Obviously they made music separately throughout the decade and some of them even collaborated with each other from time to time. I mean the actually Beatles. They went out on a fantastic note with Abbey Road, perhaps one of the greatest rock albums ever released. Could they have topped it? Hell, could they have survived it? And that's not even taking into account the culture and politics changing around them, what with the Vietnam War winding down, the hippie movement losing steam, disco, Nixon, early punk...

Discuss!

To discuss this is pure speculation, but I'll play along.  Here's what I think.  If they had stayed together (and things weren't as tense as they purportedly were) they would've done magnificently during the 70's - they seemed to adapt well to cultural changes throughout the 60's and I would expect them to keep doing so.  (I added the caveat that things had to be less tense than they were - I don't believe they could've survived together with the tension they were experiencing in reality.)  But I don't know if we would've gotten as much output out of the group collective as we got from the four individual ex-Beatles.  We 1970's youth got an awful lot of musical enjoyment out of the four superstars who each bore the title "ex-Beatle".  (Of course, none of us knew that in 1970 when they announced their breakup; we only saw the end of something beautiful.  Little did we know we were in for something grand...)  8)

https://i.imgur.com/9cosZNY.jpg

I think The Beatles's last concert was in 1969 on a rooftop and that's when they said it was going to be their final performance together.

The Beatles had built up so many fans that they certainly would have still done well, and the number of Billboard #1 songs by former Beatles members during that decade was still more than the leader of that decade, The Bee Gees (who had 9 of them, while former Beatles had 11 combined). The Rutles and the Sgt. Peppers Movie came out in 1978 despite coming in the height of the disco craze and even a Beatles musical came out around this time. New sounds would definitely give them challenges, from Glam Rock to Prog to Punk and eventually early new wave. But The Beatles would likely had evolved into more of an arena rock sound in the vein of Kiss or Queen or Nicks/Buckingham-era Fleetwood Mac since a punk image would have deemed them as too naughty for their fans. Had John Lennon lived, there probably would have been a good shot at a reunion as well during the "second British Invasion" of the early-mid '80s thanks to MTV, and would have coordinated well with the synths of the era (I'm surprised that Phil Collins and Ringo Starr have never collaborated together). VH1 had a Beatles-themed weekend in 1987 and MTV reran the Saturday Morning Cartoon around that time. It would probably be around the very end of the '80s or early '90s though that the demographic shift (Gen Xers) would finally push the Beatles as too old-fashioned, and there were even warning signs of their "decline" even as early as 1982 with Paul's duet with Stevie Wonder, which despite being a big hit, felt too "sold out", and it was only Michael Jackson which gave Paul one last #1. 

As portrayed in the filmed documentary of "Let It Be" it is noticeable of Yoko Ono coming between Paul and John, the split up was destined to happen.

As portrayed in the filmed documentary of "Let It Be" it is noticeable of Yoko Ono coming between Paul and John, the split up was destined to happen.


That was John's sabotage. He brought Yoko to sessions because he knew the rest of the band hated her. He wanted out of the band since Beatles for Sale.

That was John's sabotage. He brought Yoko to sessions because he knew the rest of the band hated her. He wanted out of the band since Beatles for Sale.
...and over the closing years of The Beatles, John was with the rest of the band less and less. At one stage in early 1969, George was off on holiday, Ringo was filming "The Magic Christian", and John was marrying Yoko and having that "Bed-in" in Amsterdam. After these events Paul McCartney recorded with John Lennon "The Ballad of John and Yoko", from John earlier inspiration. With Paul on drums, with other instruments, this song is considered by music critics to be the best drumming in a Beatles' song. All this sparking the end.

As portrayed in the filmed documentary of "Let It Be" it is noticeable of Yoko Ono coming between Paul and John, the split up was destined to happen.


What was the fight about?

That was John's sabotage. He brought Yoko to sessions because he knew the rest of the band hated her. He wanted out of the band since Beatles for Sale.



So why bring Yoko when they knew were going to hate her?

What was the fight about?
No fight, just that Yoko and John were dealing with dirty laundry, but a major of it all was cut out from the eventual release.

So why bring Yoko when they knew were going to hate her?
She wanted to be always with her husband, you can get clinging wives.

So why bring Yoko when they knew were going to hate her?


Because of the other half of my post - he had wanted the Beatles to break up since 1964. If he thought Yoko would drive them away, he wanted to bring her to every rehearsal and recording session.

Because of the other half of my post - he had wanted the Beatles to break up since 1964. If he thought Yoko would drive them away, he wanted to bring her to every rehearsal and recording session.
...as long as she did not sing?

No fight, just that Yoko and John were dealing with dirty laundry, but a major of it all was cut out from the eventual release.



I think they wanted to get rid of Yoko because of her singing or whatever you call her screaming. ::)

Because of the other half of my post - he had wanted the Beatles to break up since 1964. If he thought Yoko would drive them away, he wanted to bring her to every rehearsal and recording session.



but her screaming in every session made no sense.

but her screaming in every session made no sense.
She began to be heard after the Beatles did split, especially which the Plastic Ono Band.

She began to be heard after the Beatles did split, especially which the Plastic Ono Band.


I believe she came out with some albums after John's death.

Sure, but I think sooner, or later. Maybe like by the late 70's, at the earliest, they might have burnt out (gotten tired of the extreme fame) and taken a huge break, or just hated each other by that point! I bet they would have hated each other just because they were sick of each other. And they probably would have split up due to their strong personalities.

I think that by the mid 80's, they would have not been as 'hot' as they were anymore.

Sure, but I think sooner, or later. Maybe like by the late 70's, at the earliest, they might have burnt out (gotten tired of the extreme fame) and taken a huge break, or just hated each other by that point! I bet they would have hated each other just because they were sick of each other. And they probably would have split up due to their strong personalities.

I think that by the mid 80's, they would have not been as 'hot' as they were anymore.


and after they broke up each of The Beatles came out with separate albums.

So why bring Yoko when they knew were going to hate her?


It is generally accepted that you just don't bring your partner to recording sessions. John pushed this breach of edicate too far. However, I'm sure Paul would have done exactly the same if Linda had come onto the scene earlier. I can just see Linda playing keyboards in The Beatles! ;D

I kind of liked the way Paul encouraged Linda to learn to sing and play with the band and involved her the creative processes. The other Wings bandmates must have hated it though.  Paul didn't care ... he knew his talent would outweigh any deficiencies in the performance due to Linda 'learning on the job'. In the end, I came to appreciate Linda's harmonies (even though her tone was not always pleasant).

... and I agree that The Beatles would have been successful late into the 70's. Too much talent to not be...

It is generally accepted that you just don't bring your partner to recording sessions. John pushed this breach of edicate too far. However, I'm sure Paul would have done exactly the same if Linda had come onto the scene earlier. I can just see Linda playing keyboards in The Beatles! ;D

I kind of liked the way Paul encouraged Linda to learn to sing and play with the band and involved her the creative processes. The other Wings bandmates must have hated it though.  Paul didn't care ... he knew his talent would outweigh any deficiencies in the performance due to Linda 'learning on the job'. In the end, I came to appreciate Linda's harmonies (even though her tone was not always pleasant).

... and I agree that The Beatles would have been successful late into the 70's. Too much talent to not be...


Couldn't she had just sat there instead of not singing? ???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9kgu71d81U
Here's an example  ;D

It is generally accepted that you just don't bring your partner to recording sessions. John pushed this breach of edicate too far. However, I'm sure Paul would have done exactly the same if Linda had come onto the scene earlier. I can just see Linda playing keyboards in The Beatles! ;D

I kind of liked the way Paul encouraged Linda to learn to sing and play with the band and involved her the creative processes. The other Wings bandmates must have hated it though.  Paul didn't care ... he knew his talent would outweigh any deficiencies in the performance due to Linda 'learning on the job'. In the end, I came to appreciate Linda's harmonies (even though her tone was not always pleasant).

... and I agree that The Beatles would have been successful late into the 70's. Too much talent to not be...
In my past careers, I never took my wife into work, it was not the done thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9kgu71d81U
Here's an example  ;D
When was that recorded?

Couldn't she had just sat there instead of not singing? ???
Just not be there!

When was that recorded?


I think it was 1972 or 1973? ???

Just not be there!


I know I agree, just tell her politely that you can't be a part of the sessions today so maybe some other time.

I know I agree, just tell her politely that you can't be a part of the sessions today so maybe some other time.


Paul tried that apparently.

Paul tried that apparently.


Was screaming all she knew how to do? ???

Would there have been a Wings if The Beatles had survived the 70's?

Would there have been a Wings if The Beatles had survived the 70's?
If the Beatles did continue, there would have been no Wings.

Honestly, most likely not. They could've continued until the mid 70s but in the late 70s they would've had to change their style radically to stay relevant or they would've become relics of the 60s. It might actually be better for their historical legacy that they broke up when they did. Can you imagine The Beatles putting out a Disco sort of record in say 1977 or 1978? It's something that's easy to imagine, but not something really seems "Beatle-esque." You definitely wouldn't have songs like Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds in the 70s because that style was old fashioned by the early 70s. Part of their charm was their poppy tunes like "And I Love Her", "She Loves You", etc, they could've made it in the 70s perhaps as a pop rock sort of band but if they continued trying to be a hard rock band they would've been up against the Stones with Mick Taylor, Aerosmith, Led Zeppelin, Rush, Yes and all those bands. They would've had a harder time being the leaders. In the 1960 it was easy to be number one because I mean, outside of the Stones, their only real competition was The Beach Boys. You had stuff like The Monkees and Herman's Hermits but...that's kids play compared to all the competition in rock music in the 70s.

If the Beatles did continue, there would have been no Wings.


Ah ... but The Eagles had wings!  :D

Ah ... but The Eagles had wings!  :D


and imagine the collaboration?

...You definitely wouldn't have songs like Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds in the 70s because that style was old fashioned by the early 70s...


Although I seem to recall Elton John's 1974/75 cover of 'Lucy' did pretty amazingly - deservedly so...

Although I seem to recall Elton John's 1974/75 cover of 'Lucy' did pretty amazingly - deservedly so...

...and the 1974 collaboration with John Lennon.

The 1978 Sgt. Pepper movie on the other hand...

The 1978 Sgt. Pepper movie on the other hand...
...and was considered a box office failure.

Extremely hypothetical question.  However ... IF ... they remained on good terms with each other (which they didn't), they could have been together until present times (just like The Stones). Of course, in this hypothetical instance, both John and George would be alive today.

They certainly had enough talent to have hits through the 70's and into the 80's (as individually they did). After that, they certainly had enough past hits to keep touring forever!

...and was considered a box office failure.


Why was it a failure?

Why was it a failure?
Not enough people went to see the film.

Their 1966 song Got to get you into my life was issued as a single in 1976 and it peaked at #7 in the US and #1 in Canada.

If one song can make it to the Top ten 6 years after they broke up, I'd say they could have made it all through the 70s. 

Their 1966 song Got to get you into my life was issued as a single in 1976 and it peaked at #7 in the US and #1 in Canada.

If one song can make it to the Top ten 6 years after they broke up, I'd say they could have made it all through the 70s. 
In the UK, "Yesterday" was released for the first time in 1976, it only reached #8 in the charts. The memory of the Beatles linger on.

...and was considered a box office failure.



... that was film with The Bee Gees and Peter Frampton. It just showed that people wanted the Beatles to sing Beatles tunes.

Honestly, most likely not. They could've continued until the mid 70s but in the late 70s they would've had to change their style radically to stay relevant or they would've become relics of the 60s. It might actually be better for their historical legacy that they broke up when they did. Can you imagine The Beatles putting out a Disco sort of record in say 1977 or 1978? It's something that's easy to imagine, but not something really seems "Beatle-esque." You definitely wouldn't have songs like Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds in the 70s because that style was old fashioned by the early 70s. Part of their charm was their poppy tunes like "And I Love Her", "She Loves You", etc, they could've made it in the 70s perhaps as a pop rock sort of band but if they continued trying to be a hard rock band they would've been up against the Stones with Mick Taylor, Aerosmith, Led Zeppelin, Rush, Yes and all those bands.


I have this feeling as well unfortunately. I mean I love the Beatles to bits but I think they were suited to the era that they were big in more.

Their 1966 song Got to get you into my life was issued as a single in 1976 and it peaked at #7 in the US and #1 in Canada.

If one song can make it to the Top ten 6 years after they broke up, I'd say they could have made it all through the 70s.


That's nostalgia though.