[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by evollove

Sorry you thought attacks were personal.

Thank you kindly, its just a discussion about music, not each other.

Oh, now I see. When The Beatles were the most popular active band in the world, no one was influenced.Then they broke up and the influence was massive.

Actually, that is sort of exactly how it worked. You can definitely here the influence of Abbey Road and Let It Be on several bands from 1970 onward, and even more you can hear the influence of Paul and John's solo records. However and again, IN MY OPINION, you just don't hear a "Beatles' sound" in the mainstream bands from 1964-1968, and nobody has yet to post any bands that did in fact sound like the Beatles so I am less convinced than before...

Hollies and a thousand other Brit Invasion bands (seriously, get any British Invasion compilation and spin it a few times), Byrds,

I can see a bit of it in the Byrds, but I would also suggest that the Byrds were an influence on the 1960s of their own. Also interesting how some of the best received Byrds cover songs were NOT Beatles songs at all..

the way the Stones responded to Sgt Pepper with Their Satanic Majesty's Request ,

Yeah, they responded, but I don't think with a record that sounded like the Beatles, it was a record that sounded even more like the Stones, and I would dare say that looking at who was playing what before 1967, I'd almost say that it could be argued that it was the Beatles were responding to the Stones with Sgt Pepper and not the other way around.

Strawberry Fields kicking off psychedilia (so add early Pink Floyd and a bunch of others).

NOW YOU'RE JUST TALKING OUT OF YOUR ASS. The authentic (as opposed to crassy marketed commercial imitations) "psychedelic" bands came from their own scene, and were not imitating or copying anyone but themselves. When this sound got surprisingly popular, it is quite clear that the Beatles radically changed their initial sound to explore the psychedelic style. So I would say that its not that the Beatles greatly influenced psychedelica, rather quite the opposite, that it is clear BY THE CHRONOLOGY OF ALBUM RELEASES that it was the Beatles who were greatly influenced by psychedelic bands. Remember, both John and Paul were completely enamored with Jimi Henrdix, in fact they quite literally gave him his first start, it was Paul who got Jimi the gig at Monteray Pop Festival when he turned it down and suggested Jimi to the promoters as a consolation prize. WHAT IS FUNNY IS Y'ALL KEEP TELLING ME I NEED TO TOUCH UP ON MY ROCK AND ROLL HISTORY, AND YET IT IS CLEARLY Y'ALL WHO HAVE YOUR CHRONOLOGY AND SEQUENCE OF EVENTS MIXED UP. The Stones came out AT THE SAME time as the Beatles first records, and neither were necessarly influenced by each other, because when both were completely unrelated dive-bar bands, they each had their own respective sound which was typified in their first records. Later the Beatles put out records that were less pop, more blues, clearly a response to the rising competition of the Stones' sound.

And the fact that they wrote everything was novel and pushed others into writing their own material. First double-album in rock. Lots of other ways they influenced popular music.

I AGREE COMPLETELY, BUT I THINK THERE IS A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INSPIRATION AND INFLUENCE. Inspiration is when a band or artist motivates another band or artist to do their own thing. Influence is when a band or artist directly influences the sound and style of playing of another band. IT IS CLEARLY THAT ALL THE BANDS OF THE 1960S WERE INSPIRED BY THE BEATLES, BUT DEFINITELY NOT INFLUENCED.

Here's a list of the top selling albums in UK in 1960s:


Beatles albums make up half the list, 7 of them in the top 10. I find it hard to believe that no one took any musical cues from them at the time.

Again, there is a world of difference musically between INFLUENCE AND INSPIRATION