Some believe that Prog would never have existed if not for the Beatles, while other's claim no effect on artists like early Genesis. "What does Peter Gabriel have to do with John Lennon?" I once heard someone say. So what's the deal?

Actually the situation before was very much a 7'' vinyl single market, with LP fast being Collections

of single tracks to cash in a second time. The habit of Prog bands to have subtitles on epic tracks

comes also from that time where you have to had 12 titles on a LP to receive full royalties (otherwise

it would be just rated as an EP, no matter how long the playing time really was).

 

Of course the Beatles weren't the only ones, but very important in changing the view on LP's as

an true album format instead of compilations.

 

Also they where among the first to break with 2 to 3 minutes song lengths (in that genre) and to

introduce synphonic elements and sound experiments into their sound.

 

I think it's legit to say they where involved in setting the ground for the things that happend later.

 

FZ & Mothers of Invention - Freak Out

Beach Boys - Pet Sounds

Beatles- Revolver, Sgt. Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour

Moody Blues- Days of Future Passed

Procol Harum- same

The Nice- Thoughts of Emerlist Davjack

Pink Floyd- Piper at the Gates of Dawn

The Beatles are in there of course but they weren't alone. 

 

As a loyal Zappaholic, I still wonder why people quote Freak Out all the time but not Absolutely Free.....

 

Sounds such as those 'koo koo.. koo koo....' sung by Lennon on 'I am The Walrus' are sure a key element Gabriel might have to do with him  

You mean like this?

Or this?

Nah, Peter Gabriel has nothing to do with John Lennon. Never even listened to his music. They sound nothing alike.

Despite being forever tagged as a Liverpool band the Beatles were for most of their musical career, in fact London-based and pretty much the centre of the London scene during the late 60s. And the importance of Swinging London on Psychedelic Pop & Rock and the embryonic Progressive Rock cannot be over-stated - San Francisco is the spiritual home of the Psychedelic movement and the alternative/underground scene but (Zappa aside, as he was lone odd-ball [even] in the SF scene) having plateaued very quickly as the soundtrack to the hippy movement, musically it was pretty staid and static, the creativity that initially vitalised American Psych found a comfortable far-out groove and stuck with it - being progressive in that scene referred to everything but music. Whereas over the pond, it was London's quirky, hodge-podge slant on psychedelia that continued what SF started, it provided the impetus that powered a progression in music that radiated out in a myriad of different directions as a consequence, and that gave birth to Prog Rock. 

While the Beatles and the up and coming Psych and Prog bands were not quite in the same London social groups per se, the Fab Four were a peripheral but key part of the social scenes that grew up around the progressive underground and there was a degree of mutually reflective kudos in that association. 

[Some people disagree when I say this, but] The Jimi Hendrix Experience were a London band (with an American front-man), and what they did was born out of that 'not-quite-counter-culture-but-close' London scene, and they too were part of that same nebulous underground scene that mixed mainstream rock/pop royalty (various members of the Beatles, Stones, Yardbirds etc.,) with the psych-folk/pop fringe-ers (Bolan & Donovan, and to some extent Bowie), the hard-rockers (Zepp, Sabbath, Purple & Heap), all the Canterbury & Ladbroke Grove bands, together with the likes of pre-Crimson Fripp, Pink Floyd, the Gentle Giants before they became Gentle Giant, Yes, The Nice=>ELP and VdGG etc.

Just how influential the Fab Four were on that cannot be measured in cover songs and musical development alone, nor can it be seen in innovation and approach to song writing and music production because that is too interleaved and too ingrained into the fabric of what the Beatles created from being an integral, though perhaps passive, part of the London underground and what those underground bands created also from that association. Whether this was direct inspiration or askance influence, they fed on each other.

Abbey Road was essentially part of EMI's corporate electronics industry establishment and for that was un-hip and somewhat antiquated by comparison to US studios that were purpose-built for specific record labels and music genres. Basically it operated like a branch of the civil service, similar to the BBC and General Post Office. The studio innovations that the Beatles and George Martin pioneered were born out of having to use Abbey Road's older equipment.

I think it's underrated. I can name many early prog rock acts that weren't influenced by The Beach Boys or Frank Zappa. But how many early prog acts can you seriously say that were not influenced by one aspect of The Beatles music from any album from Rubber Soul to Abbey Road? 

 

The Beatles were heavily influential on pop culture after that in a zeitgeist induced back and forth with their generation. One need not start up the train before opening up the throttle. And I believe that applies to the Beatles. No artists exist in a vacuum, even the Beatles.

Manifold results allude to the good as well as bad aspects of drugs, depending on one's personal view. Your's has been duly noted. 

The Beatles being popular to hysterical pubescent girls is not what I consider to be an influence on pop culture as a whole, but who am I to say? 

But I've always found that those that couldn't handle weed usually had under lying psychological problems and found it was best for them to stay away from it and to just let them rant about it's evils.