Does anyone else think The Beatles are overrated?

I have always had an issue with how highly people perceive The Beatles. I have never met a person with any true understanding of music who views The Beatles as anything less than astonishing. It seems as though they are held in such high regards that no one seems to challenge the idea that perhaps they were not the... show more I have always had an issue with how highly people perceive The Beatles. I have never met a person with any true understanding of music who views The Beatles as anything less than astonishing. It seems as though they are held in such high regards that no one seems to challenge the idea that perhaps they were not the greatest band to ever exist. Before I get attacked for just not understanding or trolling let me state that I do respect The Beatles. With the exception of Ringo, the band was exceptionally talented and do deserve respect. I understand that the majority of artist who came about after The Beatles drew heavy influence from them. I can also say that Harrison, McCartney, and Lennon were fantastic song writers, and I would easily place Paul McCartney on my list of the top 10 bassists in existence. However, with all this being said I can count on one hand the number of songs by The Beatles I actually enjoy listening to.

Here are my complaints with them. First of all they experimented with their style too much. I know this is something people commend The Beatles for, but it makes me detest them. They were very successful in transitioning from British-pop to deeper more technically complicated music. They mastered every genre of music they attempted to play, but I personally prefer bands that have a consistent style. The second flaw that crawls under my skin are Paul McCartney's atrociously teeny-bopper lyrics. I know he is supposed to be the least appreciated lyricist in the band being trumped by Lennon's iconic status, but in reality being more profound and subtle in his writing. However, I feel his subtlety was done in in such a way that his lyrics almost have a silly child-like quality to them. Yet again, I know, he wrote deep meaningful lyrics such as "Blackbird," but his stylistic choices just turn me off. A final point I would like to make, just to keep this short is the matter that they are definitively considered the greatest band of all time. This one may be sort of cheap, but I feel it is an adequate argument against their status. With the consistent praise The Beatles receive, it almost belittles other artists who came around the same time and after. To think that in the 43 years since their end that not a single artist has risen up to equal or surpass their talent is absurd.

I for one fall into the camp that argues that The Rolling Stones, despite following The Beatles religiously for the early part of their career, are the superior band. For one, their style was much more consistent and has a distinct ability to get you blood pumping and just make you feel way too manly for your own good. In terms of their lyrics; The Stones have some deeper meaningful lyrics in their repertoire with songs such as "Dead Flowers," but more importantly they have balls out rock anthems that are exciting. I can't name a single song The Beatles had that makes me want to jump around and have a good time. And finally, though they get a huge amount of recognition, I have never heard any critic argue that they are the greatest band of all time.

However this is not about how The Rolling Stones are better than The Beatles, but rather questioning the status of The Beatles. What I want to know is if anyone thinks The Beatles are over-appreciated like I do, and if so what bands do you think are better and in what ways?
16 answers 16