Both the Beach Boys and the Beatles are considered Baroque pop. What's your point?

Beatles did more than "baroque pop" - they had psychedelia, rock, hard rock, showtunes, ballads

whilst Beach Boys were only reknown for that "chamber orchestra pop" on PS, sure they did other stuff, but none of it was that influential nor anything new

I would say the Beach Boys are actually more famous for their earlier music, which really (stuff like "I Get Around", "Little Deuce Coupe", etc.) isn't in the same style as Pet Sounds at all.

The Beatles never seemed to falter like The Beach Boys did. The Beach Boys went through several periods of time without even having a hit. The Beatles never did that, the Beatles were constantly touring or recording music and always had a hit song playing.

on an album to album basis, the number of albums the Beatles had were far less than the Beach Boys

if you compare the popular period of BB to the entire discography of Beatles, the hits were about the same

BB only never had any hits from the "slump" albums - that doesn't mean they're bad, however, it just means the public have already moved on to stuff like Led Zeppellin

nobody could have guaranteed that the Beatles would have any more hits had they stayed together in the 70s

Paul McCartney & Wings had quite a streak in the 70s but they weren't the Beatles

The problem with people who are of the opinion that the The Sex Pistols are the greatest band ever is that they don't consider that the Rezillos were.

Sure it is, but if their music isn't as good they don't deserve all the credit they get, ie. greatest band of All Time.

Then it isn't timeless; if it were, it would hold up.

No, it's discrediting their timelessness.

Who cares? There are free mixtapes in the hip hop world of higher caliber than big budget, platinum selling albums, sometimes by the same artist. I'm sure Trout Mask Replica didn't sell near as well as any Beatles album, but it has more meaningful influence and timelessness than the Beatles.

I wouldn't say more creative than today's best bands. Take Radiohead; they took influence from the Beatles, but it's not very noticeable, more dilute in their sound.

Il Duce, Baroque Pop may not be an extremely expansive genre, but elements of its style can be found in various artists, such as Fleet Foxes, Animal Collective, Radiohead, and the Beatles ( ;) ). Besides, Brian Wilson's songwriting is just fantastic, proving how intricate a pop song (or really any song) can be: on the level of timeless classical composition. That display of excruciating perfectionism itself has inspired a number of artists as well.

Well ya, the BB were active many more years than The Beatles. You can't guarantee that the Beatles would have kept their streak going in the seventies, but I believe they would have. The Beatles seemed to be getting better and better, unlike the Beach Boys. Lennon and McCartney had huge success after the break up. As you mentioned, Paul and wings were big. And Lennons Imagine went number 1 worldwide.

As I listen to The Beach Boys, I can't help but notice that they weren't as diverse as The Beatles. I don't think they were as musically inclined either, except for their vocal harmonies. So many BB songs start sounding the same to me. The same can be said for earlier Beatles albums, but Beatles were always evolving and getting better.

There's just so much More life and energy in Sgt peppers compared to pet sounds. Pet Sounds is a bore of an album. Not a distinct difference between any of the songs. It's just like one long, boring song. With a few good moments.

I don't think they're the best band ever but their music is timeless. Who cares that they still sell a lot of albums? Nobody I guess, but a lot of people still care about their albums. Their music clearly is still "holding up", a lot better than that of the Beach Boys. The Beatles are clearly the more timeless of the two.

yeah I know, but do those bands sound much like Pet Sounds? I think not, whereas bands influenced by the Beatles sound a lot like them

only bands that have the Pet Sounds sound (pardon the pun) are The High Llamas, the Wondermints and maybe Jellyfish

what's the basis of your belief? the Beatles would sooner or later fallen out of favour - look at the Rolling Stones - how many hits did they have outside of the 60s and early 70s?

if you compare hits, actually the Beach Boys had about 40 hit singles during their heyday, while the Beatles had only slightly over 30

that's cos you're hearing the wrong albums, as i suggested - listen to Sunflower, Friends, Wild Honey, 20/20, Surf's Up, Holland and Carl & The Passions - So Tough

or even Beach Boys Love You - if you're so inclined

the albums before Pet Sounds all sound mostly the same

not musically inclined? all members of the Beach Boys can play their instruments very well, except Brian who was a lousy bassist (he was great on the piano, though) Brian only engaged session musicians for Pet Sounds cos those were weird instruments

I'd say the most exciting moment on pet sounds is the title track. And "hang on to your ego".

The basis for that belief would be that the beatles were so consistent their entire career and even after they broke up paul and John had a lot of success. But ya, they wouldn't have kept it going forever. I don't think anyone could do that.

I listened to some of those albums. I'll keep listening.

The title track on Wild Honey is pretty good, other than that nothing really stands out to me. Currently listening to 20/20