Beatles Without George Martin?


The point of this thread is simple:

The older I get and the more I learn about the Beatles, the more I revere George Martin. I've become convinced that Martin wove the common thread of musicality through those very different individuals. In fact, his talent in some ways clearly exceeded theirs.

A man of musical genius no doubt.

Opinions? Trivial tidbits? Let's hear 'em!
danlib1
Not an attack on you Danlib1. Far from it. I respect the love and devotion for one of your favorites. Enjoy. I was only speaking for my own frustrations at hearing the same music over and over A LOT for 40 years.

I personally like Martin's production on "Icarus", the only Paul Winter album I like at all. It has a great line up: Colin Walcott, David darling, Ralph Towner. The scope of the stereo image is awesome. There is nothing like that today.
>>I was only speaking for my own frustrations at hearing the same music over and over A LOT for 40 years.<<

Agreed and that's why I avoid our local FM rock stations. Classic rock stations suck. I'm fortunate to have access to a couple stations out of Toronto that play strictly new music.

However, great music is timeless as evidenced not only by the Beatles' popularity but that of the many classical FM stations that populate major markets.

Not to mention the wide variety of classical music offered on cd and vinyl by online and local stores.
Shadorne, I am total agreement regarding Krall. She is the most overrated singer I have ever heard. Diane Schuur is a gazillion times better but she is big and fat so doesn't get the same notoriety.
George Martin was of course a good producer. More than that, he knew when he saw raw talent.

However, if he is more talented than the Beatles, tell me where I can buy his records. How many number ones did George Martin have as an artist? We know the answer is none.

Shadorne, in some cases you are correct. But the examples you give I don't agree with. While D. Krall is not the greatest, I believe B. Spears is more of a made up artist than she is by far. And if its 50% "good looks", why didn't George Martin make his own rock records? Was he too ugly to make it? Give me a break!!
Also, please play me Mr. Emericks number one records also. That's right, there are none.
George Martin is a great producer.
But he's not an artist.

Butch Harmon is a great golf coach.
But he's not a golfer.

Martin Scorcese is a great director.
But he's not an actor.

So much for the azmoon argument.