Why were they so good? All their hits were catchy yet also rarely do two songs sound the same.
They all had styles that complemented and competed with one another.
>>59638918
>Why were they so good?
They were/are all great musicians, but it was mostly the acid
literal team work
also I believe they were the first group to stop touring and go full studio.
incredible knowledge of chord progressions
>>59638951
That's a load of shit though, none of them had any formal training or knowledge. It came naturally. That's what made Macca and Lennon near-savants.
>>59638948
Brian Wilson went full studio far before them, but the Beach Boys as a band kept touring.
>>59638975
I know they didn't have formal training. It came from their days playing the cavern in Berlin. They had to play many different styles of music
>>59638975
You just described the opposite of what savant means fam.
they made 4 good albums imo
but other than that they're pretty overrated
>>59638975
McCartney's family had a piano his father used to play all the time.
They are literal proof of God's existence. One of the perfect storms of modern culture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQoVtySehtc
Highly recommend anthology if you haven't seen it
>>59639033
ah interesting, I always hear it exclusively with idiot savant so I didn't even notice.
>the beatles
>so good
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 imo tbh fam
10000 hours-meme
Memes aside, it's awe-inspiring to me to know that a band can go from a boy band (or the era's equivalent) to producing works like A Day in the Life and Tomorrow Never Knows.
>>59639096
The chorus gives me goosebumps every time I listen to it
