The Beatles- is it too late to start?

[blacknblues]

Hamburg was more or less where they put in their ‘10,000 hours’. Certainly by the time George Martin brought them into the studio, their timing and harmonies were tight and polished enough to record with minimal fuss guided by a producer, who up until that time, had recorded mostly comedy, spoken word and other novelty tracks.

[Gordon Currie]

Originally Posted by wrench68

I think their best albums were those they made from 1963 to 1970.

Yes, this is the problem, every album represented the best of where they were at that time. And they were progressing fast.

I love the earliest albums, though I don't listen to them as much. Even though the production is pretty basic, the songwriting and singing (oh my) blazes right through.

UK and US also had different releases. UK had more songs per album.

I felt like "Beatles For Sale"/"Beatles 65" marked a departure from their skiffle-influenced pop beginnings. There are new and fresh chord progressions and harmonies.

"Rubber Soul" and "Revolver" contain far more sophistication than before, and I really enjoy these even 55 years on.

"Sgt Pepper" truly blew my 9 year old mind. I couldn't imagine ever being able to write AND record such a massively distinctive collection of songs.
Each one completely different from each other and from everything being released at that time.

From then on, the concept of being simultaneously accessible musically, melodically and lyrically stunning, and stylistically experimental was pretty much cemented.

I envy you (OP) for being able to discover the range of these artists in 2021.
They were key to me wanting to play guitar (after Ed Sullivan) and then key to me learning 100+ chords in a few months (when I bought the Beatles Complete songbook with all the CORRECT chords).

[Bob from Brooklyn]

I'd just start at the beginning and follow along chronologically and just enjoy the progression.

[GoPappy]

I would recommend 3 albums as a good sampling:

A Hard Day's Night (lots of good songs on there and all are Lennon-McCartney songs - no cover songs);
Rubber Soul (as suggested above); and
Abbey Road (their last album produced, even though it was released after Let It Be)

I've always loved Abbey Road, probably because I was a huge Beatles fan and was disappointed with Sgt. Pepper's, Magical Mystery Tour, the White Album and Yellow Submarine. Abbey Road was just a solid album with a lot of great songs on it, and it seemed to get them back to closer to their roots.

[baw3]

Actually, Let it be was released after Abby Road. Abbey Road was released in Sept of 1969. Let it be was released in May of 1970. Let in be was already done when they went into the studio to record Abby Road.

[Garlic Breath]

The Beatles: The complete scores...completely unusable due to the size of the print, AND very inaccurate musically. None the less I use it every day, go figure.

[fpuhan]

The Beatles were game changers for me. Living in Bangkok as a kid (my dad was foreign service), Elvis was King. All of a sudden, a new sound erupted out of England, and it seemed like every song played at the sock hops was from this quartet that had "mop top" haircuts, oddly appealing melodics, and a true sense of rock 'n' roll. "She Loves You," "Love Me Do," "I Saw Her Standing There," "Please Please Me," "Twist and Shout," "It Won't Be Long," and a list too long to complete here had everyone dancing, and the parents all rolling their eyes.

I had an Indian (as in country) pressing of the Parlophone album, "With the Beatles." Its track list was a bit different (so I'm told) from the U. S. release, and came out earlier (1962). The band did an Asian tour, and I saw them at Don Muang Airport, but not in concert. They were on the plane, and came to the door and waved at the throng, of which I was a member. Beatlemania had already affected the falang (foreign) kids and the natives weren't far behind.

When I returned to the States, Beatlemania was in full swing. To this day, I credit the group for inspiring me to leave the piano and pick up the guitar. I still play Beatles songs (I performed "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" last night as part of my setlist), and the rush of memories and feelings that come over me when I play "No Reply," "And I Love Her," "I Should Have Known Better," and stuff from their earlier years.

Let's not forget the time: Stereo was still in its infancy. Most records were monaural, and singles (45s) were the make-it-or-break-it currency of popularity. The Beatles made the rules, then broke them. They ushered in the concept album, multitrack recording, overdubs, the Carnaby Street look, long hair, and if the Beatles did it, it was OK.

There's been a lot of music since Lennon-McCartney took the world by storm, and a lot of it terrifically good. To me, the Beatles opened the door for it all.

[EZYPIKINS]

Not very good at the start?

Look at the age they were when they first formed.

Is anybody any good at that age?

Maybe now, with all the internet resources.

Back then media was solely radio and records.

Didn't even have Mel Bay.

[Bob from Brooklyn]

Originally Posted by EZYPIKINS

Didn't even have Mel Bay.

There's a story floating around that John & Paul once took a bus across town to see a guy who taught them how to play a B7 chord.

[Steve DeRosa]

Originally Posted by GoPappy

...I was a huge Beatles fan and was disappointed with Sgt. Pepper's, Magical Mystery Tour, the White Album and Yellow Submarine....

Interestingly enough, I felt exactly the same way then and now - to paraphrase John Lennon, people say I'm crazy but I never liked the post-Revolver material (and found that one barely listenable); as a fan I saw a lot of the fragmentation that would lead to their breakup three years later reflected in Pepper, the Tour and Submarine debacles destroyed any lingering notions of invincibility, and although there were clear attempts to recover their lost musical footing on the last three albums, IMO they lacked the consistency and cohesion that characterized their output up to and including Rubber Soul. Oddly enough, their friendly rivals the Stones saw the writing on the wall and got it right: they ditched the freak show that was 1967 - something the Beatles wouldn't do completely until well into the '70s - returned to what they did best in '68, and maintained their relevance/viability for decades to come...

[Inyo]

Check out a thread over in the Show and Tell section: Let's Play Some Beatles--And Place Your Contributions Here; various AGF members play their versions of Beatles songs.

[eljay]

I've spent a lot of time learning finger style since I "went acoustic" in 2015.

With help from a songbook, I've learned a handful of Beatles songs pretty well.

I'm still amazed at the harmonic sophistication of many songs.

In My Life and If I Fell, in particular, just floor me! Always fun to play . . .

[GoPappy]

Originally Posted by GoPappy

. . . Abbey Road (their last album produced, even though it was released after Let It Be)

. . . . .

Originally Posted by baw3

Actually, Let it be was released after Abby Road. Abbey Road was released in Sept of 1969. Let it be was released in May of 1970. Let in be was already done when they went into the studio to record Abby Road.

You are, of course, correct. What I meant to say was "Abbey Road (their last album produced even though it was released BEFORE Let It Be)."

[RLetson]

I'm about a half-generation older than Mr. da Rosa, so I was in college by the time the Beatles hit the US market--"Beatles 65" is the first LP I recall buying, though of course they were already all over the radio. And I still listen to their entire catalogue with real pleasure. But then, I also listen to the entire Louis Armstrong catalogue the same way.

What I came to recognize fairly early on was how rooted the band was in the American pop music that they heard when coming up--not just UK skiffle but Brill Building material, girl groups, doo-wop, and (for George and Ringo) US country & western. Note the US-pop covers in their early LPs--certainly material they would have worked up for those long stage shows. And other British Invasion bands seem to have had similar affection for that material. In early Beatles records, it's hard not to hear the echoes of Goffin-King, Mann-Weil, Leiber-Stoller, and Neil Sedaka--and of course of all those vocal arrangements that come out of doo-wop and quasi-operatic performers like Roy Orbison, Gene Pitney, and Paul Anka.

[TedBPhx]

John Lennon is reported to have said without Brian Wilson’s Pet Sounds there wouldn’t be a Sgt. Pepper’s.