The Beatles Were Quitters!!!

[foreverblue]

Typical album rock snobbery.

Is "She Loves You" more poppy than "Michelle"? Is "I Saw Her Standing There" more poppy than "Something"? How about "Help!" or "Eleanor Rigby"? "Twist and Shout" or "The Long and Winding Road"? "Can't Buy Me Love" or "When I'm 64"? "I'm Down" or "Octopus's Garden"? ... and on and on.

The Beatles were plenty poppy later on, maybe even more so than early. Saying they were "just a pop band" early is really pretty insulting. They were a rock and roll band.

you notice most of those ppst rubber soul poppy songs were written by paul

 

[Death on Credit]

Is "She Loves You" more poppy than "Michelle"? Is "I Saw Her Standing There" more poppy than "Something"? How about "Help!" or "Eleanor Rigby"? "Twist and Shout" or "The Long and Winding Road"? "Can't Buy Me Love" or "When I'm 64"? "I'm Down" or "Octopus's Garden"? ... and on and on.

Yes. The answer to all of your questions (except for Octopus) is yes. That doesn't mean they're WORSE, but yes, they're poppier.

There's nothing wrong with pop (especially 60's pop).

 

[oscar gamble]

Yes. The answer to all of your questions (except for Octopus) is yes. That doesn't mean they're WORSE, but yes, they're poppier.

There's nothing wrong with pop (especially 60's pop).

So you're saying that "Help!" is more poppy than "Eleanor Rigby"? Based on what, exactly? I would agree that "Help!" has a very good pop hook but the overall song is much more rocking than "Eleanor Rigby".

 

[Chevelle]

I think the death of Brian Epstein caused a conflict between John and Paul as far as who would make decisions for the band. I have read that Paul was the first to step forward and take charge but John was not happy about that. It's no secret that they had already stopped writing songs together, but working together was becoming more difficult as well.
Since Epstein died in 1967 I'm surprised they lasted three more years.
I think some evidence of this "feud" can be found in John's solo work. One of his album covers was a direct reference to Paul's "Ram" LP except John was holding the head of a pig instead of a ram. I remember a line from the Lennon song "How Do You Sleep" that said "the only thing you did was....yesterday". There were other similar lines in that song but this one has always stuck in my mind.

 

[Chevelle]

The style of most British invasion bands was described as "Mersey Beat" and defined as a pop and rock music genre.
The first Beatle song I ever heard was "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and the second was "I Saw Her Standing There". I would consider these songs to be rock and roll if you compare them to the other music that was around in '62 or '63.
Were they as rock and roll as the Rolling Stones? No.
The Stones early LPs included a lot of covers of American rock and roll songs like "Oh Carol", "I'm A King Bee", "Down The Road Apiece", "Route 66", "Not Fade Away".
So, pop or rock? I don't know, six of one and a half a dozen of the other I guess.

 

[Jake T]

Don't forget about the Yoko factor. I know George didn't care much for her attitude towards the band.
7:40

 

[oscar gamble]

The style of most British invasion bands was described as "Mersey Beat" and defined as a pop and rock music genre.
The first Beatle song I ever heard was "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and the second was "I Saw Her Standing There". I would consider these songs to be rock and roll if you compare them to the other music that was around in '62 or '63.
Were they as rock and roll as the Rolling Stones? No.
The Stones early LPs included a lot of covers of American rock and roll songs like "Oh Carol", "I'm A King Bee", "Down The Road Apiece", "Route 66", "Not Fade Away".
So, pop or rock? I don't know, six of one and a half a dozen of the other I guess.

It's not so much whether those early songs were pop or rock. Songs like "I Saw Her Standing There", "Can't Buy Me Love" and "She Loves You" were guitar based rockers, complete with guitar breaks, for what that's worth.

Incidentally, the early Beatles albums had lots of American remakes too, Chuck Berry, Arthur Alexander, Carl Perkins, Buddy Holly, etc. I would agree the Stones were harder rockers but we're talking degrees here.

It's more the lack of acknowledgment that the later Beatles were often very poppy later on. "Eleanor Rigby" and "The Long and Winding Road" are lush pop and even have strings on them.

I think what we're really talking about here is the old argument that album artists are inherently better than singles artists. Somehow, that translates into the Beatles being a mere a pop band until they started making meaningful albums. It's all very silly and myopic.

 

[Chevelle]

I hear what you're saying and I know they did songs like Kansas City, Matchbox and a few others.
And, in this case, there's no doubt that none of the later solo works ever came close to what they did as a band.
My point is that I simply can't write them off as a mere pop band.
To me, in those early days a pop band would have been someone like Herman's Hermits or Freddie And The Dreamers.

 

[Death on Credit]

It's more the lack of acknowledgment that the later Beatles were often very poppy later on. "Eleanor Rigby" and "The Long and Winding Road" are lush pop and even have strings on them.

I'm going to answer your previous question, about Help vs Rigby, here.

You're absolutely correct, the Beatles made pop music in their later career, too. In my opinion, the Beatles were throughout their entire career a pop band before anything else. They were a rock band too, sure, and they had elements of folk, psychedelia, and avant-garde in their songs...But they were always a pop band. From I Want to Hold Your Hand to Come Together, they always did pop. The difference, though, is that they got a lot more innovative with their pop sensibilities later on.

Look at Help!...Despite being a good rocker and an all-around good song, it was also a pretty safe and conventional song. It's something you can get on your feet and dance to, which is what pop up to that point (and mostly since, too) was all about. The lyrics are desperate and a little bit deep, if not exactly Hemingway, but this wasn't really anything new in that era.

Now, Eleanor Rigby is a different beast altogether (and I should note here, I do like Help! more). It's a mellow song, and it can be called a pop song. However, no one's going to dance to it. It's more the type of music you listen to on a rainy day on a bus staring out the window. And it's a lot more innovative. The strings are an important part of all that. Plus, there's a lot of stuff going on in the background. There's nothing particularly safe about the song, nothing that guarantees a mass audience other than the name "Beatles" on it. The lyrics are very sad, and also abstract and imbibed with a lot more poetry. There's a canvass of an entire city in 2 minutes. They really broke new ground here. That's why I'd say that it's less poppy than Help!

Of course, if we just take pop to mean "Not a rock song," then that's a different case entirely.

 

[oscar gamble]

I'm going to answer your previous question, about Help vs Rigby, here.

You're absolutely correct, the Beatles made pop music in their later career, too. In my opinion, the Beatles were throughout their entire career a pop band before anything else. They were a rock band too, sure, and they had elements of folk, psychedelia, and avant-garde in their songs...But they were always a pop band. From I Want to Hold Your Hand to Come Together, they always did pop. The difference, though, is that they got a lot more innovative with their pop sensibilities later on.

Look at Help!...Despite being a good rocker and an all-around good song, it was also a pretty safe and conventional song. It's something you can get on your feet and dance to, which is what pop up to that point (and mostly since, too) was all about. The lyrics are desperate and a little bit deep, if not exactly Hemingway, but this wasn't really anything new in that era.

Now, Eleanor Rigby is a different beast altogether (and I should note here, I do like Help! more). It's a mellow song, and it can be called a pop song. However, no one's going to dance to it. It's more the type of music you listen to on a rainy day on a bus staring out the window. And it's a lot more innovative. The strings are an important part of all that. Plus, there's a lot of stuff going on in the background. There's nothing particularly safe about the song, nothing that guarantees a mass audience other than the name "Beatles" on it. The lyrics are very sad, and also abstract and imbibed with a lot more poetry. There's a canvass of an entire city in 2 minutes. They really broke new ground here. That's why I'd say that it's less poppy than Help!

Of course, if we just take pop to mean "Not a rock song," then that's a different case entirely.

You make a good point. It really depends on your definition of pop.

When I think pop, I'm thinking about the overall sound of the song in question and not so much how innovative it is or how deep the lyrics are. In fact, I'd call "Eleanor Rigby" a pop standard. I wouldn't say that about something like "Help!".