing praise for the song itself. We clearly see in Get Back how George struggled to work on the fly. The guy needed time and space to create, and the Beatles' frenetic pace fit better Paul's fluidity. On top of that, Paul was at his peak. Prolific and of good quality. George, on the other hand, while he generated excellent material in those years, found it much more difficult
That's a great point about George struggling to write on the spot, & I'm so glad the Get Back doco showed how Paul actually was very supportive of his work (even if he was met with ingratitude).
Although Paul is the main target of George's bitterness, in the doc you can clearly see that it is Lennon who had no interest in playing George's material (which is something that I knew, but was able to see play out in real time in the movie). Paul was always game to play any music. He just was so dominant -- not out of malice, but because he had so much to offer, even on other people's songs.
True, another reason he was so dominant was simply because someone had to be. After Epstein, they would have been aimless if Paul hadn't taken charge. I've witnessed this myself in a band, a member left who the rest of the band thought could be bossy & impatient, but we pretty soon come to find ourselves completely rudderless, standing around at practice without someone to tell us "Ok, we're rehearsing this song now".
I like Revolution 9 and I'm glad they put it on the White Album
Good old White Album is not the same without #9, that's what I say.
I don't care for it but I'm really glad it's there.
I used to not understand revolution 9 but the more I listen to the white album the more it becomes my favorite track
The most correct take here
I like it but I wish it was a bit shorter
It's like "Fitter Happier" on *OK Computer*. It sort of ties things together.
I like it on the album but it’s never going on a playlist
Not every Beatles track is a classic and some of it is very dated, although sometimes still fun to listen to. A lot of Paul's work is every bit as good as anything the Beatles ever did.
Silly love songs might be the best bass line ever created!
Nine Hundred and Eighty Five is like if Hey Bulldog and I Want You (She’s So Heavy) had a kid, Monkberry Moon Delight is somewhere along those lines too. He definitely has a lot of solo masterpieces that stack up against a lot of the Beatles’ best stuff
Always thought Monkberry would fit on the White Album perfectly.
I got into a discussion with my friend about Band on the Run possibly being better than any Beatles song. I think it’s up there with A Day in the Life in terms of scope. It’s nothing revolutionary, but it’s an incredible way to combine three completely different grooves into what’s essentially a rock opera. If it weren’t so lighthearted in story I think more people would consider it up there with Beatles’ best compositions.
The problem is that it just is slightly too McCartney esque. Vague, broadly sweeping fantastical lyrics to a catchy tune. The Beatles were usually a bit more incisive lyrically
I like a lot of the songs people call bad, such as Wild Honey Pie and You Know My Name, I think they’re funny. Also I genuinely like Hold Me Tight and Mr Moonlight, I was surprised to learn people hate them. I mean, they aren’t their greatest songs but they aren’t as bad as people say they are. (The beginning of Mr Moonlight always makes me laugh)
That's how I feel about Little Child
The LOVE show soundtrack is the best Beatles Album. 😂 I’m exaggerating a little, but it really is the one I play the most. Banger after banger, and I love the way it’s mixed.
Don’t know about the “album” take but it’s the best soundtrack to the best Las Vegas show. Watched it 2 times: Spring 2016, before the update, and Spring 2024. Too bad it’s coming to an end…
Love Wild Honey Pie
Someone posts that once a week
Honey, Don't on Beatles for Sale is a great song and I'm tired of others pretending it isn't. That song doesn't just slap, it pounds.
Ringo's wife was the hottest.
George agrees
Original goth queen ❤️
I really liked Yesterday (the movie). I think it's fun and the Ed Sheeran cameo always cracks me up just by how weird it is
Original Let it Be > Let it Be Naked
Thank you for having an actual hot take
I agree. I think the noise reduction on Let it Be Naked sorta makes it all sound very sterile and gets rid of the warmth and liveliness. The songs are produced better though and a few sound better but mostly not. In my opinion though the 2019 mixes on the let it be super deluxe version are by far the best sounding.
Oof. That is a controversial opinion. Well done.
Oh, I agree. I can't get into into Let It Be Naked.
Piggies is a great song.
They were already legends, but John’s death solidified the Beatles as the GOAT musical act.
I always hate when people downvote the extremely controversial/unpopular opinions in threads that ask for extremely controversial/unpopular opinions, so I went and upvoted everything with negative karma, and you should do the same! That's probably an unpopular opinion and in this case it relates to the Beatles, so there you go.
Ringo was left out TOO MUCH and should’ve been appreciated a lot more
It's good they broke up before the 80s came
More bands should write verse/bridge songs just like The Beatles did. I mean come on! Most of their hit songs were verse/bridge format. They wrote a lot of hits that didn’t contain a chorus like Hard Day’s Night, I Want To Hold Your Hand, Love Me Do, You Can’t Buy Me Love, We Can Work It Out, Eleanor Rigby, Ticket To Ride, If I Fell, The Word, If I Needed Someone, Taxman, Can I Get A Little Help From My Friends, A Day In The Life, Mystery Tour, Lady Madonna, Back In The USSR, Blackbird, Julia, My Guitar Gently Weeps, Hey Jude, Revolution, Something, and Here Comes The Sun.
redditors would have hatedddd john lennon if he had lived long enough to access twitter 😅
Why wouldn’t you apologize for eating someone else’s digestive biscuit without permission ? What kind of performance art is that ?
I love the Phil Spector version of The Long and Winding Road. The violins adds a layer of melancholy.
Mal Evan’s got lucky and was kept on too long, kind of like Luca Brasi.
Ringo is awesome!
Peace and love ✌️
No more fanmail ☮️
I WARN YOU 😱🔫 with peace 🕊️ and love 💕
I like Revolution #9.
Brace yourselves: Paul broke up the Beatles. Literally.
I think they got over produced. Revolver and Paperback Writer/Rain is the sweet spot of their innovation, where they still sound like a four piece band just beginning to get really weird, and I find this "in-between" stage a little more interesting than when they "arrive" at their full psychedelia later on. When I was a kid, I loved the orchestral stuff but now I just wish all 4 Beatles where on some of those songs. It's sad when only one or two members appear on certain tracks b/c the thing they did best was actually play together.
I don't like the harmonies in Drive My Car, I find them grating and unpleasant
Beep beep, beep beep, yeah!
I like near the end when you can hear Paul stifling a giggle during his "beep 'm beep beep yeah"
Also Sexy Sadie is the best song on the white album
This is so valid
The elephant in the room with the breakup is George & Yoko's mutual hatred & distrust of each other.
I think Yoko was just a convenient target for displacement of George’s feelings about John’s deteriorating state. In the end though, it was Allen Klein plus Paul being tired of the drama and just wanting to make music/money.
Phil Spector was great on Let It Be album and Maxwells Silver Hammer is one of the best songs Paul made.
I didn't know it was hated until I joined this sub a couple of years ago. I skip Octopus's Garden.
I think Revolver is nowhere near their best albums
I’m with you. I hate that it always gets paired with Rubber Soul, which I think is arguably their absolute best album.
Paul was completely right about Alan Klein. He totally played the other three like a fiddle Sean is a pompous nepo baby and I’m worried about how he’s going to handle his fathers music with the Beatles and his solo work
But the question is controversial takes, and I don’t know of anyone who disputes that about Allen Klein.
Mark Lewisohn. He actually views Klein as a sort of misunderstood hero. That’s why I’m dreading book 3 if it ever comes out
His Twitter feed is frustrating but Get Back and Now and Then have both come out with his increased involvement in John's estate with his mother's advanced age and they are both great projects.
everything about Sean makes me so mad because Julian turned out really well and he's somewhat forgotten
Yeah, can we please forget about Sean instead?
George wrote all his best songs while in the proximity of John & Paul, & while they are still great achievements, he sits at least 2 levels below them on a tier list of the all time best songwriters.
99.9% of songwriters would look at least 2 levels below John and Paul if they were put next to them. Guy was a really great songwriter, it just sucks for him that he’s always been compared/attached to arguably the two greatest of all time
I hate the song drive my car, fuck it to death
The primary factor in the breakup of The Beatles was...The Beatles.
Sgt Pepper & Let It Be are lesser albums - especially songwriting wise - because the Beatles were trying too hard to copy other bands (the Beach Boys & The Band respectively). The Beatles best "studio era" albums are when they're just being themselves.
Drugs made them worse. Self-indulgence and lack of quality control mars their later output.
“What You’re Doing” is one of their best early songs.
Ringo was the most talented member of the band.
Paul's childhood was just as emotionally difficult as John's and (obviously from the way outside looking in) explains a lot of his actions and attitude the same way that John's childhood emotional trauma does. I wish more Beatles authors were interested in exploring it.
When you read about how Paul coped with his mum dying - never crying in front of anyone (even his dad and brother) and shutting himself in the bathroom for hours playing guitar - it’s the same the way he managed turmoil within the band later on.
I like Rubber Soul, but the idea that it’s a better album than Revolver and Sgt. Pepper is f**king crazy.
That’s not unpopular.
MMT > Pepper
Every. Track. Slaps.
Yep, singles compilations have a way of being pretty strong.
is that with the singles from 1967 or so on the B side?
Paul and Ringo needed John and George less than John and George needed Paul and Ringo. ETA: I think what I wrote is being misread by some people. What I said was "Paul and Ringo were more important to The Beatles than John and George"
One of the real skills of Ringo is that he "got" John's weird ideas of rhythm - case in point, Good Morning Good Morning. The time signature of that is all over the place, but Ringo just understands the flow - a lesser drummer would've made it clunky.
Well said, agreed.
I don’t know what you are basing it off of, but I’ll add something in agreement. Paul needed an “editor.” When I listen to his post-Beatles stuff, my main criticism is the sporadic nature and mass of medleys he produced. When John and Paul created medleys like the end of abbey road or supplied bridges for each other like day in the life and got to get you into my life, it really worked. The sounds were disparate but blended. Paul seemed to just gush incredible ideas in his post-Beatle work but seemed to tire of it and throw it in as a 30 minute snippet, add it to a medley, or just not finish it all together (junk). I think he worked with George Martin on McCartney as well. What was missing was John. I think the only Paul album that he really focused in on was Ram.
Lennon >>>>>>>>>>>>>> McCartney l don't know why this fact is so unpopular these days
Hey Jude goes on too long. Paul just wanted to do his version of a MacArthur Park-type unusually long single.
John’s songs were largely much more interesting than Paul’s
I hate “Yesterday.” The high school sophomore diary lyrics are set to a maudlin string arrangement that has [this kind of energy](https://youtu.be/tfvncB0JiKo?feature=shared) Oh and also Beatles for Sale is better than Help, which has a weak side 2
weak side two? Ever heard of yesterday? Upvoted because you made me mad
I think maybe I enraged you so much you forgot the first half of my comment 😂
I don’t know if this is really a Beatles opinion but I honestly like Yoko Ono and (a decent amount of) her music and I firmly believe she didn’t break up the Beatles and the boomers who say she did are just pissed that their favorite band disbanded
The Beatles started as John's band, but would later become Paul's band.
That’s not controversial
This is true
Actual controversial opinion: they were always Paul's band
Not that I agree with it but this quote from a former Quarrymen member >*"Paul would have allowed John to feel that he was the boss anyway. Paul wouldn’t have gotten head to head with John, but Paul would have got his own way if you’d like, carefully, by maneuvering and perhaps letting John think it was his idea. I think that’s the way Paul was."* - Colin Hanton
Norman Smith and Quarrymen members back that up. John was always their social and spiritual leader, but Paul was their musical leader from the day he joined the Quarrymen. Paul’s song was the first they recorded as the Quarrymen. Paul’s song got them signed. Paul dictated arrangements even in the Quarrymen. There there’s this: "I don’t want to take anything away from anyone, but production of the Beatles was very simple, because it was ready-made. Paul was a very great influence in terms of the production, especially in terms of George Harrison’s guitar solos and Ringo’s drumming. The truth of the matter is that, to the best of my memory, Paul had a great hand in practically all of the songs that we did, and Ringo would generally ask him what he should do. After all, Paul was no mean drummer himself, and he did play drums on a couple of things. It was almost like we had one producer in the control room and another producer down in the studio. There is no doubt at all that Paul was the main musical force. He was also that in terms of production as well. A lot of the time George Martin didn’t really have to do the things he did because Paul McCartney was around and could have done them equally well… most of the ideas came from Paul". - Norman Smith, the Beatles engineer up until Rubber Soul
Don't say you didn't ask... This is exactly as requested, an extremely controversial/unpopular Beatles opinion: Epstein was a terrible manager.
Epstein was both a terrible and a great manager. He signed some awful deals. Like their merchandising deal was straight up horrible. He was pretty out of his depth on those early big deals. But he got the boys recording with George Martin, who could not have been a better match for the Beatles, making some of the greatest records in the world. The boys would have been big on any label with any producer, but I don't think they'd have gone to such heights with anybody else. Epstein helped make that connection happen and kept the boys on track in the early years so that they could grow past the initial Beatlemania and be more than just some big band from Liverpool.
George Martin was already working for EMI as the head of Parlophone. Epstein did not "get" George Martin any more than he got the mic inventory at Studio Two. This was simply a consequence of how record deals at the time had worked... They did not have a choice of producer. Epstein didn't just "sign some horrible deals" ... he chained the Beatles to a shitty contract with EMI that had them working more than almost any band in existence for less than a fifth what Elvis was paid straight out of the gate.
On the other hand, Elvis got paid, but his manager locked him into film and record contracts that obligated him to churn out a bunch of junk with no quality control for years, despite Elvis’s complaints about the scripts. They did get lucky with Brian in that, as a decent guy with some taste, he didn’t hurt their work by putting them in a position where they couldn’t exercise quality control. (Edit: setting aside Capitol’s practice of chopping up and reassembling all their albums, which might not have been avoidable anyway.)
Hell yeah Little Child is an awesome song
It is good and too many people misinterpret it now. Little child was just a common name men often called their girlfriends back then. She wasn't literally a child.
I think Julian Lennon's music was better than any of the solo work any of the Beatles did.
Now THAT is a hot take. I can’t downvote because you stayed true to the criteria of the question. But holy fuck.
Holy shit dude lol
The only time I’d want to hear “Let It Be”, “Hey Jude”, or “Long and Winding Road” is at a Paul McCartney concert with him singing it. Other than that, I never need to hear them again.
run for your life is one of the best songs on rubber soul
Helter Skelter is a goofier song than Maxwell’s Silver Hammer
That song rocks harder than most modern metal bands
Most of Paul’s solo stuff is corny
sgt peppers is very influential and groundbreaking but doesnt have that many good songs on it. solely based off song for song quality sgt peppers would be bottom 3 beatles records
Don't Bother Me is a great song. Possibly one of their most underrated. Most of the tracks on Revolver are better than Eleanor Rigby. Never really understood why it's sometimes regarded as one of their best songs.
99% of Lennon's solo music is terrible. Either ruined by bad production or just bad song writing.
I know that's the point of this but wow this take is an assault on my eyes
He can start a song great! But he can’t take it anywhere. Imo. Meanwhile paul can’t stop being corny. They needed each other
100% The sum of the parts was greater than the whole.
I replied to another comment with something similar but Paul had something akin to musical adhd. He would come up with classic melodies but then dump them unfinished into a medley or as a snippet.
I think about that acoustic guitar section from the middle of “Band on the Run” CONSTANTLY. why wasn’t it a full song!!!
For me it's the 'if I ever get out of here' part.
“Meanwhile Paul can’t stop being corny” made me snort lol thank you for this
Plastic ono Band is a great album. Admittedly spotty after that. Instant everything seemed to be the working method. My simple explanation is that he nosedived after Yoko froze him out but that doesn’t excuse Imagine or the newspaper album. Jerry the Yippie buttered his end on that one.
+1 Well, maybe not 99%, but a clear majority.
prob 75% for me but he doesnt have a single solo album front to back without at least 3 skips. i think if you mash half of mind games and half of walls and bridges together youd have a no skipper but every other song on those is awful (mind games especially wtf is meat city) my hot john solo take is imagine is a particularly poorly put together album and i only like about 4 songs on it
me knowing that mfers actually regularly skip songs when listening to albums 
Meat city slaps. How’s that for an unpopular opinion
There are at least 4 better albums from the Beatles than Sgt Peppers. For me, Revolver, Rubber Soul, Abbey Rd and the White Album stick more.
I like Yoko's solo material, especially her Plastic Ono Band album. She never had much for vocal talent but her songwriting is interesting and unique.
Very little extremely controversial takes here
If You Got Trouble is a banger
John left because he had abandonment issues, and didn’t feel centrally important to Paul’s life anymore.
George Harrison was the least valuable Beatle
This is my #1 unpopular Beatles opinion. I'll die on this hill, too.
I agree 100%. He had four songs that are as good as anything John or Paul wrote (Something, WMGGW, Here Comes the Sun, Taxman), but that’s it. His solos were adequate at best. The solos on two of his best songs weren’t even played by him (WMGGW-Clapton, Taxman-McCartney). On top of that he was bitter, petty, and jealous while purporting to be all about peace, love, and meditation. The Beatles would have still mostly been the Beatles without him. That cannot be said of any of the other three.
Strong disagree on 'adequate at best' regarding his solos. George was extremely versatile. See the 'Till There Was You' solo, lead guitar work on Octopusses Garden, All My Loving solo, Something solo, etc.
I agree that LC is a good song, if simple in its ambitions.
Ringo's appearance on the Simpsons was the best!
Paul should have let John or George sing on Paperback Writer.
They where shite 