Let it be is so fucking fantastic. What psychopath thinks otherwise?

The Beatles are one of a handful of bands that I don't really think about in terms of their individual albums -- to me it's just one continuous body of phenomenal work, with only marginal variations in good-better-best, variations which ultimately cease to matter when considering the whole. This might be because they were one of those bands who were just always around, and I became familiar with a lot of their material before I was into the practice of collecting and analyzing albums -- and even when I got more actively into them, it was by way of the "Anthology" project in the mid-'90's, which was organized chronologically but not in any way that is faithful to their albums. So to me, each album just kind of picks up where the last one left off.

Like Nirvana, they have a beautiful, compact, unfuckwithable catalog that just sounds better and better with each passing year. I love everything they ever did.

TBH...the singles years of the band is an era that I know very little other than the mega hits. Its such a strange thing for me to wrap my head around that there was a period of modern music where hit singles just rolled out on a regular basis and had no home on an "album" format.

All the non-album singles are (I think) collected on the two "Past Masters" album. The non-album singles ran concurrently with their proper albums throughout their whole career (though some made it onto albums in the US). Definitely worth a listen

What a weird comparison...

Nirvana was a ferocious live band whose albums mostly just reflected that. The Beatles were the exact opposite.

Also The Beatles were constantly reinventing themselves, while Nirvana established a formula and never strayed from it.

Finally, and this is more subjective -- Nirvana's slickest, most accessible, most popular record is easily their worst. The Beatles never even made a record like that.

Does any of this negate what I said?

not at all, I just think it's funny that they'd occupy the same conversation.

For what it’s worth, I feel very similarly about both bands. As close to a perfect discography as I can imagine.

Man do I hate Nevermind

I think it's pretty much perfect from beginning to end.

Definitely -- and, in both cases, contained to a core period of time where it all is able to feel of a piece (even where there is obvious aesthetic variance). Both catalogs have virtually no down spots for me -- even songs that are average by each band's standards, I've grown to really like over the years just because I so enjoy immersing myself in their respective voodoos.

Well said

Agreed.

The Beatles are a one of one.

I like Nirvana but you may as well [insert band name here] and I'd feel the same way about the comparison.

We appear to be entering that period again

I’d say we’ve been in that era for almost ten years now

I'm glad someone mentioned the singles. It's so crazy to think that running alongside these masterpiece albums are, oh yeah, also some of the greatest songwriting ever.

She Loves You
I Feel Fine
We Can Work It Out
Day Tripper
Paperback Writer
Rain
Lady Madonna
Hey Jude
Revolution
Don't Let Me Down
The Ballad of John and Yoko
Old Brown Shoe


That's an extra album right there.

Yeah the fast Revolution single is way better than the album cut

My error here is I didn’t give any space between this and Abbey Road - just powered right through. Looking back I did really like Let It Be but Abbey Road, amongst all the Beatles album, was the one that just blew me away.