The Beatles were the only musical act in history that was *simultaneously* the most popular, the most innovative, the most musically/culturally influential and one of the most alternative/subversive/psychedelic/"weird" of their time. On top of that, they were prolific songwriting geniuses who successfully explored more musical styles than most people even know exist, some of which they created themselves or greatly developed. They wrote about 230 original songs in 7 and a half years, many of which are widely considered all time classics. Most of these songs are completely different from one another, yet they form cohesive albums with different atmospheres that are unique to each. They had a perfect musical chemistry between them and complemented each other effortlessly. The 4 of them were extremely charismatic, each in their own way, and had very different personalities that balanced each other very well. These are all objective facts that, combined, makes them the greatest band of all time regardless of subjective musical taste or things like marketing. Everything else is secondary to those facts when it comes to why they are widely regarded as the best.

Anybody can have great management. Anybody can be just as prolific as the Beatles. The reason for the hysteria and the reason why they've enjoyed longevity is the high quality of their songs. Bing worried about Frank. Frank worried about Elvis. Elvis worried about The Beatles. The Beatles haven't worried about anyone in 60 years.

Perhaps one important difference is that the Beatles didn't follow the mainstream, the mainstrain followed the Beatles who were anything but Middle of the Road.

My mother told me a story of how when she and my father were young, they went to 'see' the Beatles when they came to play Bristol in the UK. They spoke of a seething mass of people who came and gathered on mass throughout the city central areas. A massive crowd of excited people all hoping to just get a glimpse of them. The majority of people obviously didn't have tickets, or indeed, a hope to get to see them, but they came anyway. She said the crowds were huge wherever they went. This would have been around 64 or 65, so right at the height of Beatlemania. She said she had never seen anything like it before or since. It was like the whole city turned out to try and catch a glimpse of the Fab Four. Apparently, they stuck their head out of an upper story window in the venue to wave at the crowd in the centre of town and people lost the plot. Girls screaming, totally manic, fainting, all sorts of mayhem. An unprecedented crowd of thousands and thousands of people. This was the scene everywhere they went at that point. For those of us not there at the time it's mind boggling to think of that level of hysteria now, it just hasn't happened like that for a musical group since. It's hard to pin down a straight forward and succinct reason for this phenomena. It's a kind of an alchemy of those exceptional times. The relatively freshness of the Rock 'n' Roll/Popular/Youth/Culture/Music scene, coupled with the demographic of post war children and the quickly advancing times, mores and culture, the sexual revolution, the record industry in general, the new, and readily accessible, burgeoning consumer tech of the time, changing attitudes, and so many more myriad reasons as to why The Beatles hit it big the way they did. We may never see the like of this kind of thing again. It seems impossible in today's environment, I'd love to be wrong about that, but it does seem doubtful in todays culture somehow. It's quite the miracle taken in retrospect. I still listen to them now. (I'm 54) My kids love them too, as I made the music available to them when they were little. I hope their music will live on perpetually as there's such a magic to it.

Brian definitely helped; but Paul McCartney was asked in a 1980 interview, “When did you know that The Beatles were more than just a good group, but a phenomenon?” Paul’s answer surprised me: “It was in Hamburg. We’d get a gig in a certain bar that wasn’t doing much business with the bands they’d had, and in a few weeks, people were coming in droves. This happened in every bar we contracted with in Hamburg. We all felt we must be doing something right!” This was of course long before they’d met Brian.

In January 1964 I was 6 years old and loved music. I listened to the radio every day, suddenly a song came on and I jumped up from my chair and literally ran to the radio. I was hearing a song that sounded like it was from another planet and I couldn't believe how incredibly good it was! I had no idea who it was but I knew I somehow needed to hear it again, and soon I did. I want to hold your hand was radically different than anything else at the time. I didn't know about the hype. I didn't even know what The Beatles looked like but they suddenly exploded and life was never the same.

Even Ringo in Hamburg was attracted to them… He has said, “There was just something about that front line (John, Paul, and George) that warmed my heart.”

In 1975 I heard a few songs on radio during a Beatles A to Z weekend. I liked Fool on The Hill and Penny Lane so I tracked down the album Magical History Tour and fell in love with every song. A month later I’m having breakfast in the kitchen at 7am while on a Cape Cod vacation. A song came on radio that was so beautiful…when it ended the DJ said “Yesterday Beatles gold 1965”

Another thing the Beatles had that I haven't seen anyone address is seeming infallibility. A big part of why they were worshiped is the fact that everything they touched turned to gold. It made them seem virtually superhuman. They show up on television and it's the biggest thing that had ever happened on TV. They make a movie (A Hard Day's Night) and, miraculously, it's fantastic (to both fans and critics alike). Every record goes straight to number 1. They're the first one's to play within a stadium and they pack the place. They're awarded MBEs. They hold all top five spots on the music charts. They release Sgt. Pepper and it's almost immediately hailed as the greatest album of all time. The world went hysterical largely because they seemed as infallible as "gods." Also, I think you underestimate the sheer greatness and consistency of their artistry. I think what Drive My Car *might* have taught you is that even at their worst, they were still pretty darned good!

Newborn babies, I had a customer whose baby would immediately stop crying and start laughing, smiling, giggling and moving to the music of the Beatles, the new mom was impressed and grateful that a ride around town listening to the Beatles would calm and change her baby's mood. Newborns don't know how to lie yet. So, this is 100% music and zero hype from advertisement.

I disagree because I think you left out something-the Beatles sound, their voices and performance was uniquely brilliant

80% of barbershops closed within a year of the Beatles' arrival in the US. How's that for cultural impact?

In the universe of music, there are The Beatles, and then... there's everyone else.

I'm old enough to remember the world before The Beatles. The teenage music scene was dominated by Elvis. Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Sam Cooke and 'doo wop' groups from across the pond were exciting to listen to but in the UK we only had Family Favourites and Children's Favourites on BBC radio and these played mostly novelty songs and ballads that didn't really interest us. We were waiting for The Beatles to happen.. but we didn't know it. Then suddenly, there they were and the world immediately changed from black & white to colour. The Beatles career went in phases which you can read about in the many good books that have been written about them and are still being written. When they stopped touring and became a studio band, the music critics, fans and pretty well everyone else was constantly wondering "What will they do next?" as they took song writing and recording to another level.. and another ..and another. They never wanted to repeat a successful formula, but always moved on and broke new ground. They were astonishingly productive, writing and recording well over 200 songs in just seven years, almost all of which are now considered classics. When I hear young people today, who weren't even born until 20 years after The Beatles broke up, discussing the Get Back movie or Giles Martin's remixed Beatles albums, I don't pretend to understand why they take an interest - but it makes me very happy. That's why The Beatles are so great. They're inexhaustible.

It's not just the music, the look, the big personalities and the massive cultural impact. It all goes back to the compelling story of "the 4 boys from Liverpool" a story which captures the hearts and minds of young people even today. Go into the Beatles souvenir shop and see for yourself, the kids love them and they're not going anywhere.

The only issue about Brian and Ed Sullivan you left out was a key event that led to Brian having access to Sullivan. In 1963, Ed was at Heathrow Airport when the Beatles arrived at the airport with hundreds of screaming fans greeting them. Sullivan was always on the look out for the next Elvis and so he asked about who these Beatles were. Without that chance event, I doubt Sullivan would have paid Brian much heed. That and the sales in Europe set them up. In the US, Capital records did not want to promote the band as the head guy didn’t like them. What happened was a girl in Baltimore who had gotten their records from a friend from England kept calling her local radio station till they played it. After that, the fans demanded it to the point that Capital had to take notice. A few other markets found the same impact. This led to giving the Beatles enough leverage to get Capital promotion and the rest is history. I think Brian was great but he fell into success because the Beatles music, like it did in Liverpool and Hamburg, grabbed young people. And while they played Sullivan it was their performance and songs that got so many kids to love them. And I want to Hold Your Hand was number 1 about 10 days before the first Sullivan show. A lot fell into place but it was the Beatles songs and innate charisma followed by their constant artistic changes and quality that made them the greatest.

There are so many reasons why the Beatles are No. 1: - their explosion into a time and a world without fixed musical directions - their Songwriting abilities: According to Rolling Stone Magazine list number 2 (Paul), 3 (John) and 65 (George) of the best songwriters ever - their musical creativity: 12 Studio-Albums plus the Double-EP MAgicl Mystery Tour plus several special recordings plus som Live-Recordings, plus... in eight years... plus the songs they wrote for other musicians and bands... - their singing abilities: Although they couldn't hear themselves on stage due to the screaming of the fans - the monitoring was invented especially for their second US tour - I don't know of any live recording of false singing - their status as the role model for all the boy bands to come: four different characters, four young men with different abilities, - their musical progression inbetween the eight years. The way from "Love me do" (the album) to "Let it be" (the album) - their status as cultual trendsetters: Hippie culture withou the Beatles? Unimaginable! - their status as political trendsetters: John's fight for peace, Paul's fight for the protection of animals, Georges fight for social justice, - they were the ones who gained puplic acceptance in all social classes for rock and pop - they were the first to use eight-track recording - they crashed the doors and walls and made the British Invasion of the US possible - they were the first to use eastern elements like the sitar in pop and rock - an even marginally correct number of cover versions of their songs seems to be impossible And this is just only a part of what the Fab Four have done for rock and pop. And I do not even mention the many records they have set until today. Even today - 54 years after the official dissolution of the band - new releases, newly remastered recordings, documentaries and fictional stories by and about the Beatles inspire millions of audiences.

there the greatest because they not only wrote brilliant songs, but at the peak of there fame experimented with new sounds and new ways or recording (still used today) and stopped touring and still they pushed there fame to new heights after all those risks!

To have experienced and lived through the change of music from Chuck Berry, Elvis etc, through to the Beatles has been a pleasure. To think that 60 years on from 1964 the Beatles are the yardstick for other musicians to measure their talents. In 100 years the Beatles will still be a talking point and worth a listen. Beatles music will be recorded by future musicians who will no doubt put their own style to the sound. We have now come to the cycle of the earth that there will never be another Beatles and music will not change...Just a bunch of singer/song writers who will have their time in the sun but will fade away quicker than my curtains.

I've been a major fan for many, many years, bought everything, listened to everything, analyzed everything to the point of all consuming obsession and still don't really know!!🤷. Of course it's the fantastic music, that particular sound, the progression, style, charisma etc etc etc, but there was, and still is,....... 'something' more . Indefinable, mystical, perhaps even religious?. There's some merit in the contents of this fellas analysis, but it only scratches the surface really!. It's strange to say , but I can only say this........ What the Beatles did and still do to me, and by now, billions of others, had never, ever happened before they came along and it will never, ever happen again , perhaps because The Beatles are still happening!!.

I don't think anyone who was not there at the time can ever know how the Beatles changed everything. I was a schoolboy when I heard "Please Please Me" for the first time. Nothing like it had ever been heard before. It was a moment in history. Britain was emerging from the greyness of the class-ridden 50's. They epitomised everything about that whole social revolution.

Noone has ever had such a hit rate with melodies. Even the worst Beatles songs are catchier than most bands' Greatest Hits.

I remember when I first listened to the Beatles willingly, I was a fan of queen, because I had seen the bohemian rhapsody film in 2018, and I was obsessed with them for a few months, then saw “we can work it out” on my KZfaq recommendations. I remember I instantly loved them, I genuinely said to myself “this is the greatest band I’ve ever heard” and I didn’t even know who the Beatles were, I was then obsessed with them for 2 years straight, When I first heard “I’m only sleeping” I was mesmerised, I listened to it over and over again and couldn’t even take in the lyrics or anything because it just sounded so incredible to me Yesterday is also the only song I’ve ever cried to on my first listen I now have a Beatles tattoo, posters of them all on my wall and I still talk about them all the time, I could never get bored of them they’re just so incredible, sometimes I listen to their songs and I say “I can’t believe this was written in 1964” or whatever year the song I’m listened to came out in I love the Beatles, nothing could top them in my music taste, they’re my favourite band of all time and have been for 6 years now

I was 12 when the Beatles were on Ed Sullivan, 16 when Sgt Pepper was released. I would play that album in the family room. My mother would chime in from the kitchen, "Who is that?" "I love those songs" She had no idea it was the Beatles. Last year I was standing with some friends. Much younger than me and they had a 15-year-old daughter. She had never heard of the Beatles. I played some of their older stuff that she liked, but when she heard Abbey Road she was hooked. "Come Together" was always playing when she was around. She had no idea how popular they had been. She just loved their music. The Beatles are the biggest because they are the best. It's really that simple. Sure when they were mop-tops all cute and all, everyone loved them. But then John made a crack about Jesus, they admitted to taking drugs, Yoko Ono added some weirdness, but still, they remained number one. They were smart, funny, photogenic, charismatic and immensely talented. With George Martin helping to realize their musical dreams, the Beatles created a catalog that will undoubtedly endure for as long as humans listen to music. When I talk or write about the musicians, singers and groups who emerged in the 60s, I don't include the Beatles. They were and remain in a class of their own.

You cannot have a debate about the success of The Beatles without out taking into consideration the politics of the music industry in the late 1950’s early 60’s. It was like prohibition. The youth wanted Jack Daniel’s, the groups were only allowed to give them milk. The Beatles gave its audience what it wanted. Not what the men in grey suits told them would be appropriate.

It's like when you see someone and, without any context, you don't think they're that attractive. Then, perhaps you find something out about them or observe them in a different setting where perhaps people are giving them lots of positive attention, or they're receiving praise and adulation, and suddenly you begin to be attracted to them, seeing them as more physically beautiful, even saying "They are actually quite good-looking" when what is really meant is "I'm more attracted to them (because I've seen that other people are)". Pre-selection I believe is the term. The more popular you seem, the more popular you become.

This is definitely a thought provoking video although I think one point was missed. In the beginning, the Beatles sound and harmonies was completely different from other pop music at that time. I remember my first hearing the Beatles on the radio in a small town is western Canada. Pop music was Elvis or simple 4 chord songs. My older sister mentioned to me that a popular group from England would be on our only radio station (CBC) that evening. When the Beatles songs finally came on, it was like a musical explosion to me...great melodies and beat, beautiful harmonies,....it all came together into something different from what I'd ever heard before. I was hooked. I knew nothing of the hype.. nobody had a TV.and we only one national radio station....I only heard the music. I, like many other young guys, had to buy a guitar. I wanted to be in a band. In our little town, many small groups were formed, mostly playing covers of Beatle songs. I agree with your discussion how they became as big as they were, but the music was the hook. Today's music of auto-tune, electronic sounds, all performed to a clip track just doesn't have the excitement created by talented musicians and vocalists creating music.

Brilliantly creative analysis. As to why the adulation disappeared when the Beatles broke up, you have given us the reason: The public was ANGRY about the breakup, and the "magical musical lens" was inverted.

You give very important insight. I mostly agree! It was a perfect storm. I was there in a sense...I'm 75 and remember coming out of the early 60s.. this sound was something new. I went to the Montreal concert Sept 8 64 and there was something going on, very special.On a personal note I didn't love all their music like" Chains"...I also didn't care about "can't buy me love " but soon after "i'll be back" was on the radio It was so beautiful & different I was Hooked ,I loved your Apple,Steve Jobs comparison ..I didn't realize it until you said it.

Unfortunately, the record labels have tried their hardest to retire rock and promote their AI autotuned music. If a Band is ever going to be bigger than the Beatles, the record companies need to get behind rock artists again. Lets hope they do.

The Beatles reached the hysteria they did due to a very unique circumstance I offer per below. 1) The teenage demographic was the largest we had ever known since the advent of efficient record recording and distribution system. Hence the audience was available and the industry had the means. 2) Music was available via AM Radio which was nowhere as fractured as today where everyone has a specific FM genre of music they desire and primarily listen to. Top 40 was it and it alone. Perhaps a larger city would have maybe 2 or 3 listened to AM platforms. 3) Yes the Beatles were very talented people, but the Record Industry saw $$$$ and pumped the well as long and hard as humanly possible. 4) One only needs to look at Elvis to understand the grow of the focused campaign the entertainment industry had available. 5) I don’t mean to underrate the talent or cultural impact of The Beatles, but they hit the sweet spot and they had the talent and unique personalities to match the moment these circumstances presented. I could go on and on but these are (some) of the reasons I have the opinion I do.

Positive, relatable, melodic and mainstream. Huge mountain to climb.

It's very briefly touched on, but I think one of the key appeals of the Beatles was their charm and wit. Especially in the States at that time, where such irreverence was seen as disrespectful rather than just loveably cheeky. The fact that a Beatles cartoon was quickly made to capitalise on this irreverence tells it's own story, I think. Everything else you've said I agree with, particularly the Brian stuff. Funnily enough, when I first heard Paperback Writer I thought it sounded like The Monkees; a sped-up version of Last Train to Clarksville or something.

Very interesting take this. Well thought out. I think a lot of things like enless number 1s and the like was a result of the mania. This is the case for most bands though. Once established, the name alone can influence people's opinions. The mania had nothing to do with the music. It was just pure chaos that existed around them. Its Very odd looking back at it nowadays. What makes them so revered is the sheer amount of amazing songs and the fact that they were light years ahead of their peers in songwriting and production. From about 65 onwards the output was actually bonkers. Some filler on there too of course but they were scary good at their peak.

,You need to have lived through that era to understand. You may compare their music to all the genres that came after them. Of course, you can't expect them to have anticipated metal, punk, prog rock or grunge. If you compare them to what came before, you'll see the impact they had. They single handedly rewrote the whole script in popular music, as well as pioneered new sounds between 1964 and 1970. Eventually, every other band or artist was copying them whenever they came out with a new album and a new sound. It was also the upbeat optimism of their sound, with incredibly well crafted songs. Their cheeky humor was also a big draw. There was also a cultural revolution happening at the time that they fed into. They had many of these things together in one package.

When you consider that the world's population back in the days of the Beatles was around 3.3 billion (todays is over 8 billion) , and you couldn't just 'download' songs/albums with a thumb press and physically had to get to a music shop and purchase it, The Beatles were even bigger than you think and owned a far larger share of the world audience in their hands than anybody else since. The only reason many album sales from the likes of Swift, Sheeran, Beyonce, etc have stood up to the Beatles sales is because they're current artists playing to a current audience who are up on the whole downloading game. To put it possibly a little insensitively, many 1960s Beatles fanatics are either old or dead. And even given that, they still hold a massive fan base 60 years after they emerged to the world. Giving the attention span of kids these days, I'll be surprised if 'Taylor Swift' is even a thing 20 years from now. I mean, whose still buying Britney Spears records today ?

One of the best channels on KZfaq covering the best band in the world? Perfect! Can't wait to watch this one

Great James, you clearly explained the phenomenon of The Beatles!! There was and is nothing like The Beatles ever! The Beatles were the greatest band in the entire world! 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

I was listening to the 2023 blue album in the car the other day, and had forgotten that 'Now and Then' was even on the CD. I listened to it 3 or 4 times! I like it more now than when it came out. Its really a good song. I hope the vocals on 'Free As a Bird' and 'Real Love' are done the same way using the demixing technology to extract John's voice from the tape, like 'Now and Then' was. It will really improve those songs.

Whereas many other 60s bands primarily took their influence from rock n roll and blues in an attempt to appear “tough”, the Beatles drew musical influences from other diverse genres like music hall, Motown girl groups, stage musicals, baroque and other styles which many people would consider “unmanly”. You don’t compose a song like Eleanor Rigby by listening to Gene Vincent constantly.

And to your point: When McCartney released "Maybe I'm Amazed" on his first solo album, it went nowhere; it was not even released as a single. Everyone hated McCartney (falsely) for having broken up the Beatles. Fast forward 6 years, the public had warmed up to him again, turning the lens back in his favor. He played the same song, the same way on his Wings Over America tour - and it was a hit, still considered by many to be his best post-Beatle song. Same song, different lens.

Culture- The first widespread exposure to androgyny to young men in the west. Drugs- The widespread exposure to POT and LSD to millions of young people throughout the world via their songs and lifestyle cannot be overstated . The association with commune lifestyle implicit in their group lifestyle. Exposure to the music of Black American songwriters on a large scale.Widespread exposure to World Music.The almost magical appearance of being ahead of trends. Music - Two of the finest SINGERS in Pop/Rock singing dozens of meaningful songs that were written, performed and sung by them. Ian MacDonald’s book- Revolution in the Head - is a must read for anyone who is serious about the Influence of The Beatles on our current culture- the good and the bad. Apple and Steve Jobs - see The Beatles. Thank you James this was outstanding.

There's something that's crucially important to the story of the Beatles and the sixties that often goes unnoticed - the rock industry that happened in their wake and the level of reverence and popularity that you regard their history with just barely existed prior to them. You know what did exist? World War 2. The period after WW2 was a period of an unprecedented Long Peace, and a furthering of an internationalisation, unity, mobility, trade, and crucially and economic and technological boost among the youth and the populace at large that made the idea of another imperial war more and more unfeasible by the day. Before that point, wars were a lot more common, and culture as a whole were a lot more inaccessible and lower in a hierarchy of needs for average people than basic security like food and shelter - if you didn't get drafted. Teenagers all over the world saw something really special when Elvis took the airwaves, and even moreso the Beatles: They looked androgynous, and they represented something close to a next evolutionary step of humanity. What they didn't look like was like the grizzled buzz-cut veterans of yore who would dread going to fight in the trenches again. Sadly hopes like that would be dashed by the coming of the Vietnam War in '65 and the drafts in America, but that's also precisely why the youth also fought so hard against it: They wanted to keep the newfound beauty they discovered, and the Beatles were in every meaning the centerpiece of it. I will also agree that Brian was a really shrewd and talented businessman. He knew the game. But he also had a belief in the boys, and as someone who's had a large share of persecution and who was also fearfully a gay man, I think it really speaks something if Brian saw something immense and irreplacable in them. I wouldn't compare the Beatles to Jackson or Swift as you've put, because the state of the world they existed in is so much different than the world the Beatles appeared in. The world was still recovering from centuries of warfare, oppression and authoritarian ideologies, and they wanted to break free from it. Instead, the next big musician I would compare the Beatles to would be Ludwig van Beethoven. Beethoven also did something unprecedented for his time: He was a romanticist - it was the romantic period. His composed not with genius or math, but with feelings, fiery, brooding, doing so in a world that many romantics felt had forgotten all about. The world before romanticism was a world without feelings and the inner world. Beethoven represented that thing that the world was lacking. So did the Beatles.

For me it’s the songwriting and the sheer volume of quality. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge Beatles fan, but they recorded some very average gimmicky songs. The fact they had to earn their corn, nothing much was contrived, their Britishness, their evolution. They had it all.

It's like NG said once, 'when does anyone get into the Beatles? They're just there' their influence is beyond far reaching and they were the 1st in a lot of things musically.

I think this video is very interesting, but it misses one thing that only The Beatles had: consistency; just seven years releasing one album after another, each one more innovative than the last. Nowadays that is impossible for any musician, what's more, they don't even try or care, music is no longer sold like that. And ... how many 'innovation' is left in terms of music? I don't know. I also don't agree on two points: Music changed in the 70's and 80's, so none of them, who continued making rock/pop (except for McCartney, who came up with some electronic pieces ) could have the impact they had as a band. I find the comparison unfair. And the second point confirms what I say: McCartney did have a successful solo career, with many excellent songs that are in fact much better than some of the ones he composed for The Beatles. I think a myth was created around them while they were together, it's true, but once you knew their songs, they never let you down, and the new material was even better. What band or soloist could offer that? None. Every band has albums and weak songs. Again: consistency.

This video is beyond great! You are so interesting to listen to my "admiration " for the Beatles is better understood now. A well crafted expose of why the Beatles were so great. I cant wait to hear you again❤

Great video, as always

Hi James. I started my own KZfaq channel, I’ve enjoyed your videos and liked the one about how to start a channel. Cheers mate, enjoying your content!

Will be talked about in 500 years off the charts

This is a very good video essay. Well done.

Interesting thoughts and a lot about Brian Epstein that I didn't know! In my opinion, everything came together with the Beatles: The history of the Beatles, the charisma, their songs, the legends, the versatility, but also the era of the 60s, which was a great time of transformation. But I don't know whether the Beatles were rather average at the beginning, as G. Martin said and also the person responsible at Decca for the sessions. There are also statements that the Beatles stood out from the other bands in the early days in Hamburg and Brian Epstein was also fascinated by them and didn't just do it for the chance to earn money, or am I wrong? PS: I can remember being fascinated by Beatles songs as a child in the 80s - without knowing the band behind them. And I also remember being totally fascinated the first time I saw her in a movie, it was kind of magical. So it's a bit different from your story with "Drive My Car". I think there are definitely several points of view.

The Beatles songs are phenomenal.

James luv … your best ever video. As an educator myself, I see here a video dissertation worthy of an A+. But one flaw … Ed Sullivan Show was not a chat show, so … I’ll give it an A

Your topic is one I have always wanted to understand. I think that your analysis is the most objective, rational and practically the best I've heard.

I love your stuff man big respect. The recording seems to have a fuzz on it . X

Certain things can only happen once.

Two competing song writers, who respected each other’s abilities and their value to the group , but the biggest thing that made the difference, was George Martin.

@14:06 😃 *So glad to see/hear you mention these brilliant creators! (esp Guthrie Goven!)* 😊🤘🏼

You are so right about the publicity angle here. It really is a gigantic deal. It played apart almost more important than the music itself this was a great video sir.

The video claims it was beatlemania that made them the biggest band. It is actually the quality of their songs and how they were able to keep reinventing themselves.

I think that one reason why you see a lot of soundtracks on the list of best-selling albums is that the movie gives them automatic context. Think about the “Star Wars” theme. I bet you’ve been in a situation where you heard it out of the blue and suddenly, you were in space in an X-Wing or something. The context is just automatically there. Same with “Thriller.” I bet when you hear the title song, or “Beat It,” your mind flashes to the music videos. Context is everything.

One of your best James 👊 brilliant!

Great video, and your love and worship for them shines through, as would mine. A very minor point that I would like to point out, but it might help to put things in a bit of context. The Ed Sullivan Show was not a "Talk" or "Chat" show as you said but what was Called a "Variety" with different acts from classical musicians to international circus acts and Ed would barely ask them 2 or 3 questions standing up with no chairs or sofas or desk or table. They were also watched by the whole family from small children like me, I was 4 at the time of The Beatles first appearance, with my older siblings, my parents, my grandparents and even any guests that were over on Sunday evenings. Thanks for the video and for your heartfelt story.

Interesting take. But they would always been as popular, albeit with slightly slower progress without Epstein. The personalities, humour and being completely comfortable, likeable and composed in front of the media was critical. Can not teach that or manipulate it, they could just do it. The music was also fresh and original compared to their stuff around at the time. Epstein was pretty much marketing a "sure thing" .Completely different to other pop stars of the time. Plus, the Americans could understand the soft Liverpudlian accents (If they had been Geordie or Brummie who knows!) and the music was American influenced as well. All boxes ticked. Epstein in effect speeded up the process to superstardom, which would have definitely happened anyway.

I am a slightly older music fan than James, so my exposure to The Beatles was different. When I was a teenager, after an eclectic assortment of childhood taste, the first musical pheneomenon that happened was Acid House. This introduced me to the Psychedelic sounds of the 1960s, and especially The Beatles. Also around at that time, guitars and dance started to merge. When Britpop happened it was a welcome revival of the swinging sixties in the form of cool Britannia and it was a glorious time for new music. The music press had a couple of major albums it seemed every week and the people in the NME and Melody Maker were soon in the tabloids too. But The Beatles so not transcend these times purely on music or influence, sales or status. There is a sense of destiny there, but also a philosophy, an outlook and a message. For me, personally, they become a way of life. That may sound extreme, but my attitude to politcs is based on the four, my humour is dry, learned from them and my father who is a big fan too. Spirituality... But I think what defines the band is one word. Growth. People grow with the band and they are the archetype of a great story. Traumatic childhoods, hard work, insane levels of fame for very extraordinary people who remained grounded. They always sought to grow, always gave those behind them a leg up, and even when competing, had friendly, rather than nasty rivalries. It is one of the reasons they are so blessed. They, by being themselves, and true to themselves, were always somehow not only in the right place at the right time, but became the right place at the right time. Jackson, and Madonna rather than Taylor (who is coming up) are the only others with that level of fame. Sorry, but The Stones were great musically, but as Icons I feel lacked something despite their obvious charisma... But Jackson, much as I love him and his music, became isolated as his fame increased and he adopted the posture of Jesus. Paul. Still uses public transport. Both The Beatles and Jackson have their merits, but as inspiration? Look at their lives beyond music too... Thejr attitude to women as they grew. The Beatles went from birds to those who were their equal as the liberation of their era became more accepted. Jackson had issues in that regard. The Beatles searched for God, Jackson invited adulation. But mainly, I think, Jackson defined the times, whereas The Beatles set the agenda for the times. Oasis are a comparison too. Another big influence. But Oasis, as much as they sang about love and the Beatles were more like the Stornes in attitude. At the height of their popularity and creativity the four called out those looking to live in Downing Street in Taxman, while Noel supped champers at the supernova heights of his, not that he does not regret it, but that too was a sign of the times. These are of course opinions, not judgements Jackson got me through my childhood. Oasis saw me through my twenties. The Beatles have often saved and guided my life. I guess for me ultimately, that is the difference.

I believe it's more than just PR. There's a hell of a lot of perfectly aligned variables that goes into success like that. Most of which are beyond anyone's control.

What a video mate! I picked up a guitar 7 months ago and like many, became obsessed with how I could become the size of the of the Beatles or Oasis. Although the creative side is massively important, I’ve been analysing the business side of these bands and comparing them. Will definitely give the Brian Epstein book a read, Thank you for such a boss video!

Everything you say. But I'd add that the myth making can be backed up by substance. Going over the 100 mark with great songs everyone remembers. No one else has done that. They have scores of album tracks only that are more legendary than most No1 singles by everyone else.

Bah humbug. The Beatles are great by themselves. Adding some hype does not explain the longevity of their popularity. There IS a magic separate from the songs. It is the way they play and interact, their sound. You dont need anything else to explain it. Not 'a lens' not a mania. They became even more popular after they stopped touring. I discovered them during a Beatles popularity lull in 1975. Wings were on top. A friend put on 'no reply' from 'rubber soul'. I saw the light. But if you dont hear the magic you will explain their phenomena by other means. So, there's gold in them hills. You just need to open the curtains. A small push will do it. Given all the hype 'now and then' still sounds like a so so project with overblown effects. Overhyped, for the modern audience. Give me Get back any day. Magic..as witnessed. No hype needed just careful exposure. It is all there to begin with..

You are right about this to some extent, I mean it's true for many, but some of my favourite music and bands I discovered organically and loved. With no filter at first. From hearing something in a record store or just tuning into something at the right moment on the radio, hearing a tune playing in the background. Someone else playing something etc etc. Just the music own it's own and having no idea about who it was or their image or anything. I found out who they were and went and purchased singles and albums based on this alone. A lot of these artists became very big and popular. Which was only propelled further by the type of thing you are talking about. Once it's popular it becomes more popular. Yet for me, the music has to be there. It's the main thing.

I would add many other facts too. They achieved these record sales when you had to go to the shop and buy the vinyl not just download it. If fans now have to go somewhere and buy the record what would the sales be? Also the records they made in the 60's (and beyond) have been resold many many times to collectors so there true sales are probably double what was pressed. They wrote about 300+ songs of which at least 100 are at the top level of songwriting and will always be played and listened too. If you look at those top 500 albums of all time there are about 8 of the 12 albums they made which make regular appearances in the chart while everything else peaked and fell away in other words their albums will always be in that league while everything else is a fashion. The other thing was each new album was better than the one before and peaked with Abbey Road Let It Be was not quite as good but recorded before Abbey Road how many bands have managed that? They also sold millions of records as solo artists after the Beatles. The Beatles were the best there ever was and will never be surpassed UNLESS they write more than 300 songs that are better and nobody is likely to do that. The Beatles will always be the best, enough said.

It's gonna be very hard to have another Beatles. Back then, celebrities in general had a certain aura and mystique about them because their exposure to the public was carefully planned and controlled and limited to few outlets, so curating a certain image was easier. But now, in the age of information/misinformation, it's quite hard to control what everyone thinks of a public figure because any undesired information, factual or otherwise, can slip from the act's management team's grasp and spread uncontrollably, damaging that image beyond repair. All the celebrity DUIs, mugshots, me toos, scandals, etc across the internet made the public view celebrities as normal people with flaws so that mystique about them is no longer there. The best an act can hope to reach now is level 3.

L&Mc were great song writers.Who are the song writers today ? maybe Sheeran,Swift,Adele.Too many songs today are written to order by faceless musicians.You could probably get to swiftie levels of hysteria if you can pen a decent song and have a target audience of teenage girls,the Beatles appealed to every generation.

JHG a lot of what you presented here I agree with but not all of it. I don't recall being hyped up about them. I was 8yrs old and just starting to check out radio stations. Particularly the rock n roll Top 40 stations. I never heard about The Beatles there. My parents are immigrants from Liverpool, England and my Dad came home with their 1st Capitol record (Meet The Beatles) and told me, "These kids are from my neighborhood!". I played the 1st tune (I Want To Hold Your Hand) and was immediately hooked. No hype, just music. Of course my Dad rolled his eyes and left my room. But it was their music that hyped and sold me.

When I decided I wanted to play guitar my dad took me to get a guitar and amp. A mel bay guitar book and 2 albums. A Hard Days Night and 12x5. My dad now these guys are really having fun. He thought they were the future of music and told me to learn to play some their stuff.

that´s explain why john lennon claimed to hate or not like many of his extraordinary songs with the beatles (a day in the life, and your bird can sing) , because he was maybe analizing the songs objectively, with no lens of their fans, and he and george were particulary fed up of the massive hysteria of the beatlemania.

Havent watched the video yet, but I would say it will be impossible for anyone to get as big as the beatles. For sure they where great musicians. However good quality recordings where difficult and expensive back then, and they just did amazing records. So there was not so much music to choose from. Today there are so many different genres, divided in hundreds of sub-genres, with countless of artists, all having great recordings, all available on streaming platforms. Everyone can choose what he likes, so I doubt that there will be a band/artist that is so good that almost everyone likes is their music.

Very well done and enjoyable video about the greatest band ever.

brilliant as usual!

In 1966 the Rutles faced the biggest threat to their careers. Nasty in a widely quoted interview had apparently claimed that the Rutles were bigger than God, and was reported to have gone on to say that God had never had a hit record. The story spread like wildfire in America. Many fans burnt their albums, many more burnt their fingers attempting to burn their albums. Album sales sky-rocketed. People were buying them just to burn them. But in fact it was all a ghastly mistake. Nasty, talking to a slightly deaf journalist, had claimed only that the Rutles were bigger than Rod. Rod Stewart would not be big for another eight years, and certainly at this stage hadn’t had a hit. At a press conference, Nasty apologized to God, Rod and the press, and the tour went ahead as planned. It would be the Rutles’ last.

i cant agree with your thesis about the beatles are heard through the ears of media and exposure which helps to make the beatles sound better than they actually are making people think like sheep i agree with about brian epstein being a great manager pity elvis had such a bad one and the timing of the early sixties was perfect for band to cheer us all up especially america after the loss of president john kennedy but what made these cheeky four lads from black and white liverpool to become the musicians to open up the world to colour and absolute joy was their life changing music im 75 now and have listened all sorts of music from great classical works blues rock and good old pop but maybe apart from lark ascending by ralph vaughan williams the majority of the beatles songs are the only ones that make me laugh smile and cry sometimes all three in one song

In the UK people had never heard of Steve Jobs. Apples were bought because of the design, quality and reliability. The design held it over others. Because of the design it gave the owner kudos - they have taste, etc. No one bought an Apple because of Steve Jobs.

I'm not sure such hysteria as Beatlemania is even possible in our modern day and age. They were incredibly revolutionary in their time and one of few rock bands in the world at that time. It was all so brand new at that time. The Beatles were the first band I ever listened to and liked as a kid. I remember listening to them on my father's old record player back in 1993-1995 ish. However, Oasis was a band I chose for myself on a whim. "Some might say" changed my life forever. It was a catalyst for attending university, which lead me to a study abroad and later living overseas for 8 years. Thanks Noel!

I didn't have the reaction you describe at all. I was too young to be aware of Beatlemania when I heard Beatles songs on the radio, but I loved them, and some of the first records I bought were Beatles records, in 1966, when I was four years old. I liked the Monkees too, but I collected Beatles records. However, it was still only their music that interested me, I preferred early Beatles records through Rubber Soul, but I also enjoyed hearing things like Penny Lane and Sgt. Pepper that often played on the radio in that era. I must have listened to all the early Beatles records hundreds of times by the time I went to college in 1980, but I knew nothing about their story, and I still didn't know which Beatle was which. My focus was entirely on the music and not the culture, or who played the music. I got in an argument with a friend about it grade school, when I said I liked the Monkees, and he called them "fakey", claiming they didn't play their own instruments. I couldn't imagine why that made a difference. What a stupid objection! Because all you hear is the sound, and you either like it or you don't. I was a little amazed to learn that at such a young age, he was captured by the myth, the image, the story, or whatever. I only cared about the sound. In the case of The Beatles, it might have been an astrological destiny, because I was conceived in December of 1961, when they signed their contract with Brian Epstein, and I was born in September, 1962, when they were recording their first hit. It isn't clear why they needed to gestate for nine months, but I was born into a Masonic tradition, and people say The Beatles were using Masonic occult symbolism. I just loved the sound.

Too much collective talent and chemistry on all fronts. A combination of lots of things including influencing western culture. And it's not really best sellers its about, it's how undeniably good the songs and albums were.

Their hardship are the the fruits of their popularity The Beatles is my favorite band of all

Hi Great video, well explained. Two things I would like to add. Im a massive Beatles fanatic and have loved them since i was 10 in 78 but I do think they were also a product of their time, what I mean is. In 1963 there was no internet, computer games, phones etc even TVs were not in every home, the main sources of entertainment were Movies, Dances and music, so people had a lot more time on their hands to go to airports to see them off. The other thing was, you said solo Beatles songs never eclipsed the Beatles, technically that is wrong, in the UK anyway. Mull of Kintyre is the biggest selling single in the UK ever, excluding charity singles Band aid and Elton johns Diana tribute. It outsold I want to hold your hand and She loves you the two biggest Beatle sellers. One thing is for sure the Beatles are the biggest and the best and probably will never be toppled now

My Dad being a No 1 Bestles fan didn't care for Now and Then but me and my sister who had been brought up on their music (nostalgia) loved it. I think this proves your point 😊

Michael Jackson was and Taylor Swift is a major Beatles fan and part of the craft momentum, as many of the most popular acts are as well... the Beatles were an engineered social experiment that spared no expense that got out of the hands of the establishment, integrated sophisticated Crowley magic that cooked the music product that gave it a timeless and mystical quality... so the Beatles were not organic nor where they manufactured... so you had classical music theory integrated into much of the songs to elevate the product by Martin as well as other people and studio musicians in the background... then you had the genius of the individual Beatles bringing in ideas to add to this corporate foundation.... so the Beatles were the first or a big bang that spread

You are correct about the listening lens. Studies have shown that how we perceive everything is extremely subjective. The food we like, our view of aesthetics, what we believe, who we find attractive, etc. is all based on confirmation bias and social forces.

James is correct. There is more involved in understanding the Beatles' enduring appeal than the great tunes, the innovative albums, the cheeky witticisms, the mop top haircuts, and so on. Other bands and artists had all those qualities and have not achieved the Beatles' stratospheric heights. So what is it? I feel it can best be explained by the manner in which the four components of the band complimented each other and, in toto, represented a fully-formed ideal human. Once the two films were released and fans got to know each Beatle as an individual, certain archetypes became associated with each one. John, the intellectual. Paul, the romantic. George, the spiritual. Ringo, the joyous. The head, the heart, the soul and the spirit. Together they formed a powerful combination that still resonates to this day. No other band, no other performer did anything similar. The religious paradigm, I feel, is valid. Who knows? Perhaps it's time to think about the Church of the Holy Beatles?

What you on about. Tony Clifton was way bigger than The Beatles.

The Beatles' music is universal.

Great melodies and harmonies and the vocal blend defined a sound and also George and Ringo. Just great chemistry.

Personally - and I am ready for the hate here - I think the only act comparable to the Beatles meteoric rise at the moment is Taylor Swift. Whatever you think of her music, she's pretty much reached (and is possibly exceeding) the levels of hysteria and fame The Beatles had in 1964 - The intense fandom, every album reaching number 1, the numerous thinkpiece articles, the colossal scale and attendance of her concerts, the unheard-of levels of wealth and billionaire status. There's nothing comparable at the moment. I'm fairly certain in future 'best artists' lists it'll probably be The Beatles, Taylor Swift - then everyone else at this point, and I'm saying this as someone who likes a few songs, but hasn't heard the majority of her work yet.

The Beatles had the “cool” factor!🇳🇿🇬🇧

I agree with this in large part but there could be a follow up to this video focusing on the management of The Beatles’ catalog starting with Anthology in 1995. There’s been a slow drip of Beatles projects since then that have created new fans and kept existing fans engaged. I’m sure that McCartney has solicited input from marketing firms to promote The Beatles’ legacy but he is himself a marketing genius. He knows the right buttons to push to create hype. Other bands and musicians like Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix, and Pink Floyd saw a resurgence of popularity in the 90s but only The Beatles have maintained it until today.

Somebody in the last 60+ years needed to figure this out, and you have done a great job.

Nirvana are close to being if not being bigger than them today. Look at anything Kurt Cobain owned what it sells for at auction in 2024. Problem is Kurt didn’t live long enough to go ahead of the Beatles. Just FYI the Beatles are my favorite band, Nirvana second, Kurt and me are the same age. So it was good to see someone from my generation become so huge.