If The Beatles had continued into the '70s

I have always been of the belief that The Beatles' output in the Early '70s wouldn't have been too dissimilar to their solo work. Some of the verses and melodies may have been different (as it likely would have been more of a collaborative effort, even though tensions within the band still would have existed), but by and large, I think what we have today is what The Beatles' output would have been like if they had not broke up. Songs such as "Imagine", "My Sweet Lord" and "Instant Karma" still would have existed.

As for their level of popularity, I believe they would have been just as much of a cultural phenomenon during the Early '70s as they had been in the 1960s. I do tend to think though that they would have experienced a decline in popularity around the Mid-Late '70s. Most mainstream acts/artists have a shelf life of about 15 years until they start to underperform commercially. I believe the change in demographics would have caught up with The Beatles eventually, regardless of the quality of their work. Teenagers don't want to like/listen to the same music as their parents in a lot of cases and I think it would have got a point where The Beatles were viewed as being an "old band". They still would have been critically acclaimed and beloved by millions, but their time in the spotlight would have started to come to an end. Nothing lasts forever.

One example of a "Beatles sounding" song I can think of is "Jet" by Paul McCarteny & Wings. This could have easily have been a Beatles song, IMO:

I tend to agree. Personally, I think The Beatles still would have been well-respected today, however they wouldn't have had the "legendary" status which they obtained as a result of their career being prematurely cut-short. It probably was for the best that their career ended when it did. Let It Be is the only Beatles album which quite often receives mixed or negative reviews, so who knows what might have manifested if the tensions within the band had been left to simmer for any longer. 

Yeah, the "Disco" theory is only popularised by casual music fans who have very little knowledge about popular music or the band itself. It doesn't have any real credibility with most Beatles fans or people with a good general knowledge of the history of music.

To be honest, I feel as though The Beatles' music wouldn't have skewed towards any particular style if they had remained together into the '70s. I think they all would have come up with their own unique compositions, all with differing influences and drawing from a wide range of styles. That was always one of the best qualities of The Beatles in the first place. The band was made up of four talented musicians, each with their own strengths and weaknesses, who had come together to create some beautiful, meaningful music which continues to be remembered fondly today. I think they all would have brought something different to the table.

Yeah, I'm glad as well that they broke up at the height of their career, and still "Let it Be" is a pretty disappointing finisher album in my eyes. Not only did they pretty much legendarized their legacy with little seeming dud on the way (unlike the Beach Boys which have released some pretty shoddy material past their 60s peak), but it also let John Lennon in particular to be fully free creatively and releasing some absolutely amazing stuff on his own.

I don't think they would have severely dropped in popularity looking at how huge each individual Beatle member was still in the 70s and 80s. But their new material probably wouldn't have interested that much critically considering how many revolutionary bands came to be after them.

Yeah, Let It Be would have to be one of my least favourite albums by The Beatles. There are some good tracks on the album (e.g "Two of Us"), but for the most part, it's a sad, underwhelming album to listen to.

Just out of curiosity, have you ever watched the "Let It Be" film? It's pretty depressing to watch (as it documents the tensions within the band during the Get Back/Let It Be sessions), however it is an interesting insight into the factors which led to The Beatles breaking up. Watching it makes you realise how incredible it was that they somehow managed to stick together to record Abbey Road! 

The four of them weren't successful for the entirety of the '70s and '80s though. As a matter of fact, it was only Paul McCartney who sustained a huge level of success during most of that time. George Harrison's Dark Horse was considered a commercial failure when it was released in 1974 and it wasn't until the release of Cloud Nine thirteen years later that he made a significant comeback into the mainstream. Ringo's solo success was mostly confined to the Early '70s; his Disco-orientated Ringo the 4th was so poorly received by critics and fans that it was essentially a "career killer" for him. Even John Lennon experienced varying levels of success before he retired from the music industry in 1975.

I still tend to think that there would have been a point in time where The Beatles would have fallen out of favour in the mainstream. They still would have maintained their huge amount of popularity (due to their stature as one of the greatest bands of all time). However, I have my doubts that their post-Early '70s albums and singles would have continued to perform as well commercially as their earlier 60s/Early '70s material. Time would have worked against them eventually.


It's possible that might have happened. I mean, there's no real way of knowing what might have eventuated had The Beatles remained as a collaborative group. 

Re: The Beatles not having creative control; that wouldn't have happened thankfully, as towards the end of their career, The Beatles actually established their own record label known as "Apple Records". 

That's true. Brian Epstein's death was one of the biggest turning points for the band, IMO. He was arguably the key figure who helped keep The Beatles grounded during their touring years and his death in 1967 left a void that was never filled. The other factors (such as Yoko's presence in the studio) which ultimately played a role in the band's break-up still would have eventuated, but had Brian Epstein lived longer and remained as The Beatles' manager/mentor, it makes you wonder how his presence would have had an influence on the relations within the band during their final couple of years.

Not sure if I agree with the idea that John had been trying to break up the band since Beatles for Sale. Relations among the band members were generally healthy up until the death of Brian Epstein and even then, it was the rejection of his song "Cold Turkey" that was the real turning point for John and his place in The Beatles.

That may be true, however I would argue that John at least had some interest in remaining in The Beatles up until about 1969 or so. There were conscious efforts within the group to try and carry on as a collective unit after the death of Brian Epstein. Also, if John was truly disinterested in wanting to be in the band, why did he choose to present "Cold Turkey" to Paul as a potential Beatles A-Side? It was after the rejection of "Cold Turkey" that John's enthusiasm and participation in the band really started to wane.