It may be that the Beatles suffer a bit from being so foundational for later musicians...
The Beatles have the same problem as Seinfeld- a modern viewer might find it horribly cliched, but they were the ones who established those cliches. Breaths of fresh air that've gone stale.
I don't really get the reasoning behind deriding something as "entry-level". I don't even think I could effectively argue the point- I don't have a firm grasp on the philosophy.
most (not all) entry-level stuff is just one-dimensional and utilizes only surface-value qualities of whatever genre it either is from or precedes.
Black Sabbath is entry-level metal, but it still exemplifies all the good aspects of metal music in a nuanced, and multidimensional way.
i cant say the same for the Beatles.
Quote:
I hate most country music. Half of it's so preachy that I want to throttle the singer. The other half is alright, but most of that's just rock music trying to cash in on a cultural trend without its own unique musical style.
modern country is pop music with twangy guitars. It follows typical pop chord progressions and ABABCB song construction that has been done to death.
try country from 1980 and earlier, also bluegrass. its pretty manly
I get the gist of what you're saying, but I'm not sure exactly what you're saying the Beatles lacked. Subtlety? Were their chord progressions too simple? Did they just never delve deep enough into all the things they touched on?
There's definitely popy country out there, but I had assumed anything that got to pop was no longer considered country. I have no idea where the genre boundaries lie honestly. (And if we're getting into that "pop" is pretty vague too. It's the "popular" stuff, and it's usually really light?)
I know little of older country music, except that cowboys yodelled and it that was painful. That may be going back too far though.