If the Beatles never existed and the fab four were never born, what would the music industry have been like? Would it have been the same, or would it have been completely different?

I think it would have been the same anyway. Before the Beatles there was still a certain structure pop music took (mostly rock and roll type ? written by others ?) and thats what was so good about the Elvis and rock and roll period (being the first lot that gave teenagers their own type of music possibly) but the Beatles were probably the first group to write their own songs etc and to patent the sound and song-pattern that teens and others were really looking for.

Not only did they do the template for pop-type music but they seem to be one of the first bands (probably the first) who were on a journey and their music was very creative and experimental and soon changed from the pop-type songs to using songs as a sort of journey. After Sgt Peppers etc came bands like Led Zeppelin etc

The only band since then that I feel have had the Beatles affect on people are Oasis (who I dont find interesting). Oasis music is like "this is what we want to listen to and so do you" type music and for many people they got that right. Music had drifted too much in either route since the Beatles until Oasis turned up. Their songs are very simple sort of macho-sensitive songs that actually sound like lullabies. But Oasis arent experimental like the Beatles and churn out the same stuff.

Thats what I think anyway (until otherwise convinced)

Possibly I would say that the Beatles formed the standard template both for teen cool pop band music and also for teen experimental music. Taking their influences from Rock and Roll, Blues, Gospel, Big band music etc. There wasnt really any type of teen music before Elvis and Buddy Holly and rock and roll but rock and roll music turned out to only last a decade or so (which is why I dont think Elvis` legacy is as strong as the Beatles although he did do some great songs like "are you lonesome tonight". His rock and roll songs probably arent very often played now, despite being the first teen sensation )

Well, Noel said on Patrick Kielty's show that the Beatles and Oasis were the only good artists in the history of pop music. Everything else was rubbish.

He always says things like that. I personally dont think Oasis are influential at all. Its just they did music the way the kids want it done without anything unique about it etc. And I doubt oasis music will change much too. Sort of sensitive-macho-repressed-wallflower lullabies (IMHO)

I have heard him say also that The Jam and The Stone Roses and The Sex Pistols were important too.

But thats just his opinion. I would generally agree with him except the Oasis bit. But theres no doubt Oasis were a bit of a phenomenon back in the mid 90s. Kids that dont normally buy records bought that album. They have the 2nd best selling album in the UK but its the sales that are incredible.

http://www.everyhit.com/recordalb.html

I think he must of liked Trex alittle as well, considering "cigarettes and alcohol" was trex's "get it on" with different words

And according to allmusic, Fade Away borrows the melody from Wham!'s Freedom.

I thought it was funny when Noel appeared on Channel Four's Top Ten Prog Rock programme and called it all crap, and then admitted he loved Pink Floyd but never realised they were prog rock!

dunno, but Liverpool wouldn't have the damned none english speaking tourists saying Car-A-Ven instead of Caven.

i find it hard to give directions out so i send them left, no matter where i am

Ok, just personal tastes really, but I've never liked The Beatles. I've always thought they were totally overrated.

The Stones were much better and they were around the same time weren't they..?

Led Zeppelin are one of my favourite bands. I'm not sure if you're saying that they drew inspiration from Sgt Peppers album, if you are I'd have to disagree.

Led Zeppelin arose from Jimmy Page leaving the Yardbirds, can't remember how John "Bongo" Bonham and John Paul Jones came into the equation but Robert Plant was a known singer from the "Black Country". I could be wrong, I read all of this from Led Zeppelin - Hammer of the Gods - a very good read if you're a fan of the mighty Zep.

Led Zeppelins influences were mostly blues if I remember correctly. I know that they knew and were I believe friends with The Beatles.

Think I'll leave it at that for now. I'm sure I'll get lambasted for speaking my mind about the supposed "Fab Four"

Stubob..

no what I was meaning was, as far as I know, up until St Peppers it seemed like it was thought that to be a hit you had to do songs in a stict pop way. Sgt Peppers must have sounded very odd to the public who were used to pop songs. Also it was a sort of theme album and much less conventional.

After that there was the "summer of love" and hippiness seemed to come about and record companies were probably looking outside the normal pop acts for different styles of music.

Sgt Peppers is still well within the pop song structure really, but the arrangement and words and choice of instruments etc must have made it sound very odd at the time at first and perhaps set the tone for hippiness and more relaxed music styles.

What I was meaning that maybe record companies were looking outwith ordinary pop music after that and that young bands were maybe influenced to become more exprerimental

But I could be talking complete rubbish

And what about the influence of Queen? Surely an influential band in many ways other than just starting off the trend of the music video. They were also quite "experimental".

I agree, Bill. A top band, my favourite no less, but they only made the concept of promoting a single via a video popluar, they didn't invent them as such. They made campness in music trendy perhaps, but that was a good thing. Thing is, Elvis and The Beatles were pioneers in their fields of coolness, rock 'n' roll and pop music respectively, even though Bill Haley and The Comets just beat Presley to it in September 1954 with "Rock Around The Clock" realeased just ahead of Presley's own debut single "That's Alright Mama". Despite Haley and friends introducing rock 'n' roll to the mainstream, Elvis Presley showed them how to do it with style. I think The Beatles are marginally ahead of Elvis in the greatest musical act of all time rankings-but it's a close run thing.

Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys were as important to the late 60s break away from The Man's control as the Beatles, both played off each other. Times were changing, bands were not content to just sing what someone else had written and youth culture in general was getting more rebellious, i don't think it would have been that much different sans Beatles.

That's a fascinating list but you have to remember, Albums first became significant only in the 1960s. When Oasis released (28 years after Sgt Pepper), total UK Album sales were vastly greater than before, so it was much easier for Oasis to achieve huge sales figures. Everything else in the top 18 was released at least 14 years after Sgt Pepper.

Sgt Pepper has sold nearly twice as many as Bridge over Troubled Water - it's only competitor from the same era - both of which I have in vinyl

Unfortunately the annual sales figures I found only go back to 1973, I'd love to know what it was like in 1967.

In 1973, 96million albums were sold in the UK
In 1995 196 million were sold, more than double.
In 2002, 225 million.

But the big jump in sales didn't start to happen until 1986 so Queen's (and other) massive hits of the early 1980s may be a fair comparison with the Beatles. What we don't know, of course, is how much of these sales can be attributed to the deaths of John Lennon and Freddy Mercury (not that it necessarily matters).
Last edited by d'@ve : 07-01-2004 at 13:39