The Beatles
- Thread starter Pepper13
- Start date
Xen
Banned
Dying in the bombing of London is a long shot considering the lads were from Liverpool.
However, Rock Music would take a very different direction as it is likely the Rolling Stones would have led the British Invasion and would be very different from the Beatles (obviously) in progressing their music. Without the Beatles there maybe a very different perception of British rockers as being grungy looking lunatics rather than the "long-haired" but clean Fab Four.
I remember a challenge on here once about the Beatles breaking up before they struck it big, I had Lennon dying of a drug overdose as he got up in that in the 1960's, George Harrison joined the Royal Navy and eventually married an Indian woman and settled in Bombay, dying after quiet, peaceful, private life in 2004, Ringo moved to the United States and settled in the Southwest where he became a hand on a ranch, he eventually made a record and had some small success in the early 1970s in Country and Western, Paul got involved in British politics as an MP with the Labour Party, in the late 1990s he becomes Prime Minister of the UK.
However, Rock Music would take a very different direction as it is likely the Rolling Stones would have led the British Invasion and would be very different from the Beatles (obviously) in progressing their music. Without the Beatles there maybe a very different perception of British rockers as being grungy looking lunatics rather than the "long-haired" but clean Fab Four.
I remember a challenge on here once about the Beatles breaking up before they struck it big, I had Lennon dying of a drug overdose as he got up in that in the 1960's, George Harrison joined the Royal Navy and eventually married an Indian woman and settled in Bombay, dying after quiet, peaceful, private life in 2004, Ringo moved to the United States and settled in the Southwest where he became a hand on a ranch, he eventually made a record and had some small success in the early 1970s in Country and Western, Paul got involved in British politics as an MP with the Labour Party, in the late 1990s he becomes Prime Minister of the UK.
This one is really hard to predict. All we can look at are the other musical threads around at the time. It's still pretty impossible because the Beatles influenced their contemporaries as much as those who came after.
From Britain the Stones were indeed a possibility, but they were no bigger at first than more jangly poppy acts like Herman's Hermits or The Dave Clark Five. Where the Beatles took pop and helped merge it with rock, we might see acts like this carry on and develop a more noticeably separate pop.
Basically I think that Britain still produces a number of bands that are basically variations on the same theme- much like motown- but the variety of styles and genres that arose with the help of British bands IOTL probably don't even make it off the ground, since the experimentation of the Beatles doesn't give the producers the trust needed to bring acts like The Kinks (bye bye guitar rock) or Them (bye bye punk) or Pink Floyd (bye bye acid rock) over to America.
Meanwhile in the US folk rock was taking off. Dylan was already getting big, playing Madison Square Gardens in '62 (if Mad Men is to be believed,) so politically-conscious music in a popular form is still around. But even the Byrds were influenced by the Beatles and had probably the biggest crossover potential from this thread.
One thing's for sure, the youth market was radicalizing and they would've demanded music that spoke to them.
I think the most interesting What-if is if you can somehow reincorporate contemporary African American music (on a larger scale than OTL) and politicize the result.
From Britain the Stones were indeed a possibility, but they were no bigger at first than more jangly poppy acts like Herman's Hermits or The Dave Clark Five. Where the Beatles took pop and helped merge it with rock, we might see acts like this carry on and develop a more noticeably separate pop.
Basically I think that Britain still produces a number of bands that are basically variations on the same theme- much like motown- but the variety of styles and genres that arose with the help of British bands IOTL probably don't even make it off the ground, since the experimentation of the Beatles doesn't give the producers the trust needed to bring acts like The Kinks (bye bye guitar rock) or Them (bye bye punk) or Pink Floyd (bye bye acid rock) over to America.
Meanwhile in the US folk rock was taking off. Dylan was already getting big, playing Madison Square Gardens in '62 (if Mad Men is to be believed,) so politically-conscious music in a popular form is still around. But even the Byrds were influenced by the Beatles and had probably the biggest crossover potential from this thread.
One thing's for sure, the youth market was radicalizing and they would've demanded music that spoke to them.
I think the most interesting What-if is if you can somehow reincorporate contemporary African American music (on a larger scale than OTL) and politicize the result.
WestVirginiaRebel
Banned
I think we would have had the singer-songwriter movement several years early...also no folk rock (no Byrds), and the San Francisco music scene would probably have stayed local.
Heh, I remember reading a novel where Lennon ends up as a Labour PM - a non-famous Elvis meets him once for some reason.
Here it is... for some reason it was in my secondary school library, which is puzzling remembering how much sex drugs and violence was present...
It was alternate history, too... the POD was that Nixon became president in 1960, and everything went bad from there
Rock and roll made a quick debut between 1955 and 1959. Suddenly, conservative Americans backlashed against the music as "evil" in 1959 and 1960, causing its cutting edge to stall out for a few years. Besides, Buddy Holly died in 1959.
Slower-moving "beach music" was common in the early sixties. The cutting edge of rock had settled in two places: Motown, as soul music became a distinct part of rhythm and blues; and Britain, where bands like the Beatles kept working on the music form.
Among experts who discuss the relative impact of Bach and Beethoven on classical music will quickly remind you that the Beatles were followers of Buddy Holly. Even their name suggests a reference to the insects named in Holly's band The Crickets.
The Beatles bridged the Atlantic in early 1964. Later that year, the Kinks, with the single song "You Really Got Me," made the greatest single change to rock and roll as a form of music since Bill Haley's "Rock Around the Clock."
Without the Beatles, British rock-and-roll would have still spread world wide, perhaps a year later.
Slower-moving "beach music" was common in the early sixties. The cutting edge of rock had settled in two places: Motown, as soul music became a distinct part of rhythm and blues; and Britain, where bands like the Beatles kept working on the music form.
Among experts who discuss the relative impact of Bach and Beethoven on classical music will quickly remind you that the Beatles were followers of Buddy Holly. Even their name suggests a reference to the insects named in Holly's band The Crickets.
The Beatles bridged the Atlantic in early 1964. Later that year, the Kinks, with the single song "You Really Got Me," made the greatest single change to rock and roll as a form of music since Bill Haley's "Rock Around the Clock."
Without the Beatles, British rock-and-roll would have still spread world wide, perhaps a year later.
Corporate America certainly curtailed the music scene, systematizing and sanitizing it for mass consumption.
But it was simply fate that the early giants failed to flourish. Buddy Holly, as you mentioned, died in the plane crash with Richie Valens. Elvis joined the army, then went to Hollywood and stopped recording. Chuck Berry went to jail, Jerry Lee Lewis married his cousin and fell into disgrace, and Little Richard stopped performing rock to focus on gospel. Hardly anyone left to fill the airwaves, so corporate models kicked in and started churning out the cheesy stuff. (and just for the record, the Beatles were influenced by all of these acts and others; look at their early B sides and likely as not you'll find a Little Richard or Chuck Berry song.)
The point being, I guess, that certainly the culture was looking for a place to go, and Britain might have been the place, but probably not with the Kinks.
The problem with the Kinks is that even taking advantage of the rising tide of the British Invasion, they still weren't that popular. They may be the first band to claim the phrase "not many people listened to them, but everyone who did went out and formed a band."
If the Beatles don't fuel the spread of British music, the Kinks are likely even less noticed and probably don't happen.
The singer-songwriter option mentioned by WVRebel is a good bet. I still say it involves a re-merging of Motown with folk and the Brill Building set. The advantage of this model is that many later famous singer-songwriters worked in the Brill Building machine.
Though Elvis went in to the army for two years, his records were continuously released through the early sixties. When he did movies, he continued to release records. But in the early sixties, the slower moving ballads, like "Can't Help Falling" blended in with the dominant style of the time.
Look at the state of music technology in 1960 and 1961. The multi-speed record player was finally saturating the residential market, and the buyers were WWII veterans who did not appreciate rock and roll. Music in the US slowed down for a variety of cultural reasons.
In late 1963, producer Phil Specter produced a Christmas album that is popular to this day. But in that first year, the album was too upbeat to sell well. Why? Because during the Christmas shopping season, the country was in a more somber mood with flags at half staff after the killing of the president.
After the holidays, the flags flew at full staff and the young people were restless for music. Had the Beatles not been there, other British artists such as the Dave Clark Five might have broken out first. Starting in March, they did have five songs in the Billboard top 20 in 1964.
The cutting edge of rock and roll had been in Britain for several years in 1964, and the so-called British Invasion was inevitable.
As for the Kinks, they may not have been the most popular group around. But I still maintain their song "You Really Got Me" had done more to solidify the direction of classic rock and roll than any Beatles song of that year.
Look at the state of music technology in 1960 and 1961. The multi-speed record player was finally saturating the residential market, and the buyers were WWII veterans who did not appreciate rock and roll. Music in the US slowed down for a variety of cultural reasons.
In late 1963, producer Phil Specter produced a Christmas album that is popular to this day. But in that first year, the album was too upbeat to sell well. Why? Because during the Christmas shopping season, the country was in a more somber mood with flags at half staff after the killing of the president.
After the holidays, the flags flew at full staff and the young people were restless for music. Had the Beatles not been there, other British artists such as the Dave Clark Five might have broken out first. Starting in March, they did have five songs in the Billboard top 20 in 1964.
The cutting edge of rock and roll had been in Britain for several years in 1964, and the so-called British Invasion was inevitable.
As for the Kinks, they may not have been the most popular group around. But I still maintain their song "You Really Got Me" had done more to solidify the direction of classic rock and roll than any Beatles song of that year.
hammo1j
Donor
Here's my take on it:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=19753&highlight=beatles
The plan was to have all 4 survive to the present day and then get to some level of stardom at an advanced age.
eg
Danni: I think there were tuning problems.
Cowell: Sorry, boys, but that performance just did not cut the mustard.
Compere: John, what do you think of his comments.
Lennon: Fook you, Cowell.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=19753&highlight=beatles
The plan was to have all 4 survive to the present day and then get to some level of stardom at an advanced age.
eg
Danni: I think there were tuning problems.
Cowell: Sorry, boys, but that performance just did not cut the mustard.
Compere: John, what do you think of his comments.
Lennon: Fook you, Cowell.
I definitely agree that the Kinks were ground-breaking, I just don't think they'd really get the chance to try without the Beatles. Unless the next British band (Dave Clark Five or whoever) totally dominate the way the Beatles did, I can't see a marginal act like the Kinks being signed- and again, that's marginal in a contemporary context.
As another poster mentioned, Elvis did continue to receive airplay even during his Army hitch, and if we want to throw in another butterfly of Elvis using the Army to get his head straight, kick the drugs, and fire the Colonel, Elvis can continue to remain dominant. Elvis wanted to tour Europe and star in serious movies (in his younger, fitter days he would have been a credible action star and while he'd never win an Academy Award Elvis was a competent actor with the right script). Colonel Tom Parker was more interested in milking the cash cow than in doing anything truly innovative. Leave The King to his own devices and both his life and the music scene become very different.
And Johnny Cash did fill a very big 'rebel rocker' void (even though he was mainly known as a country artist) during that period. He had as keen an eye as anyone for what would be popular.
Here's another fun idea: Bob Marley arrives in New York from Jamaica during the same period OTL. Suppose he gets signed by Motown Records? Pan Am under the leadership of Terry Juan Trippe is making a killing flying Boeing 707's between New York and Puerto Rico at rates Puerto Ricans of the time can afford. Suppose also Pan Am runs another flight out to Kingston...with the rise of the civil rights and Black Power movements, we could have a Jamaican Invasion instead...
In 1964, the first year of the baby boom was finishing high school. Americans were ready for new music and Britain had it. Had the Beatles been butterflied out of music, there would have been even more room for other British groups like the Dave Clark Five, Kinks, etc. to become popular in England. They may not have been able to land 20 songs in the Billboard Top 40 as did the Beatles, but at some point in 1964, they would have crossed the Atlantic.
As another poster mentioned, Elvis did continue to receive airplay even during his Army hitch, and if we want to throw in another butterfly of Elvis using the Army to get his head straight, kick the drugs, and fire the Colonel, Elvis can continue to remain dominant. Elvis wanted to tour Europe and star in serious movies (in his younger, fitter days he would have been a credible action star and while he'd never win an Academy Award Elvis was a competent actor with the right script). Colonel Tom Parker was more interested in milking the cash cow than in doing anything truly innovative. Leave The King to his own devices and both his life and the music scene become very different.
And Johnny Cash did fill a very big 'rebel rocker' void (even though he was mainly known as a country artist) during that period. He had as keen an eye as anyone for what would be popular.
Here's another fun idea: Bob Marley arrives in New York from Jamaica during the same period OTL. Suppose he gets signed by Motown Records? Pan Am under the leadership of Terry Juan Trippe is making a killing flying Boeing 707's between New York and Puerto Rico at rates Puerto Ricans of the time can afford. Suppose also Pan Am runs another flight out to Kingston...with the rise of the civil rights and Black Power movements, we could have a Jamaican Invasion instead...
Hehe, interesting thought. I would say Decca or Chess rather than Motown since Marley never would've met their grooming standards
And then it raises all these interesting questions about African American identity in the 60s and relations between West Indians and African Americans.
Hehe, interesting thought. I would say Decca or Chess rather than Motown since Marley never would've met their grooming standards
And then it raises all these interesting questions about African American identity in the 60s and relations between West Indians and African Americans.
Rastafarianism as a viable competitor to the Nation of Islam and the SCLC...could be fun!
Rastafarianism as a viable competitor to the Nation of Islam and the SCLC...could be fun!
West Indians and African Americans aren't generally on the best of terms, but I think Marley could've bridged that gap. He sung enough about radicalism and African American identity that he might be accepted.
But then if we're talking radicalism he's not going to be a replacement for the Beatles I suppose. Not enough broad appeal.
Maybe Jamaica is combed over until the island is stripped of entertainers and then the producers look to the other islands, bringing in Latin influences and a revived interest in Cuban music from the recent expat community in Florida, keeping the plight of Cuba a bit more in the forefront of the public mind and keeping the Left from embracing communism.
And then the market might seek further afield, south the Brazil. Bossa Nova had its day in the 60s, no reason why it can't last longer.
The other positive feedback from these styles is that they all reinforce the singer-songwriter movement simmering in the states. Under these circumstances I don't think Butterflies can touch Linda Rondstadt.
The Beatles Most Influential Rock Artists
Its wrong to assume it would have been the Kinks or the Rolling Stones. Since it was not them and The Beatles that started the British Invasion we must give the Beatles credit for starting it. Anyone can easily see the lack of success British Rock Artists had on the charts between 1956-1963 that the Beatles established British Rock in America and really throughout the world.
Also The Rolling Stones were forced to write their own songs because it was the only way they could compete with the Beatles. The Kinks also were influenced to write their songs by the Beatles. The Beatles led the shift from dominated front man to group who wrote/played and where album focused. Some might say the Beach Boys but they had a lot of session people who played the instruments like Carol Kaye on the bass in Pet Sounds.
Their would be no folk rock or jangly guitar sound without the Beatles influencing the Byrds to form a rock band. The Beatles chord progressions made Dylan think the Beatles were leading the direction of music.
The Beatles are the most influential act of the last 50 years. How many Modern Rockers cite Elvis as a influence, hardly any? They had a huge impact on other areas like Folk Rock, Songwriting, Studio Production, Psychedelic Pop, Progressive Rock, Power Pop, and Indie Rock.
Brian Wilson himself said that Pet Sounds would not have been made had he not heard The Beatles' Rubber Soul Album. And many, if not all, of the early prog artists were influenced by the Beatles....
The Beatles helped popularized experimentation in pop and rock music forever. Revolver, Sgt Peper and Magical Mystery Tour is loaded with songs with complex meter changes, Classical Influences in Avant, Indian, backward music, Modal Music, Electronic Music and odd chord progressions. They wrapped it around a keen sense of Melody and Harmony. Many have tried and have failed miserably.
Then the Beatles use of avant techniques into a listenable pop song like the backward tape, looping, electroninc music and putting basically a drum 'n' bass sound on "Tomorrow Never Knows". Really this was the first of its kind in pop music and it on various genres in music.
Its wrong to assume it would have been the Kinks or the Rolling Stones. Since it was not them and The Beatles that started the British Invasion we must give the Beatles credit for starting it. Anyone can easily see the lack of success British Rock Artists had on the charts between 1956-1963 that the Beatles established British Rock in America and really throughout the world.
Also The Rolling Stones were forced to write their own songs because it was the only way they could compete with the Beatles. The Kinks also were influenced to write their songs by the Beatles. The Beatles led the shift from dominated front man to group who wrote/played and where album focused. Some might say the Beach Boys but they had a lot of session people who played the instruments like Carol Kaye on the bass in Pet Sounds.
Their would be no folk rock or jangly guitar sound without the Beatles influencing the Byrds to form a rock band. The Beatles chord progressions made Dylan think the Beatles were leading the direction of music.
The Beatles are the most influential act of the last 50 years. How many Modern Rockers cite Elvis as a influence, hardly any? They had a huge impact on other areas like Folk Rock, Songwriting, Studio Production, Psychedelic Pop, Progressive Rock, Power Pop, and Indie Rock.
Brian Wilson himself said that Pet Sounds would not have been made had he not heard The Beatles' Rubber Soul Album. And many, if not all, of the early prog artists were influenced by the Beatles....
The Beatles helped popularized experimentation in pop and rock music forever. Revolver, Sgt Peper and Magical Mystery Tour is loaded with songs with complex meter changes, Classical Influences in Avant, Indian, backward music, Modal Music, Electronic Music and odd chord progressions. They wrapped it around a keen sense of Melody and Harmony. Many have tried and have failed miserably.
Then the Beatles use of avant techniques into a listenable pop song like the backward tape, looping, electroninc music and putting basically a drum 'n' bass sound on "Tomorrow Never Knows". Really this was the first of its kind in pop music and it on various genres in music.
Without question, the Beatles had an enormous impact on modern music. But if we butterfly them out of history, some very large gaps will open. The radio airtime, record store space, concert hall time and fans' resources would go somewhere, to other artists. Some may be OTL bands, some may be bands that made it on their own instead of covering the works of others.
In 1963, American rock music had lost much of its cutting edge, except for soul music, and soul did not yet have the critical mass to join the mainstream leaders. But in Britain, the music scene had progressed to a new style that was ready to explode into the worldwide market.
Without the Beatles, the sixties music revolution that started with the British Invasion and ended with the classic rock of the last years of the decade, would have sounded very different. Today's music would be different as well, but rapid changes would still have characterized the period, 1964-1969.
In 1963, American rock music had lost much of its cutting edge, except for soul music, and soul did not yet have the critical mass to join the mainstream leaders. But in Britain, the music scene had progressed to a new style that was ready to explode into the worldwide market.
Without the Beatles, the sixties music revolution that started with the British Invasion and ended with the classic rock of the last years of the decade, would have sounded very different. Today's music would be different as well, but rapid changes would still have characterized the period, 1964-1969.