Why The Beatles kept changing their sound
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 апр 2022
- follow me on instagram :) / davidhartley94
The Beatles are one of the most influential bands of all time. Formed in Liverpool in 1960, they would go on to represent a time of great change through a unique yet powerful sound. In this video, I explore how they were able to reinvent themselves to reflect a change in culture through their music. In particular, their work in the second half of the decade with albums such as Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, The Beatles, Abbey Road and Let It Be.
//
This video was made during a time when I had covid, you can probably hear it in my voice. Because I wasn't able to go out and do anything, it meant I could stay in and edit non-stop for a few days. I'd just recently watched Casey Neistat's 'Do What You Can't' again, (it's probably quite clear to tell), and this had inspired my to try a new style of editing. This video has one of the best retention graphs from any of my videos but I've always struggled to come up with a title. If you have any ideas, let me know!
18th May 2023 
Видеоклипы
Thanks for watching! If you enjoyed the video, please subscribe!
David thanks I enjoyed the video and have subscribed.
You and the pop goes the 60s channel I feel could do some good videos together. You both have a relaxed but knowledgeable feel to your videos.
Cheers 👍
The Beatles had the musical talent, with 2 great singers, 3 great songwriters, an excellent creative drummer, and an unmatched energy. But what made them great was that every album they had a new style, and every album they got better.
Great comment, but I’d add they had 3 great singers.
@@ml5955 4 great singers, all 4 had wonderful voices even if Ringos isnt technically impressive. His songs later on in their career as a band like Octopus's Garden and With A Little Help are awesome
@@TheRyanH. hard to argue with you Ryan 😉
@@TheRyanH. Ringo's solo records were also excellent. He racked up a lot of hits on his own.
Great response. There's one more key to understanding the Beatles. That was the opportunity to experience them in real time. You had to be young and alive in the 60's to really get the Beatles. Sorry kids. You'll never understand the greatness of this band, second hand. You had to be there.
I still can't wrap my head around how they progressed from She Loves You to A Day in the Life in just a few years. Excellent video.
LSD
Exactly. I believe they had many others involved. I believe it was by design. Just as Dave McGowan says American rock was a military thing, I think Beatles were highly handled.
Because they never... most of their songs were written for them. They just turned up and did the vocals over pre recorded tracks then learnt a selection of then to play.
Even George Martin said they were crap and had no original songs
It's all a myth
Ticket to Ride sounded great in 1965. And it still sounds great today.
I feel the same about the song 'A Hard Day's Night'. Those 2 songs turned everyone's head when played for the first time.
I heard The Beatles for the first time just after New Year's Day 1964. My dad bought me the 45 rpm as a joke, 'cause the group on the record sleeve looked so weird - and they DID! I had no idea who The Beatles were, and Beatlemania had yet to reach the United States. I put the record on my Hi-Fi, and within seconds, this 10 year-old was getting chills up and down his spine. I'd never felt like that before.
"I Want To Hold Your Hand" entered the 77 WABC Radio (NYC) Record Survey on New Year's Eve 1963 at #35 - and in one week, it rocketed straight to NUMBER ONE! On February 9th, The Beatles debuted on The Ed Sullivan Show, and by April, held the Top 5 positions on the Billboard Hot 100. Everything about The Beatles was so unlike anything America had ever seen, that they might as well have come from Mars.
"The Fabs" did more than influence a lot of bands. They transformed every genre of Pop Music. American Culture was divided by “BEFORE The Beatles on Ed Sullivan” and “AFTER”. Anything BEFORE The Beatles - was instantly a Relic of the Stone Age.
Only The Beach Boys, The Four Seasons, and a couple other music acts survived the cultural tsunami caused by The Beatles. It took Elvis Presley 4 years to regain his popularity - with his fantastic 1968 “Comeback” TV Special. "The King" returned wearing tight black leather and long hair, looking even cooler than Jim Morrison of The Doors. The Beatles had even modernized Elvis.
They had so many different genres covered, they were absolutely incredible and still have the greatest discography of any band ever
Perfect expression of why The Beatles are the benchmark for pop and rock music. Their influence, and musical achievements will live on for decades to come.
I'm a first-generation, unreconstructed Beatlemaniac: saw them on Ed Sullivan and have loved them ever since. I really appreciate this condensed answer you've given to the question that gets asked more and more as decades pass and their influence never wanes. Thanks!
I absolutely love the way they kept changing their sounds and the way they played their music. Amazing band, so much talent!! ❤️❤️❤️❤️
They were influential because they did a lot of what music does today. People call Ringo's drumming simple and boring, but he created a lot of new styles and things that people used today. They mixed instruments and styles together so nicely and so naturally. On "Within you, without you" they have a full-on Indian sound, but did you know George uses a guitar in that song?
Yes, George played an acoustic guitar on the song - but, he also played sitar and tambura on it.
No drummer had better timing and consistency I think, that's why he's amazing
Ringo was never a flashy drummer like Keith Moon or a jazz drummer like Charlie Watts or Ginger Baker.
But he was a solid reliable drummer who the others knew would hold the beat and not go off on a tangent.
I just happened to live through the Beatles years I am greatful for that
Great video. And in 2023 the Beatles are still the biggest and greatest band ever.
The United States and England have a very special, enduring, and reciprocal musical relationship. I don't know what the world would be without both countries.
Greater than a sum of their parts - great quote, thank you, David, fits perfectly.
Great video sir 👍🏻. I was a child in the 60's and recall very well the excitement of waiting for the next new Beatles record. That's what's missing with today's music and artists - no one else can generate that same level of excitement, not to mention artistry.
You really write great essays and put together great videos. So impressive.
This video is probably the most accurate analysis by far. Thanks for your creativity and insight.
top-tier video. Please make more like this!
specifically requesting a full-length Neil young video
Thank you, will do more for sure!
for your next video can you please do how Rock artists inspire and influence by Bob Marley.
Really good video, man. Keep it up.
I was thinking this a few days ago, it is interesting how they got more musically complex as they went along, and having said that, the simpler, early stuff was just as fantastic as the later stuff, but in completely different ways
Great job dude! Keep it going this one was really informative
Thank you!
for your next video can you please do how Rock artists inspire and influence by Bob Marley.
Thank you for the video. I hope some day you could visit Toronto Canada. Cheers.
One of the best critiques on why we still listen, reminisce and remember the Fab Four. Concisely spoken from a well written summary..
Brilliant video David, and great thumbnail ;-) I wonder for many artists whether there's an even more compelling argument that change is simply inevitable - both within the artists themselves as they age and in the world around them. If we look at the world in 1960 and contrast it with 1970, there's such a gulf of cultural, social and political change, not to mention advancements in studio techniques and technology, it seems almost impossible for music to be impervious to that and so there's a kind of inevitability to music's evolution and change. I wonder therefore, what separates good artists from truly inspirational genius is that the latter lead that change, whereas the rest just get swept along by it. End of stream of consciousness! Great video, look forward to your next!
Great selection of tracks to illustrate their genius.
Tomorrow never knows still sounds like it was written in the acid house era.
The drums on the Chemical Brothers track setting sun is the same as Ringo and the rest of the track has a psychedelic Beatles feel to it.
Good video. They are great because they changed and grew! Few artists do this. Other examples: Harry Nilsson, David Bowie, Eno, John Cale, The Who.....
Dylan!
GREAT video!
Very insightful comments, I agree.
Great video nice explanation
They are the greatest band ever
So influential
The Get Back documentary has made people realise a bit , actually Paul McCartney is a genius
Criminally undervalued in recent years
Of course how great they all are but I feel many preferred John Lennon partly sentimental but maybe Paul was a bit to much at times
Howard Goodall says they are the first musicians since Mozart to have had the impact across the world like they did . When they are gone I believe people will say “ I was alive when The Beatles were or now Paul & Ringo
My three favorite bands are The Beatles.
In some way, shape or form every generation finds the magic of the Beatles. How many bands can say that?
Hamburg made them great. Many individuals and groups went there from UK. Only Beatles transformed utterly. From there they mastered covering a vast number and range if songs and artistes. Add Ringo with similar background. That gave foundation groundworks of song and stagecraft to build a city of songs and styles that were both popular and cutting edge critically acclaimed. The early record sales subsidised EMI serious music. It bought the right to infinite studio time which, instead of wasting in self-indulgence, they continued to use productively and... profitably for record company.
Hamburg was their college education and they graduated with honors.
Was it 1200 or 1400 shows in Germany? Something like that? That's more shows than most bands put out in their entire lifetime. That's why it was educational for them. The grind....
They are damn near as popular today as they were in 1964 when I was a pup. Know how I know? Abbey Road....53 years after it was recorded and releases...is still one of the top 5 selling albums every year. Think about that for a moment.
No it’s not lol
They were great at everything they did
It's very difficult to fully appreciate the decision The Beatles made to quit touring and performing live back when they did. Many people thought that they had finally dried up and that their time was up and I don't blame anyone who entertained those kind of thoughts. The concept of using the recording studio itself as some kind of new instrument limited only by your imagination hadn't really been explored at the time. Within a hand full of years they went from recording a whole album in 1 day to taking 6 months or more. To continue to release LPs at the frequency the maintained is more than impressive, it's mind bending.
Perfect summary
If you haven't yet watched it, the Dick Clark bandstand featuring the "new" Beatles songs
penny land and strawberry fields is quite interesting to say the least!
HISTORIC LEGEND
This is a great summary of the marvel that was the Beatles. One part that you don't mention is the contributions that George Martin made as their enabler. He introduced them to some classical touches, provided them with links to other artists and styles of music, added overlays to some of their musical pieces that enhanced those songs, even if the band members felt otherwise. You got it right in that the Beatles were far more than the sum of the individual pieces. Each of them would have been a notable artist in their won right, but together, their imagination, skill and talent set them apart form everybody else.
Why The Beatles kept changing their sound-because they could and staying static was not going to keep them going not dissimilar to my current favourite artist Poppy who changes thing up with every new release she makes. Variety is the spice of life and both the Beatles and today's Poppy knew and know that.
The Songs The Songs The Songs.
And their look
It's very simple, in music the currency is the song, the more good songs you write, the more successful you are.
Music has to evolve, if The Beatles had sounded the same in 1967 as they did in 1963, they would have been out of the charts and quickly forgotten.
The Beatles are a great band and they’re pioneers in the music industry
I enjoy pre rubber soul and each album is so different from the last musically but still consistent until you get to post rubber soul where the sound and production pushes the boundaries where each album sounds so different from the last especially that psychedelic era where the band is so experimental
4:57 BILLY SHEARS
Hmmmm ... what made The Beatles so great?
I'm gonna go with: They were all incredibly talented.
Every single one of their top 50 most popular songs are unique in their own right and would've been a massive hit for any other band. Some bands only get a one hit wonder, these guys were a 50 hit wonder. At least. Perhaps a 100 hit wonder.
Nearly the entire catalog was great, there are very few Beatles songs that I don't like.
whats the song at 2:08 and 3:07?
‘Michelle’ and ‘Tomorrow Never Knows.’
There's only one reason why the Beatles continually changed their sound...BECAUSE THEY COULD
what song is that 0:55 ?
Lucy in the sky with diamonds
for your next video can you please do how Rock artists inspire and influence by Bob Marley.
The point about them being the face of change really explains the downfall of The Beach Boys. While their music certainly changed a lot, that's not how they were viewed. They're still know for their "California Sound" as you put it. Part of the blame is on the people, but they didn't help themselves either.
Nobody can beat the Beatles.
If your stuck listening to the same music genre...play the beatles...takes your brain through rock, classical baroque,music hall,ballads.
GEORGE HARRISON MY IDOL
2:39 It's 1969
They always recreated them selves
Watch The Wickerman. That will help you understand the footage from MMT.
Hilarious that this channel can think the guy presented as Paul on Rubber Soul, is the same as the guy on Peppers... Mass formation 1.0
"Yellow submarine."
uh the beach boys also immensely changed their sound
I got a women she's in my dreams she's de Los Retiros i saw her in my dreams and she's also a Mercenary but theirs Zowie she's a Police Offecer from Cuitzeo Del Porvenir Michoacán México el Pueblo Miajico
They were new, innovative and never stood still. They could have enjoyed a few more years of Beatlemania, but they didn't, they were the real rolling stones.

Can only think Dylan had changed his sound more than the Beatles.
Rejected by Decca because they did a totally trash audition on New Year's Day 1962. The guitar groups on way out was being kind to them. Tremoloes got the contract. Beatles admitted they were dreadful - nervous and drunk with Pete Best as drummer who could thump hard in Hamburg but didn't fit in socially or technically. The stars aligned for the last chance saloon of EMI novelty sub-label, Parlophone, with George Martin ordered to record them by senior management who had connections with Dick James
And George Martin signed them because of their personalities...not their music. I remember hearing him say he thought their music was trash but that their personalities would sell them to the public.
John Lennon and George Harrison were no Eddie Van Halen or Stevie Ray Vaughan on the guitar, Paul McCartney was no Les Claypool on the bass and Ringo Starr was no Neil Peart on the drums, but what made the Beatles so great was their ability to write good songs that appeal to everyone. Nowadays, you have multiple genres of music to appeal to whatever audience, but the Beatles were able to appeal to everyone.
And Les Claypool was no Phil Lesh on bass. Eddie and Stevie were no Jerry Garcia on guitar. What made them better was their ability to improvise with all members at once. Most bands played a set rhythm while the lead improvised. Stevie was limited in his style of music and became boring after a while. Eddie was talented by his songs were mostly mundane. Listen to the Help/Slipknot/Franklin's Tower from 2 26 77 San Bernadino and you will see what I mean. Eddie and Stevie were good but not nearly as creative as the Beatles and the GD.
@@foxfakenews3293 The same can also be said about Joe Bonamassa. He’s can play the hell out of a guitar but when it comes to songwriting he sucks! And you’re correct, when you have a group of other talented band members that can complement one another, make it all come together and sound awesome it is a rarity.
Also if you think about it, the Beatles solo careers were good but without the elements of all the other members, they were rather ho-hum. All of them wrote good songs after the break up (with Paul McCartney writing some of the best in my opinion) but they just did not have the magic like they did as a quartet.
Paul McCartney’s solo work here in the last 30+ years has just pure sucked! The last song he wrote that was noteworthy was “No more lonely nights” and that was way back in 1984. Starting in about the late 80s his talent seem to have run its course and I can’t name any song he’s written since but I know several from the early 1970s to the mid 80s. A lady I know saw him in concert here about five years ago, and she told me if it wasn’t for his early work, nobody would have even known who he was! He played a few of his songs from recent years, and I think everybody gave him a “courtesy applause“ but when he played songs like ”Jet”, “Live and let die” and “Band on the run” the crowd went wild.
Thats it ??? He didnt say anything !!!
It's ELON MUSK reviewing The Beatles! 😁 (Not really - but, he's a dead-ringer)
That's easy John Lennon.
Let's give Sir George Martin a lot of credit for the music of The Beatles .
correct no Martin, no Beatles
Great channel just subscribed
👍👍👍
Think back to 2016, Brexit, Trump etc. That was the period in which The Beatles did EVERYTHING. That is the reason. 8 years to make the greatest back catalogue in history.
I'm not always a fan of critics and "experts". But, c'mon, the Beatles are considered the "best band ever" by critics and "experts" because they are the f**king best band ever! By a longshot, in terms of quality + quantity
Okay...such a claim can't ever really be objectively true...but the claim that "The Beatles are the best pop/rock band ever" is as close to objectively true as is logically possible with this kind of question. Haha
What? It's over already? Take it as a compliment that I'm telling you that you f@%# up by only making this 6 minutesish long
not gonna listen to someone with a crosley
Perhaps you should have used the term Merseybeat rather than the Liverpool sound. Flock of seagulls & China crisis among others were labelled the Liverpool sound for what it’s worth.
AI is removing true art from our world. Anyone can use AI and become an artist of any kind even if they can’t sing, draw, paint or sculpt. It’s really debilitating for those who have raw talent.
Wait a second.....this isnt the "Wonderwall" guys? They sound just like them..... thats totally lame how this band copied that "Wonderwall" bands sound. That type of unoriginality is probably why theyre not around anymore.
I really cant see any rock in there music, I would personally class them as a pop band edging on the verge of soft indie music, Psychedelic music mainly but definitely no a rock band, A rock band is ACDC, Rolling stones, metallica, def leopard and so on.
Rock n Roll is a Pop art form. It struggled to be accepted as Pop Art in the 50s and early 60s.
They could rock: Helton Skelter, Yer Blues and many, many others. But, they never stood still. That’s why they’re the greatest.
I grew up with the beatles. To me the beatles were just a boy band. Epstein changed their look and sound to appeal to a bigger audience, something the beatles could not do on their own. Epstein used the same principal on the beatles as did the colonel on Elvis and in todays terms the same Simon Cowell does with his bunch of groovy accountants. The beatles were just another boy band, sorry folks and that is why they only lasted 7 years.
To me you're just an idiot
I grew up with The Beatles and didn't think of them as a boy band. You must have been a teenager in 64. I never heard of anyone calling them a boy band until only the past 20 years. Epstein changed their looks because he knew he couldn't sell a bunch of punks in leather. He put them in suits, told them not to jump around on stage and take a bow at the end of their performances. Epstein was brilliant.
Possibly the most stupid statement ever put to text. Unbelievably naive.
@@paulsteele8079 perhaps it was one of 2 things, 1 too intellectual for you, or 2, the truth!
What made the Beatles 'great' ?
An incredible promotion and publicity juggernaut.
“....[they] were the first manufactured group, not The Monkees… "
Davy Jones.
They had song writing talent that The Monkees never had. Of course they had promotion but it was their music that sold them to me in 64.
@@ktcarl ....and you honestly believe that they wrote all of those songs ?
They were a third rate bar band playing dives in Germany, they could barely play, they couldn't read or write music, and out of nowhere, in two years they become musical geniuses.
Well okay then.
Have it your way.
Bill P.
@@RocknRollkatI agree. There was a mighty force behind the Beatles. Dave McGowan describes the rock scene in the USA. I believe the Beatles were driven by a much bigger entity or group of people.
Ringo Starr was a Freemason. In hard days night or Help, he tells someone his ring is a masonic ring.
arctic monkeys does the same thing