Ehh...kind of a stretch. That song came out in '68 right? TVU was noisier a year before.

>>65851845
This OP, you fucked up.

1966
https://www.discogs.com/Peter-Walker-4-Velvet-Underground-White-Wind-Loop/release/7237826

or if we want to go a bit earlier
https://www.discogs.com/Rune-Lindblad-Death-Of-The-Moon-Electronic-Concr%C3%A8te-Music-1953-1960/release/392916

>>65851773
Perhaps they popularized it I guess, but certainly not pioneered

>>65851773
The Beatles failed to pioneer a single genre of music.

>>65852480
mom rock

>>65851773
No, they did that four years earlier with I Feel Fine

>>65851773
Hey Jude, is it?

>>65852480
But they popularised an awful lot...

Also:

Metal with Helter Skelter

Shoegaze with It's All Too Much

Jangle Pop with Hard Day's Night

Pretty much Psychedelic stuff in pop music (feedback on I Feel Fine, drone on Ticket to Ride, the obvious stuff in Norwegian Wood, stuff on Revolver which sounds like nothing else released at the time e.g Tomorrow Never Knows)

>>65852802
>le beatles influenced everything meme XD

>>65852829
But they did...

The 13th Floor Elevators are the ones who invented psychedelia. But they weren't that great. They're fun, and Roky Erickson's an interesting guy, but The Beatles and Grateful Dead are better than the Elevators ever could have been.

The Byrds are really the ones who created jangle pop. But while the Byrds had a fantastic sound and did some wonderful songs, the Beatles were much more effective and creative with the sound.

The Beatles started out as a skiffle band. They jumped on that bandwagon. But there are no other skiffle bands worth remembering.

I can't even call the Beatles one of my favorite bands. I'm not all that fond of them. But the fact of the matter is, they made some great stuff, they were prolific, and they were massively important to pop, rock, and everything connected to them. It goes beyond popularity (Scruffy's a retard) - if we're just going by early stuff, early Beatles is way overrated IMO - I'd take early Stones or early Who over it. But by 66 they became something unique and pretty revolutionary for popular music.

>>65852802
Except none of this is true and you're reading far too much into their work. I could say the exact same stuff about most other contemporaries and it would be just as if not more true.

>>65852829
I know not liking the Beatles and flat out denying their influence on popular music is the ultimate contrarian move, but that doesn't make you right.

The vast majority of music critics (no matter how you feel about them) and music people in general agree they were pretty far ahead of their time. Not always, of course, but time and time again they produced styles of music that just hadn't been made or heard before. The release of Revolver being the prime example.

>>65852982
But why is Revolver cited so frequently while contemporary records like A Quick One (which was instrumental in establishing prog, metal, noise and even featured sampling/spoken word) are forgotten?

>>65853108
Come on A Quick One isn't really that great

>>65853230
Whether or not you think it's great, it was very influential but has been forgotten by time (or overshadowed by their later releases) unlike Revolver.

>>65852923
You're literally wrong

The Byrds directly started the jangle pop thing after seeing George Harrison use a 12 String

Helter Skelter is unanimously regarded as proto-metal

It's All Too Much is the earliest example I've found of a real 'Shoegaze' sound

The psych stuff is pretty indisputable too

Feel free to find earlier, more prolific examples from other artists to prove me wrong

>>65853254
Who did it influence? It's a fine record but nothing more. The fact it's been forgotten proves it's not influential in the same way as Revolver is

>>65853412
>The Byrds directly started the jangle pop thing after seeing George Harrison use a 12 String
So they influenced each other.

>Helter Skelter is unanimously regarded as proto-metal
So is Boris the Spider and Black Monk Time and they were '66.

>It's All Too Much is the earliest example I've found of a real 'Shoegaze' sound
Not the same thing as Shoegaze at all.

>>65853424
>Who did it influence?
Early death metal vocalists and the entire prog genre to name a couple.

>The fact it's been forgotten proves it's not influential in the same way as Revolver is
No. Long-term fame and contemporary influence are two completely different things.

>>65853510
>So they influenced each other.
The Byrds didn't even releases their first single until after The Beatles released A Hard Day's Night, and The Byrds have all been very upfront about the influence that had on the group

Anyway, even if they were the second or third, or even like the twentieth band to do something in a certain way, that's still pretty ahead of the curve, and it's most likely that The Beatles had more of an influence on the genre as a whole than some French Musique Concrete guy two weeks earlier, or whatever.

>>65852480
Doom metal

>>65853510
>Not the same thing as Shoegaze at all
But you can say exactly the same thing about Black Monk Time and metal... why does one fit when it suits you and not the other?

Long-term influence is the most important factor and if you think otherwise you're wrong