If The Beatles had continued past 1970....

[Vincent Vega]

If The Beatles had somehow managed to keep it together and remained as a band past 1970, what direction(s) could you see them going in musically as the decade progressed? Would they continue to be a poppy rock band, or embrace the blues, or perhaps even go as far as progressive rock and transform into a band like King Crimson or Yes, had they continued on?

Would we have eventually gotten a subpar Beatles album, tarnishing their record?

Would they have remained the dominant, guiding force which pushed along the trajectory of rock music throughout the '70s, or would they have been overtaken by new, upcoming bands like Black Sabbath and Led Zeppelin?

Would "Beatlemania" have continued, or would their popularity (and thus perhaps their "legend") have faded?

If they'd continued into the '70s, would they have remained relevant, or would they have become passe, a relic of the '60s? Would we have gotten a "The Beatles do Disco" record in the '70s had they remained together?

I just think it's an interesting question since they were such a major force in rock for their time, one has to wonder what it would've been like, both for The Beatles musically and popularity rise, and for music in general, if they'd continued past '70.

[bacardimayne]

They broke up at the right time. Let it Be WAS the subpar album that tarnished their record.

[bacardimayne]

To answer your question though, if they had stuck together, we likely would have seen the same type of music that came from their solo careers, just all on the same album. They didn't collaborate much in the end. Most of the later Beatles songs are solely written by either John or Paul. So more stuff like She's So Heavy and Yer Blues for the Lennon songs and trippy Wings songs and piano ballads for the Paul songs.

Edited June 4, 2013 by bacardimayne

[TombRaider]

I have all their official releases, but I've never been a huge fan. I mean, I sorta was, back in the early 90's, when I was just getting into rock. But I haven't really listened to them since the mid 90's. I think the Beatles broke up at the right time.

Does anyone know what role Yoko Ono played in the Beatles deciding to call it a day?

[dalsh327]

I have all their official releases, but I've never been a huge fan. I mean, I sorta was, back in the early 90's, when I was just getting into rock. But I haven't really listened to them since the mid 90's. I think the Beatles broke up at the right time.

Does anyone know what role Yoko Ono played in the Beatles deciding to call it a day?

Very minor. Rolling Stone put a detailed article out about why they broke up, and it's pretty much taking everything said over the years and putting it in there. Geoff Emerick's book also explained what the tensions were. Yoko was an annoying presence but not a factor why they broke up.

When John did the Toronto concert, the band was over and no one knew it, Abbey Road was about to come out in a couple of weeks.

[Guest Len B'stard]

When things are starting to come apart like they did with The Beatles just because everybody basically starts getting on each others tits then a lot is made of the littlest things

'wah wah, Paul kept telling me what to do!'

'wah wah, i was just tryna put my ideas across but when they were mean to me about it it burned me'

'they don't like my girlfriend'

'they don't pay enough attention to me, i feel like the outsider'

it's all just a load of rubbish, a load of smoke when at the heart of the matter was the fact that they just got on each others nerves and they were sick of the whole arrangement...and why not, they were pushing 30 at the time and had been together since they were fuckin' babies.

[dalsh327]

If The Beatles had somehow managed to keep it together and remained as a band past 1970, what direction(s) could you see them going in musically as the decade progressed? Would they continue to be a poppy rock band, or embrace the blues, or perhaps even go as far as progressive rock and transform into a band like King Crimson or Yes, had they continued on?

Would we have eventually gotten a subpar Beatles album, tarnishing their record?

Would they have remained the dominant, guiding force which pushed along the trajectory of rock music throughout the '70s, or would they have been overtaken by new, upcoming bands like Black Sabbath and Led Zeppelin?

Would "Beatlemania" have continued, or would their popularity (and thus perhaps their "legend") have faded?

If they'd continued into the '70s, would they have remained relevant, or would they have become passe, a relic of the '60s? Would we have gotten a "The Beatles do Disco" record in the '70s had they remained together?

I just think it's an interesting question since they were such a major force in rock for their time, one has to wonder what it would've been like, both for The Beatles musically and popularity rise, and for music in general, if they'd continued past '70.

You have to go back to Jan 1969 and forget Let It Be and Abbey Road ever happened, and just go by what songs were recorded at the time, you have a lot of songs that wound up on the solo albums. They pretty much scrapped the sessions at the time and spent some time apart.

Abbey Road was when they brought George Martin and Geoff Emerick back in. Emerick had quit in frustration during the White Album sessions, and talked back into working with the band in the spring/summer of '69.

Part of Abbey Road was demos from the Get Back Sessions, some of them were White Album era demos. When they scrapped the Get Back sessions they had something like 60 or 70 new songs, a lot of it wound up on Ram, All Things Must Pass, and Imagine, some of it doled out on the other solo albums.

So if you were going to do the "what if" in '71, would have to forget about Let It Be and Abbey Road, go with the songs recorded during those sessions, and piece together 3 45 minute albums, and speculate which of the solo songs would've been Beatle songs (Uncle Albert, Another Day, Imagine, Photograph, It Don't Come Easy).

I think the time for The Beatles to have reunited would've been in 1974, but it would've been a horn section and sloppy performing. It's def. possible Rock and Roll could've been the last Beatles album, doing all covers and having Phil Spector produce it. But this was lost weekend era, and it would've had a huge backlash. But at least they got along as friends and the feuding was over for the time being.

Just listen to the stuff Paul, George, and John were putting out towards the mid 70s... it wouldn't have worked.

I do think they would've all "reunited" on SNL to collect Lorne Michaels' check, or show up in one of the Monty Python movies. They had started doing the Anthology in the late 70s, but it was just assembling footage and a small handful of interviews, and at that time, Lennon was still away from music.

[izzygirl]

They would have lost a very important member in 1980.

Edited June 4, 2013 by izzygirl

[LightningBolt]

I think their best days were behind them. I could have seen them continuing with the more "classic rock" sound of Abbey Road and Let It Be for a while. They had their moments of greatness in their solo careers but they seemed done trying to really push the envelope musically. If they were still working together to some extent the results obviously could have been a lot different, but eh.

It's nice trying to imagine what they could have done if they stayed together, but I'm not convinced it would have been pretty and I have trouble imagining what they would have sounded like anyway. Even if you do look at the stuff written in the late 60's that showed up on the solo albums... how long would have they stayed with that sound? They went though multiple major changes in their sound in their short existence. It's really just impossible to predict.

[luciusfunk]

More or less The Beatles broke up because of Brian Epstein's death. Everyone likes to blame Yoko, but Paul's the one who announced the split and pulled an asshole move by releasing his solo album and promoting it while they were still technically together.

[Johnny Drama]

They would have sucked. Their solo work was miles below what they were capable of together and by the White Album, shit say Peppers, but excluding Abbey Road IMO, the other guys were studio musicians for the composer/singer of a song.

[bacardimayne]

Band on the Run > Let it Be