To answer the OP, No. You have to consider context. They really were truly unlike anything else at the time. Their catalogue is quality, not quantity like the Stones who base a lot of their output on whatever is popular at the time and sometimes is not very good.
In a relative sense, they seem to have been overrated -- in music press commentary, nearly always ranked No. 1, when several other artists are objectively more worthy of the rank.
If I could only listen to 10 artists/bands for the rest of my life, meaning all their stuff but just the 10.....
Muddy Waters, Lighting Hopkins, Bessie Smith, Hank Williams, The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Johnny Cash, Elvis, Robert Johnson, Tom Waits. All of them recorded a lot of records and in my opinion were as good as it gets at what they did.
The Beatles were amazing and they just kept getting better as time went on, you can't talk music without paying homage to this incredible band. So many great songs and they just kept coming. Love The Beatles.
I'd hate to be stuck with you if those are your 10. Not that they're not great but I'd want a little more variety and lighter music
Frank Sinatra, Ray Charles, Etta James, Bob Wills and His Texas Playboys, Merle Haggard, Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix, The Doors, Billie Holliday, Howlin' Wolf.
Again, that's a good list of artists but now you're grasping at straws.
Beatles made some good pop songs but not much else. Sure they did some studio wizadry but that is just a product of the technological changes of the times. Many bands did similar things at the time and they have to credit their producer too. There is a narratove that they were very radical but this is overrated very much.
Their story on so many levels is unique. I know professional classical musicians who were casual fans. Then they saw Get Back and are mesmerized. Can’t get enough.
There is no modern day comparison.
They are the biggest gift to modern culture since Beethoven and the rest of the classical era.
Yeah - Absolutely overrated. The only reason any millennial likes them is bc they grew up listening to them. Baby music (like most popular music from Britain). They/their acclaim are one of the obstacles in the way of rock (broadly defined) being considered a true art form.
The Beatles were pretty good. They themselves said they were average musicians and were probably surprised at their fame.
Few people would say they were the greatest, except at making popular songs everyone liked. It's hard to argue with calling them #1 at that.
Remember the movie Amadeus, where Salieri plays a bunch of tunes noone recognizes, and then the Nachtmusik? So the viewer immediately thinks Mozart wrote stuff everyone knows. But it's about the only one everyone still knows. The Beatles have 10 or 20 of them, at least, we'll see if that holds up over the centuries.