The Beatles- Most over-hyped band of all time

[whiskyboozer]

Discuss......................

[Trollslayer]

I heard some music in an advert last year and it took me a while to ralise who this new band was - yes, it was a Beatles track!
In a Bon Jovi calssical instrument session I knew there was something - they used the score from Elanor Rigby.

[risetoaddiction]

Not 'overhyped' at all. True innovators and their music speaks for itself. No hype involved here. They did what they did at a time nobody else had even thought of attempting to do. Changed the music business and influenced countless artists to this day .

[karkus30]

You either get it or you don't. Took me long enough

[Harj]

Originally Posted by whiskyboozer

Discuss......................

Yes absolutely overhyped, I mean all overhyped bands play their own instruments, write their own songs, make innovative albums, and still sell millions of albums every year.

You should actually give a reason why they you think they are overhyped rather than just asking us to discuss it.

[JohnG]

Whether you like The Beatles or not, there's no denying that without them, a lot of rock as we know it today (both sides of the Atlantic) would not exist. They inspired a whole new genre of guitar driven bands. Just look at what else was in the charts at the time when they started!

[deadtotheworld]

When they came out - they were all hype... people latching on to clothes, haircuts, the endless amounts of screaming girls and so on. The stuff people caught wind of was little to do with their music at first. They were the Spice Girls of their generation - a band of blokes with completely different personalities. The Shadows were doing similar stuff before them. I met a guy about 15 years ago that showed me this spanish musician and played me some stuff and showed me the date it had been written and published - and it was before The Beatles and loads of the Beatles stuff had stolen melodies, chord progressions, harmonies from this guys stuff. Once could be a coincidence but hearing so much - it was pure plagarism so I believe that they werent as original as people think.
You cant deny that they released alot of terrible stuff aswell as the good stuff - that it is alot of hype that keeps them selling... I mean it was not so long ago that a bit of hype from Noel and Liam Gallagher helped kick start a new trend in liking the Beatles - every kid in School went and bought Beatles albums and liked them because Liam told them to.

So yeah even orginal or classic bands can be seriously overhyped - but its all down to the ears of the listener to decide if it was worth the hype or not.
Times change and musicians and songwriters get better - it might have been original at the time but I just dont like it.
Appreciate it - Yes. Like it - No. Better musicians, vocalists & songwriters since - Yes. Overhyped - Definately.

[JohnG]

It would be interesting to know how many people who post in this thread were actually born when they first hit the scene

[KillerOfThreads]

I'm 50 and don't like Elvis, Bill Hayley, or anything before the mid 60's. First record i ever got was Sabre Dance by Love Sculpture. I only posess the Past masters vol 1 cd and despite being lent all the beatles cd's time and time again there's very little i like. but i would be the first to admit that almost everything i listen to probably wouldn't be here if it wasn't for them. I think, like them or not, they were the most important thing that happened to shape musics future.

[jtfab75]

imagine if the Beatles had never got a recording contract,Cliff Richard would be the biggest star in British chart history and Elvis would be still in his jump suit.
after the Beatles came along ,the stones,the who ,animals,zepplin,black sabbath etc followed.
even if your not a Beatle fan,imagine going to see Cliff at wembley stadium singing 'Bachelor boy' or elvis squeezing into his jump suit in vegas sweating like a pig.

[karkus30]

It's this 'hype' description I don't understand. How on Earth can a band be hyped when they no longer exist ? Albums are being bought that represent a band that ceased playing almost 40 years ago. The music and style cannot possibly represent todays younger audience and those that remember them already have their music.

When they first started they produced pop music and were promoted in a similar way to bands of today, although in a sense it was probably easier to promote four good looking guys with lyrics that spoke to young girls. No different to any modern band in that respect. The thing that singled them out was evolution and an incredible ability to write catchy tunes and great lyrics. They evolved constantly and even when they split up they still managed to produce music that had enough about it to continue being played.

We are not talking Mozart or Beethoven here, this is just folk music. They have been a huge influence on musicians throughout the last 40 years, from Nirvana to Oasis. Their songs are now so much ingrained in many peoples heads that a simple opening chord such as that from 'A Hard Days Night' is so reconiseable that you can instantly begin singing the words and tune. Others have managed this, but not many, if any, have managed it so many times.

So, hyped? I cant say they are. Popular? definitely.

Deservedly? Well with a back catalogue of hit albums and singles that would make most bands envious, a constant evolution despite having a ready audience that liked their earlier output, many, many covers (dig a guitar out around a campfire and I would be very suprised if half way through the night you don't get at least a few people demanding you play a Beatles number). Sited by so many artists as a major influence ......remember that both Nirvana and Oasis readily admitted to that, two of the biggest bands of the 90s and 00s managed to get to that position by simply using the same general style as the Beatles and were happy to mention them.

I never considered myself a fan until a few years ago when I finally admitted they were an amazing musical band.

[deadtotheworld]

JohnG - I think it would be a great idea to find out peoples age with their opinion. I am 29 and am not a fan. But I know alot of older people who were around when the Beatles kicked off - that cant stand the sight of The Beatles. Maybe people who were born after or became of an age to appreciate music after the Beatles had ended, may like them more... I dunno but I am interested to see.
I always find that you can really upset people with threads or discussions like this as people become very protective of their favourite stuff or stuff from their generation.
It is funny that I love Metallica, yet I cant stand Black Sabbath who were an influence for them, I cant stand the Beatles who influenced Sabbath/Ozzy... so it does go a lot further down the line, like No Beatles = No Metallica.
But also overhyped is not all that much of a negative thing. Some of my favourite bands have been overhyped in the past and I have been disappointed with certain releases - but its usually a media thing.
People get things like the word overhyped mixed up with words like 'crap' were it turns in to a personal opinion. A different thread could have been called: 'I think the Beatles suck! - Discuss'

[deadtotheworld]

I can totally understand the phrase 'hype' in this situation as there are always countdowns of best or classic albums in magazines and tv shows, same with films and it just seems that people 'inherit' the thought of stuff being a classic as they dont want to appear different from an older 'classics' list. Everybody must know people who could guess a classic albums list without ever hearing most of the albums! Im sick of seeing critics or reviewers who are about 20 telling me that this is great or dont listen to this because its not cool anymore or going in depth on what times were like when the Beatles came about even though their parents were barely born at that time. Gullible people lap this **** up and can argue that stuff is classic without hearing it. I hope that makes sense haha I mean Dark side of the moon always ends up on classic lists because of some type of hype, as its probably the best known album title by Floyd - but it isnt even Floyds best album!

[Harj]

Originally Posted by deadtotheworld

I mean Dark side of the moon always ends up on classic lists because of some type of hype, as its probably the best known album title by Floyd - but it isnt even Floyds best album!

1) The Wall (i know, I know, but I've been lisening to it again recently)
2)DSOTM
3) Meddle
4) Animals
5) Wish You Were Here

[unique]

i'm a fan of the beatles, but i think trying to be impartial i couldn't say they were overhyped, and certainly not the most over hyped band of all time. they progessed from simple pop music to something that changed the face of music forever and probably inspired and influenced in some way, even indirectly, almost every western music artist since, from elvis to miles davis

i also think when you look at the classic albums lists, that most of the albums there are generally deserving. an album doesn't necesarily have to be considered a bands best album to be thought of more highly generally. wish you were here is my favourite floyd album perhaps, but it's a close shave to wish you were here. i think the wall is a great album too, but it's a long and slightly patchy affair. ok computer, revolver, pet sounds, what's going on, songs in the key of life, harvest, blue, hot buttered soul, exile on main street, those are real classic albums that have went on to influence so much music that came afterwards. if you don't appreciate those albums, you probably haven't given them the due care and attention they deserve