What does Sup Forums think about the beatles were they really the greatest band of all time or were they shit

What does Sup Forums think about the beatles were they really the greatest band of all time or were they shit

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=WWVMXLSS1cA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

...

Greatest band because that's what was pushed by the music industry. Individual opinion will, or course, vary greatly.

Fpbp

Sage fuck you op

Most overrated band of all time next to nirvana

stop edging and just orgasm already

musically, maybe, but in terms of what they represented for their generation, both beatles and nirvana, they're the biggest acts of their time

They don't have a single good song.

Do people actually compare the Beatles and Nirvana?
Jesus save us from retards and women.

im not a huge fan of their early stuff but i do really enjoy their psychedelic phase

Sure they were big acts. Although the music was average, it sounds all the same... take say Linkin park for example that's real music with real emotions. Nobody even knew about linkin park until the singer killed him self

Like any band some of their stuff is "meh" and some of their stuff is "meh"

>Telling me i want to hold your sounds like i am the walrus

musically, overrated. what they started may put them in the top spot. I'd put rolling stones ahead of them. They started around the same time and pushed music more in the direction it ended up.

literally what to all of this

...

...

Nirvana were an insignificant band from the 90's. They were nowhere near the the biggest act of their time. Most people now would think who were they?

>insignificant
no
>biggest act of their time
yes they were
>people would think who were they
definitely not

Nirvana is commonly accepted as one of the best bands of all time among normies. Check any best of album/band/song lists. theyll be on there in the upper ranks

...

total bullshit

>Nowhere near the biggest act act of their time

They were actually one of the biggest

The real question is who he holds higher than the other.

About A Girl, Dumb, and a few others sound
Beatlesque

They were insiginificant. Guns n Roses and Metallica were bigger than them and at the time and still are. Cobain vs Lennon, No contest. McCartney vs Novoselic, who? Grohl vs Starr, again who is he?. A teenage Britney Spears was more popular than Nirvana in the 90's.

Guns N Roses and Metallica had fanbases building since the 80's Nirvana came out of nowhere, gained popularity incredibly fast and was one of the biggest "Seattle Scene" bands, probably more popular than Pearl Jam and definitely more popular than Alice in Chains and Soundgarden

GnR, metallica are fucking hasbeens now and never had any artistic vision. The beatles were much more prolific than nirvana that's no question; but to say that Nirvana won't have an endearing legacy long after every other band from the 90s is forgotten is wrong. They're a seminal band and kurt cobain was an amazing songwriter.

In fact I'd argue nirvana was more impressive than the beatles because it was largely the work of one man whereas the beatles was a group effort half the time

They're a shitty fucking boy band.

>more popular than Pearl Jam and definitely more popular than Alice in Chains and Soundgarden
What an achievement that was. More popular than 3 shit bands.

And Nirvana was only around for 3 years, The Beatles were around for 10, And the Beatles had John George and Paul 3 geniuses, Nirvana had 1,

don't cut yourself on that edge now son

Look at me I listen to the Beatles yep my life is all fine and dandy Lucy in the sky dude totally

In terms of influence, sheer number of hits and original melodies, cultural impact and iconography-- yes. They are the greatest band of all time. But whether you think their music is better than all other band music is completely up to you.

I appreciate what the Beatles did for music but if you're one of those stuck up douche bags who think that the Beatles are still on par with later generations of music then please kill yourself. Just do the world a favor and kill yourself. These fuckers try harder than anyone to convince people that the Beatles have produced the greatest tracks of all time while the quality level of music produced just 20 years later was much better. In 2017 the Beatles sound like fucking shit because their music is shit by comparison.

I'm probably older than you son. I have seen all of those live. Alice in Chains in 2013, Soungarden in 2012 and pearl jam in 2010. They were nothing special.

>not realizing the beatles literally invented the boyband and their early music still today has more intricate melodies and more skilled rhythm and guitar work than anyone before or after them making pop music.
>not realizing the second half of their career invented modern music in terms of sound design.

>AIC in 2013
just lol. low tier b8
shit in what way? Sound quality? cause that's the only reasonable argument

There's is nothing more cringeworthy than a person who can't digest anything from a previous era because "technology was worse so the current era just MUST be better". Is shakespear worse writing than George RR Martin because the language of Martin is more clear to a modern eye? Is Taxi Driver worse than Nightcrawler because Nightcrawler has the sleek clarity of digital sound and image? If you think someone can't wholly destroy anyone that claims Nightcrawler is better than Taxi Driver because Taxi Driver looks and sounds old you are a fucking moron.

Paul is GOAT, John is all right.

I can't conclusively say that the music of The Beatles is the greatest music of all time, but as a cultural phenomenon, The Beatles as a group is definitely the greatest band of all time.

sauce

Sup Forums is more retarded than Sup Forums

John was a better rocker in the beginning but then he turned into a Bob Dylan wannabe, even in his singing too.

If the songs are shit, who cares about the singer. Never mattered with Brian Johnson.

I love the Beatles and can play many of their songs, but I have a different view than others.

Stats say that they're arguably the best band of all time.

I say that there's been better. I'm a fan of their music and it was pioneering, especially how they helped usher the world into the age of music videos, but let's be real; do we ever find ourselves listening to them by first choice?

>do we ever find ourselves listening to them by first choice?
Literally all the time... I'm not even a fanatic.

yes we do

ACDC is a meme, i don't even get what you're implying

I own every album from Rubber Soul to Let it Be. Literally everything before Rubber Soul sounds the same. As far as influence, I can't believe someone would even compare them to nirvana. The sheer advances they contributed to music is mind blowing considering they were together for less than a decade.
Listen to Elvis's m.youtube.com/watch?v=WWVMXLSS1cA then to the Beatles She's So Heavy. Made the same year .They were way ahead of their time.Nirvana is good, not great

there's a class of untouchable bands that both nirvana and the beatles belong to but the beatles are a cut above every other band in this category. Their influence can't be defined. Their songs are timeless in a way that i can't even comprehend. they exist outside of time as a monolith, looming over and influencing every band that existed after the beatles' inception