Worst Beatles Songs :/

[Newguy562]

1/ Being for the benefit of Mister Kite. (all time stinko)
2/ Revolution #9 (Frank Zappa did this kind of stuff so much better)
3/ Happiness is a warm gun. (ran out of decent song ideas? Just lump a bunch of fragments together into one unlistenable mess- don't worry, as you're a Beatle many will hail it as genius).
4/ Run for your life. (Horrible, nasty lyrics)
5/ Only a Northern song. (George Martin wasn't too keen on it either)

At least Macca waited 'till he was out of The Beatles before he started putting out crap.

happiness is a warm gun has one of the best outros the beatles ever did ..that song is definitely influenced by frank zappa as well...and omg i forgot all about beingi for the benefit of mister kite(scary circus music)
run for your life ruined rubber soul from being a perfect album and the other song the one that ringo sings one as well (forgot the name of it)

[Newguy562]

Sun King because they ripped off Fleetwood mac. That's below them.  

I Love Mr Kite off Sgt Pepper

sun king is so beautiful and melodic

[Amanda Hart]

Your Mother Should Know.

Dang, I love Your Mother Should Know. I dig those types of Paul songs though. For my money Maxwell's Silver Hammer is by far the worst thing in the catalog. I think I might perceive it as worse than it is because it represents the direction he would take through most of his solo career. There are gems on almost every Macca album, but the overall output is a bit too bland for me.

[JohnMill]

In my opinion they make a case for being the only band that doesn't have a bad song in their catalog.  The reason being is because in my opinion even if the lyrics aren't there there is something in the performance that makes it worth listening to.  "Mr. Moonlight" plods along at the pace of a snail but John's vocal on it throughout is just amazing.  "Little Child" may be the definition of a throwaway pop song but again that vocal on it is incredible. 

[Newguy562]

In my opinion they make a case for being the only band that doesn't have a bad song in their catalog.  The reason being is because in my opinion even if the lyrics aren't there there is something in the performance that makes it worth listening to.  "Mr. Moonlight" plods along at the pace of a snail but John's vocal on it throughout is just amazing.  "Little Child" may be the definition of a throwaway pop song but again that vocal on it is incredible. 

i love little child it reminds me of our dog!

[guitarfool2002]

In my opinion they make a case for being the only band that doesn't have a bad song in their catalog.  The reason being is because in my opinion even if the lyrics aren't there there is something in the performance that makes it worth listening to.  "Mr. Moonlight" plods along at the pace of a snail but John's vocal on it throughout is just amazing.  "Little Child" may be the definition of a throwaway pop song but again that vocal on it is incredible. 

i love little child it reminds me of our dog!

Not just the vocal - I remember getting one of those really thick old Capitol pressings of Meet The Beatles at a flea market...playing the whole thing, one of the highlights of an admittedly "lesser" track on the album was John's harmonica solo. That solo cooks! It jumped out of the ol' hi-fi, I remember lifting the needle and replaying the solo several times.

And Mr. Moonlight...agreed, it's a lesser cover overall, but John's vocal intro is one of the *best* vocals he's ever done. The first thing you hear knocks you out, then the record sort of drops in intensity, but how could it live up to that vocal intro, anyway? Paul's theater organ solo break, I always loved the tone and feel of that. Two key elements like those make a lesser song memorable, such was the brilliance of the Beatles.

You're right, John...every Beatles song has *something* that makes it worth your attention. If there are exceptions, like a song that offers practically nothing of interest, I can't think of them in what they released.

[Newguy562]

In my opinion they make a case for being the only band that doesn't have a bad song in their catalog.  The reason being is because in my opinion even if the lyrics aren't there there is something in the performance that makes it worth listening to.  "Mr. Moonlight" plods along at the pace of a snail but John's vocal on it throughout is just amazing.  "Little Child" may be the definition of a throwaway pop song but again that vocal on it is incredible. 

i love little child it reminds me of our dog!

Not just the vocal - I remember getting one of those really thick old Capitol pressings of Meet The Beatles at a flea market...playing the whole thing, one of the highlights of an admittedly "lesser" track on the album was John's harmonica solo. That solo cooks! It jumped out of the ol' hi-fi, I remember lifting the needle and replaying the solo several times.

And Mr. Moonlight...agreed, it's a lesser cover overall, but John's vocal intro is one of the *best* vocals he's ever done. The first thing you hear knocks you out, then the record sort of drops in intensity, but how could it live up to that vocal intro, anyway? Paul's theater organ solo break, I always loved the tone and feel of that. Two key elements like those make a lesser song memorable, such was the brilliance of the Beatles.

You're right, John...every Beatles song has *something* that makes it worth your attention. If there are exceptions, like a song that offers practically nothing of interest, I can't think of them in what they released.

i guess the reason why i love the beatles is because i feel like it's been a big part of my life since i was a child my parents would play it constantly so most of their songs reminds me of different parts of my life and many memories come with it

[joshferrell]

"You know my name look at the number","revolution #9","what's the new mary jane","wild honey pie","Dig it"..

[JohnMill]

You know I'd be remiss at this point not to talk a little bit about the "Beatles For Sale" LP which I think if you ask most Beatles fans what their least favorite Beatles LP is (minus "Yellow Submarine" which really doesn't count) most will hand over "Beatles For Sale".  It's not that it's a bad album but when compared with the lofty standards that The Beatles set for themselves there seems to be a crucial element missing.  It's not that the songwriting isn't there but the entire album (with a few notable exceptions) just seems to have a very weary tone to it.

The album starts off with three very dark tracks.  "No Reply" is a strong song while "I'm A Loser" is a candidate for one of John's best pieces of writing during this period and "Baby's In Black" isn't exactly bad although it doesn't purport to be anything other than what The Beatles termed it when they played it in concert: a waltz.  The issue is that for a band that was making it's stock and trade in energetic beat music, starting off the "Beatles For Sale" LP with these three tracks kind of leaves the listener feeling as if they are stuck in neutral.  

Things pick up greatly with John's cover of Chuck Berry's "Rock And Roll Music" which obviously deserves enshrinement as one of the best Beatles covers ever and another one that in at least my opinion they topped the original (something they were in the habit of doing).  "I'll Follow The Sun" is actually a nice ballad from Paul even if he technically wrote the same song twice ("I'll Be On My Way").  The aforementioned dirge like "Mr. Moonlight" follows before side one of the LP wraps up with another incredibly strong cover this time by Paul McCartney of "Kansas City" in the style of Little Richard.

Side two fares far better than it's predecessor as it starts off with the only seminal classic from this LP "Eight Days A Week".  I know in later years John Lennon was frustrated that they had to work hard to make a good record out of "Eight Days A Week" but they did indeed do that and it speaks well of the band and the song.  "Words Of Love" would fall in the same dirge like category of "Mr. Moonlight" if it wasn't for the strong writing on the part of Mr. Holly.  Likewise "Honey Don't" is one of Carl Perkins' better tracks, affectionately performed here by Ringo Starr.  I'm a huge fan of both "Every Little Thing" and "I Don't Wanna Spoil The Party".  Both are very underrated Beatles tracks and largely unknown likely due to their placement on this record.  

"What You're Doing" is mostly a throwaway track but generally inoffensive and unlike a number of tracks on this album, it does possess an infectious beat.  The album closes with an absolutely horrid cover of Carl Perkins' "Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby".  I understand that George Harrison was a huge fan of Perkins but both the fact that the song isn't exactly the best song Carl ever wrote along with the inability of The Beatles to elevate it in any way shape or form makes it one of the more unremarkable closers in the Beatles canon.

So there you have it, "Beatles For Sale".  Again in summation, it's not necessarily a bad album at all in terms of songwriting or even the covers they choose to fill it out with.  The issue with "Beatles For Sale" lies entirely in it's tone.  Perhaps they were trying to beat the holiday rush or perhaps they just had exhausted their cache of truly top shelf material on "A Hard Day's Night" but the tone set for "Beatles For Sale" is one of a sluggish listen which is why I believe a lot of Beatles fans rank it as their least favorite record by the band.

[Aegir]

The only Beatles song I don't really like that much is The Long and Winding Road.

[rab2591]

The only Beatles song I don't really like that much is The Long and Winding Road.

Agreed.

[Newguy562]

The only Beatles song I don't really like that much is The Long and Winding Road.

Agreed.

why?

[guitarfool2002]

I say this 100% honestly: Beatles For Sale is actually one of my favorite go-to Beatles albums, the one I'll reach for more often to get a fix of the Beatles. I can't explain why, but it just is.

Least favorite is hard, very tough to call. I certainly wouldn't put Beatles For Sale *anywhere* behind Yellow Submarine or Let It Be.

Honestly, besides the title track and Get Back, what on Let It Be can stand next to the average track on Beatles For Sale?

The fact that the Beatles were world-weary, were tired, and were barely able to sneak in studio time while touring the world might have something to do with why I like the performances. The album sounds good, minus a few exceptions.

Let It Be the overall album sounds forced, lifeless, and cold. EXCEPT the title track, which is an absolute masterpiece, a fantastic record. And Get Back, which rocks like a motherfucker.

[Newguy562]

I say this 100% honestly: Beatles For Sale is actually one of my favorite go-to Beatles albums, the one I'll reach for more often to get a fix of the Beatles. I can't explain why, but it just is.

Least favorite is hard, very tough to call. I certainly wouldn't put Beatles For Sale *anywhere* behind Yellow Submarine or Let It Be.

Honestly, besides the title track and Get Back, what on Let It Be can stand next to the average track on Beatles For Sale?

The fact that the Beatles were world-weary, were tired, and were barely able to sneak in studio time while touring the world might have something to do with why I like the performances. The album sounds good, minus a few exceptions.

Let It Be the overall album sounds forced, lifeless, and cold. EXCEPT the title track, which is an absolute masterpiece, a fantastic record. And Get Back, which rocks like a motherf*cker.

my least favorite albums are definately "beatles for sale" & "let it be" i felt like their last album is the worst...at least go out with a bang!....my favorite is "magical mystery tour"..then "rubber soul" then "white album"

[guitarfool2002]

As far as all-time favorites, I liked them before I knew who Geoff Emerick was! But it's hard to top in any era of rock and pop that handful of albums that Geoff Emerick engineered, including Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, and all related singles in between, then coming back again for Abbey Road.

It was a near-perfect combination of a band wanting to break new ground and a young, a *really young* engineer who had the same things in mind. Nothing couldn't be tried, nothing was off-limits. The time the Beatles were reaching an artistic and creative peak lined up at the exact moment they needed those technical people around them who were willing to go outside the regulations and standards and try new things. What a match.

Beatles, Emerick, Martin, 66-67...phenomenal.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

As far as all-time favorites, I liked them before I knew who Geoff Emerick was! But it's hard to top in any era of rock and pop that handful of albums that Geoff Emerick engineered, including Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, and all related singles in between, then coming back again for Abbey Road.

It was a near-perfect combination of a band wanting to break new ground and a young, a *really young* engineer who had the same things in mind. Nothing couldn't be tried, nothing was off-limits. The time the Beatles were reaching an artistic and creative peak lined up at the exact moment they needed those technical people around them who were willing to go outside the regulations and standards and try new things. What a match.

Beatles, Emerick, Martin, 66-67...phenomenal.

Absolutely.

I think the only album that doesn't quite match up to the rest for me is the first one. There are great songs on it, but it does sound cheap or it reveals that it was made cheaply (because it was). Yes, that does have its charm (which is why the album is still great despite not matching up to the rest) but The Beatles did more with more.

[Uncomfortable Seat]

What Goes On

[LetHimRun]

I say this 100% honestly: Beatles For Sale is actually one of my favorite go-to Beatles albums, the one I'll reach for more often to get a fix of the Beatles. I can't explain why, but it just is.

Least favorite is hard, very tough to call. I certainly wouldn't put Beatles For Sale *anywhere* behind Yellow Submarine or Let It Be.

Honestly, besides the title track and Get Back, what on Let It Be can stand next to the average track on Beatles For Sale?

The fact that the Beatles were world-weary, were tired, and were barely able to sneak in studio time while touring the world might have something to do with why I like the performances. The album sounds good, minus a few exceptions.

Let It Be the overall album sounds forced, lifeless, and cold. EXCEPT the title track, which is an absolute masterpiece, a fantastic record. And Get Back, which rocks like a motherf*cker.

my least favorite albums are definately "beatles for sale" & "let it be" i felt like their last album is the worst...at least go out with a bang!....my favorite is "magical mystery tour"..then "rubber soul" then "white album"

To be fair, Abbey Road was their last album, so they did go out with a bang. Let It Be was shelved (as "Get Back") because they weren't happy with how things were going. It was to be released before Abbey Road. Spector was asked to complete it, unbeknownst to the Beatles themselves. The album was released after they were broken up.

[Newguy562]

I say this 100% honestly: Beatles For Sale is actually one of my favorite go-to Beatles albums, the one I'll reach for more often to get a fix of the Beatles. I can't explain why, but it just is.

Least favorite is hard, very tough to call. I certainly wouldn't put Beatles For Sale *anywhere* behind Yellow Submarine or Let It Be.

Honestly, besides the title track and Get Back, what on Let It Be can stand next to the average track on Beatles For Sale?

The fact that the Beatles were world-weary, were tired, and were barely able to sneak in studio time while touring the world might have something to do with why I like the performances. The album sounds good, minus a few exceptions.

Let It Be the overall album sounds forced, lifeless, and cold. EXCEPT the title track, which is an absolute masterpiece, a fantastic record. And Get Back, which rocks like a motherf*cker.

my least favorite albums are definately "beatles for sale" & "let it be" i felt like their last album is the worst...at least go out with a bang!....my favorite is "magical mystery tour"..then "rubber soul" then "white album"

To be fair, Abbey Road was their last album, so they did go out with a bang. Let It Be was shelved (as "Get Back") because they weren't happy with how things were going. It was to be released before Abbey Road. Spector was asked to complete it, unbeknownst to the Beatles themselves. The album was released after they were broken up.

so abbey road was their last true album?
why did they even release let it be?...well at least let it be has some of the greatest songs they ever did like across the universe & don't let me down.

[LetHimRun]

What Goes On

I tend to agree. The only thing that partially saves it for me is George's guitar picking.

Honey Pie is dreadful. Til There Was You is so boring. Doctor Robert is pretty far down there, especially when considering the material on Revolver.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

so abbey road was their last true album?
why did they even release let it be?...well at least let it be has some of the greatest songs they ever did like across the universe & don't let me down.

Don't Let Me Down isn't on Let It Be.

[Newguy562]

so abbey road was their last true album?
why did they even release let it be?...well at least let it be has some of the greatest songs they ever did like across the universe & don't let me down.

Don't Let Me Down isn't on Let It Be.

OH sh*t!! then just across the universe :/

[Chocolate Shake Man]

No, but the album has some great songs - Let It Be, Get It Back, I've Got a Feeling, Two of Us, Across The Universe. Those are all great.

[LetHimRun]

I say this 100% honestly: Beatles For Sale is actually one of my favorite go-to Beatles albums, the one I'll reach for more often to get a fix of the Beatles. I can't explain why, but it just is.

Least favorite is hard, very tough to call. I certainly wouldn't put Beatles For Sale *anywhere* behind Yellow Submarine or Let It Be.

Honestly, besides the title track and Get Back, what on Let It Be can stand next to the average track on Beatles For Sale?

The fact that the Beatles were world-weary, were tired, and were barely able to sneak in studio time while touring the world might have something to do with why I like the performances. The album sounds good, minus a few exceptions.

Let It Be the overall album sounds forced, lifeless, and cold. EXCEPT the title track, which is an absolute masterpiece, a fantastic record. And Get Back, which rocks like a motherf*cker.

my least favorite albums are definately "beatles for sale" & "let it be" i felt like their last album is the worst...at least go out with a bang!....my favorite is "magical mystery tour"..then "rubber soul" then "white album"

To be fair, Abbey Road was their last album, so they did go out with a bang. Let It Be was shelved (as "Get Back") because they weren't happy with how things were going. It was to be released before Abbey Road. Spector was asked to complete it, unbeknownst to the Beatles themselves. The album was released after they were broken up.

so abbey road was their last true album?
why did they even release let it be?...well at least let it be has some of the greatest songs they ever did like across the universe & don't let me down.

"Get Back" was pretty well fully recorded in I believe January of 1969. They didn't start work on Abbey Road until April of 1969. As I said, they were not happy with how "Get Back" had turned out, so they shelved it until December of 1969. It was eventually given to Phil Spector to finish and he added all of the overdubs and stuff and Apple released it as Let It Be in May of 1970.

[LetHimRun]

so abbey road was their last true album?
why did they even release let it be?...well at least let it be has some of the greatest songs they ever did like across the universe & don't let me down.

Don't Let Me Down isn't on Let It Be.

OH sh*t!! then just across the universe :/

Don't Let Me Down is the B side to the Get Back single.