Such a John Lennon response.

The best answer. Hahaha!

😀😀

Yes, that's in this video...

Thank you, I had to watch it like five times and still could not understand anything except for 'Australians'.

I remember being that age. I wasn't doing a thing in life except work and drinking lattés.

...also, my favorite tune from this time is "You Can't Do That."

@@karaamundson3964: And you turned out to be a bit of alright, too, Kara. 😇😇

Yeah, mass hysteria. Such BS.

Great story.

It was a special time in is life-personally I'm glad he decided to take the opportunity to go and enjoy the moment!

Energy and enthusiasm from a large crowd can be great stuff at a concert. Even the oppressive wall of sound from a crowd erupting can be exhilirating - at the right moments. Singing along, so that you have a band leading hundreds or thousands of people in a big huge belting crowd rendition version of their hits - awesome. Losing your shit with excitment to the point that you climb up on stage and leap into a mass of humans that are charged up in a way only live music does for people, getting carried around in an ebb and flow that moves with the music - lots of fun. Feeling the ground rumble beneath you as a sea of people dance or stomp in beat together to a thumping great song - awe inspiring and sometimes even kind of spiritual. Leaping into the flurry of chaos and hype that is a good mosh pit when the band slams into a doozy of a track - exhilirating and endlessly fun. All these things describe the kind of fanatical energy that can make live music with big crowds transcendant and distinctly human in a really awesome way. But drowning in a sea of shrieks from beginning to end, no back and forth with the band at all, barely an acknowledgememt that there is any music...? What's fun about that?

See what makes live music so great (IMO) is that usually the fans want to hear the music and are also musically inclined (at least insofar as they enjoy music and will pay to see it), so there ends up being a rhythm to their participation in the music. THAT'S what makes a good stadium/outdoor concert IMO. When the fan enthusiasm acts as an extension of the music, when tons and tons of people USE the fact that there are tons and tons of them to add a layer of depth to the musical experience thar they can't get just listening to the music at home alone. Beatles fans appeared to have done the exact OPPOSITE of that. It's like the crowds shriek when the band comes on stage, "okay fine they're excited," then the music starts and the shrieks intensify... "fair enough they're psyched for the music." But then it just... persists. As if to make damned sure you can't actually make out that there's music going on. "Oh you like Beatles music? Fuck you we like screaming so tough shit you have to listen to us instead. They'll be playing like shit anyways because they can't hear themselves either!" They might as well have used their ticket money to rent a stadium and shriek at a cardboard cut out of the band. Could have gotten it out of their system so the music fans could actually get a chance to see and HEAR live Beatles music, you know? It's just lacking in basic concert etiquette. Boy bands have it rough lol. Their fans make a shitty audience.

Lol, also the first Ed Sullivan show had a US audience of 73 million! The Our World broadcast, had like 400 Million people tune in, Bealtes performed 1 song.

Nth Degree wow that’s some insane stats!

@@nthdegree1269 thats 3 times more people than ALL of Australia

DAMN

300,000 people Just to get a Glimpse Of 4 Men

Elvis

@@dumb2389Hello is it me your looking for

@@dumb2389Presley was a solo act, but he’ up there for sure

They were no smarter than kids now. The biggest Beatles crowd in the world only in Australia, 300, 000 didn't turn up elsewhere in the world. Besides those fans only liked the Beatles when they were doing 3 minute catchy simple pop songs. As the Beatles progressed into more sophsticated writing half of those kids wouldn't be interested.

@@Raider577 You should remember that the fans grew just like the fab four. The kids that were 13 in 1963 were 16 in 1966 and I bet most of them loved an album like Revolver much more than their early work.

cool

+Nicole Cress amazing

truly

you are lucky!

Thank you, I'm near to 68...and still in business....as a guitar player.Thanks.

Woodstock would have been bigger - about half a million at that one.

Em Rog, This was larger than Woodstock. This was people, lined from the airport right into the city, with people in trees, that is a lot of people. I mean, think about that. From the airport to the city. Then near the hotel alone, another crowd of at least 350,000, some have estimated higher. Woodstock, was a bunch of bands playing for a long time, this was the Beatles, one band, merely showing up, just people lining the streets and crowd the hotel to see them. Some of the most crazy reaction I have ever seen. I don't think this wil be duplicated. See this short video on their arrival at Adelaide kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mJmgdM15zJO8g4k.html

don leavell, this was "the eyewall" of the Hurricane known as beatlemania. Insane.

I think you might be right. Super cool!

Adelaide had a population of about 600,000 at the time - thats HALF the entire city turning out to see them. Insane.

yep

Yep i was 5 years old when i heard them singing in tv help i was born in their era 1961 im still young then but when you were bor in 1955 you may be aware and will look for them but still im amazed by their popularity and songs as a band that time and no doubt they are on top and nostalgic thats why im curious and became their avid admirer but i still dont know their individual story before this presetn generation only

My grandmother who is 76 saw them in there The Beatles 1964 America Tour

bloody scary you mean---I'm even older.

Supreme Kira ......my best mate (almost 73) saw The Beatles in Brisbane.

Beatles visit. Manila

You never know: you may be gone first or I may be gone first. They may be blessed with many more years.

"Sir Paul" (William) will be remembered in a different light when the truth gets out.

Yeah they had a lot of sex in Australia from all reports Lennon commented, ha

+ Paul

Vasco Yehezkiel Sidauruk Paul is alive

@@marisarico4933 yeah

You mean in Australia

@@Raider577What do you mean? Wherever they went there were huge crowds to greet them, if Australia’s 300,0000 thousand was a record it doesn’t mean they didn’t attract vast crowds elsewhere. In America they had ticker tape parades, In the Philippines George Harrison said “it seemed like there were millions there”

@@johnp515 I know they attracted crowds wherever they went but in Australia that was the biggest attendance they ever had. Though Abba in Australia may have come close.

Elvis was better.

@@AbiNomac Elvis is a solo artist.not a band smh

@@missyaz4959 - And he was still better than all four of them

@@sarthaktegta4642 - and yet he lives on 44 years after his passing like know other artist in history. Also, they couldn’t compare to him in stage performance and vocal abilities. I still like them though

@@sarthaktegta4642 isn't mj more famous than the beatles? idk about elvis.

Yep, and then thousands of people, young and old lined the highway for miles all the way from the airport into the city, with many people in the trees. Just for a "glimpse".

Jim Cushman never!

Nevah!

And thank god for that. That amount of autistic screaming... ugh.

Don't say That

One Direction kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rLN-qcqr3LbZYIk.html

Yep. That's insane.

that's not true, the beatles played at cominsky park in chicago, that stadium is still used today, and they also played at busch stadium and i believe that staidum is still standing,not sure about the gator bowl but that might still be standing as well. and the hollywood bowl is still there and being used today,

@@archangelmusic13 in Australia. This video is about their Australian tour

@@sliat1981 oh so now you change your comment to appear right, haha well you didnt say that in your original comment, you said out of all then places they played. you didnt say out of all the places they played in australia

@@sliat1981 so what if this video is of their australian tour, i see people leaving comments from shea stadium talking about their concerts in australia

@@archangelmusic13 I never once changed my comment. When does it say it was edited. Are you on drugs!? Did you even read my comment? Why the hell would I say that on anything but an Australian video. And Shea Stadium is not even the only American place they played still standing let alone the world

That's correct

Well when nearly the entire city comes to see you. Entire country goes on hold. Crazy

Perhaps a bit more intense in the USA

Australians just miss home. Coronation street actors toured there sometime later and there were greeted by similar large crowds .

true but other celebrities visited australia back then and didnt have 300 thousand people come out to see them.

All the big acts toured Australia with the exception of Elvis. The Aussie promoters had booked the Beatles to tour Australia back in 1963. They made an absolute fortune out of them as they booked the Beatles before they took off in the US and got them on the cheap.

Michael Smith1'see They sure did well, more No.1 hits than anywhere else.

+QueenConsternation So far so good.

@Joe studly they broke up before they cud...I'm sure they went individually though.

No, he didn't, The Cavern Club in Liverpool England promoted the Beatles

The bubble never burst.

No Antifa or Lefties to ruin the fun and freedom....

the reason they never returned is because it was just too far, had australia been close like in france or germany they would have gone back.

would you like paul if he were ugly?

That's true, MJ attracted a lot of femboys.

@@drmattathias and mj was attracted to a lot of little boys

Nothing compares to the Beatles. Not even Michael Jackson. If anything social media helps to create a buzz. When the Beatles played, no could even hear them live, and the performances were only 20-30 minutes. No Light Show. No audio effects. Just them way in the distance. The Beatles, were unique as they were a SOCIAL/POP/Phenomena. This wasn't crowds and fans, this was nearly entire cities coming out to greet them. Miles and Miles of people, along the highway, from the airport into the City Sq. People hanging out of buildings, out of trees as this video shows. People, who were not even fans, talking about them all the time, wherever you go. This is what Mick Jagger of the Rolling STones said: Quote"The Beatles were so big that it's hard for people not alive at the time to realize just how big they were. There isn't a real comparison with anyone now. I suppose Michael Jackson at one point, but it still doesn't quite seem the same. They were so big that to be competitive with them was impossible. I'm talking about in record sales and tours and all this. They were huge."

Nth Degree 😱

@The Q- Tip you guys are the reason I have lost hope in humanity. Thats all I can say.

@@nthdegree1269 michael only got big because of mtv, he wasnt big in the 1970s with his off the wall album at all

RobbeyRoad actually was way way more... back in the mid 60s they couldn’t count them 🤷🏼‍♂️

@@deanknoote114 There was no where near 300,000.

@@informedcarpet Adelaide ? Over here there’s a general consensus that pretty much everyone between 13 and 45 turned out, I wasn’t there, partly because I was 4 years old and because I wasn’t in adelaide at that moment, I wasn’t around to accurately count them, but it’s generally assumed that most of the population at the time lined the route from the airport into the city ( the airport in Adelaide is uncommonly close to the CBD) if it wasn’t 300,000 then I apologise to your more accurate count, clearly you have more facts and information at your fingers, and I apologise for being so misinformed. So, how many were actually there ? Just, soI don’t repeat my embarrassing and misinformed guesstimate ?

@@deanknoote114 🤣😂👍👍👍