Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Would the Beatles have stayed together in today's music biz?

That's a broad question, but here's the part I've been thinking about. Even when their recording pace slowed in the late 1960s*, the Beatles spent an awful lot of time together in the studio. They'd spend 2-3 months making an album, and they'd be back in the studio again a few months later. These days, most popular bands only put out an album every two or three years. Of course, the Beatles fell apart for myriad reasons (management issues, Apple problems, Yoko, etc.), but spending so much time together in the studio couldn't have helped their situation.

A related question: would modern long-lived bands like U2 and REM still be together if their record companies required them to make records as frequently as the Beatles did?

* How prolific were the Beatles? They released over 200 of their own songs (plus some cover versions in the early days), and yet their recording career lasted only about seven years (1963-1969).

No comments: