Beatles Without George Martin?


The point of this thread is simple:

The older I get and the more I learn about the Beatles, the more I revere George Martin. I've become convinced that Martin wove the common thread of musicality through those very different individuals. In fact, his talent in some ways clearly exceeded theirs.

A man of musical genius no doubt.

Opinions? Trivial tidbits? Let's hear 'em!
danlib1
The Beatles could never have been "lost in the rest of the British invasion" because they were the CAUSE of the British invasion.

It simply would not have occurred without them.
>>It simply would not have occurred without them.<<

It's disingenuous to speak in absolutes.

That's like saying Viet Nam wouldn't have escalated had Kennedy lived.

We'll simply never know on either example and it's wasted energy belaboring the arguments.
But if Kennedy had lived would the Beatles have escalated? Let's ask Oliver Stone- the expert on things that never happened!
I never understood this thing about Kennedy, especially since they were already considered a phenomenon in the rest of the world long before the Kennedy assassination. I also believe that this was an American tragedy and didn't nearly affect the rest of the world as it did Americans. However, this is only my opinion.
This is getting a bit off track but JFK's death did have far reaching effects. His attempts (with RFK) to aggressively pursue and prosecute organized crime certainly affected every country in which those groups operated. Millions of revenue dollars were the result of the prostitution, gambling, and drug enterprises they operated.

Many historians believe that "The Mob" was involved in his assassination although Oliver Stone took exceptional liberties, IMO, in his interpretation.

One could go on and on regarding Viet Nam, Cuba, the FBI, and who knows what all but Kennedy's death was an event of global impact both immediate and long term.