Originally Posted by Rainard Jalen

The original post was facetious anyway, but yeah, to others who have used the thread as a way of casting aspersions on the Beatles... clearly the bands are not comparable because they are of different genres. In fact, nobody should attack a band for being of a genre they don't like or listen to in the first place. It's like, when I hear some extreme Death Metal fans talk trash about Radiohead and say things like "get some talent", as if "talent" depends upon how raw and heavy your sound is. In a nutshell, if somebody doesn't even like the genre that a particular band/artist play, that's fine, but then they have no right to criticize the band for belonging to that genre. You only criticize a band for embodying a genre badly.

1: If somebody doesn't like sugary r&b inspired pop, they should shut up about the early Merseybeat Beatles stuff.
2: If somebody doesn't like melodious brightly harmonized pop/rock'n'roll, they should shut up about all of the Beatles stuff.
3: In fact, if somebody doesn't really like pop music at all, (which is 9/10 times the case with Beatles hatas), they should shut up about all pop music and leave it to us who actually enjoy it. God, there's nothing more irritating than an extreme diehard hate-all-else proggy or metalhead feeling they're in a position to comment on the Beatles.
4: If you don't like folk, you're in no position to comment on Nick Drake.
5: If you don't like rap, you're in no position to ridicule the skills of Biggie Smalls.
6: If you don't like classical, = no right to comment on Mozart.

If on the other hand somebody genuinely likes music of that description, they have a right to criticize as much as they like. I'll respect their view unreservedly.