Taylor Swift

[KevShmev]

Yep, yep, the changes look great to me all things considered. She obviously wasn't going to cut any of the big hits, so some of the deep cuts had to go to make room for the TTPD songs.  I thought So Long, London would be in the mix, but none of the other new ones surprised me.  Having seen some clips of the visuals, she really went all-out again with this new era being added.  Some really awesome stuff.  I like that she shuffled some of the other eras around as well in the set list to mix it up a bit.

[MirrorMask]

So I figured it out indeed, the Folklore / Evermore merger 

Yeah, I can see how she picked those songs, they're some tunes that translate well live. I Can Do It with a Broken Heart, as I said, is something that I can't stand musically, but the lyrics are deep and hey, having sad lyrics with energetic music is straight out of Springsteen's playbook. It was inevitable that the most dance-y song would end up in the set.

Also, Who's Afraid and Smallest Man are one of my favorite songs from the album so that's fine with me.

One of the surprise songs in Paris was Paris, I guess she'll save So Long London for London. And if and when Florence Welsh can eventually be a guest at a show, who know what might happen.......

[KevShmev]

I am not sure Florida would work nearly as well as an acoustic song (which I assume it would be if Florence Welch guested at a show to sing it with her); it needs the dynamic shift of the melodies and the pounding drums in the chorus to really "hit," IMO.

I figured I Can Do It with a Broken Heart was a given since it's the only real bop on the record and is a live natural, but I can't say it's one I reach for right now.  It is one of the few from the main album here I will often skip over.  I like it, but there are just many others I'd rather hear right now.

I have a hunch that Who's Afraid of Little Old Me will eventually be seen as THE most classic song from this record by the more hardcore fans.  I doubt it would touch the success of Fortnight if even released as a single, but Fortnight is for the casuals; Who's Afraid... is for the dedicated fans. 
 

[KevShmev]

BTW, it is worth noting that after resetting the surprise songs slots for the 2024 shows, she recently changed it to where she can do whatever the hell she wants.   In other words, if she wants to play a song over and over in a surprise slot, she is gonna do it.  You're On Your Own, Kid has already been played five times in a surprise slot on this tour, and I wouldn't be shocked if it gets that many more plays in the final 65 shows (87 down, 65 to go!!).

[Zook]

Maybe she'll burn herself out, take a nice long break, and come back with something fresh.

Knowing my luck she'll do just that, but then storm the Capitol and I'll be blue balled again.

[MirrorMask]

BTW, it is worth noting that after resetting the surprise songs slots for the 2024 shows, she recently changed it to where she can do whatever the hell she wants.   In other words, if she wants to play a song over and over in a surprise slot, she is gonna do it.  You're On Your Own, Kid has already been played five times in a surprise slot on this tour, and I wouldn't be shocked if it gets that many more plays in the final 65 shows (87 down, 65 to go!!).

She could make a double album alone with just the surprise songs.

And You're On Your Own, Kid is one of the very best songs on Midnights so it's no wonder she plays it.

I believe she did Haunted at least once? or am I confusing it with Red? that would be great to hear, alongside with Carolina, Peter, whatever is left of Folklore and Evermore, and maybe for the novelty of it, most of the latest album in rotation.

[KevShmev]

Haunted has been played more than once, as I remember seeing that she played it sometime last summer, and then I know she played it at one of the Australia shows that the Chats and Reacts podcast ladies attended (one of them is a HUGE Haunted fan).

For anyone unfamiliar, and I am guessing most here are, there is a YouTube podcast of two ladies from Australia who do real live reactions to Swift's music. Their reactions can be a bit over the top at times (but I will take positive and happy over negative and constantly critical), but they are highly entertaining, and always do a great job of breaking down the lyrics and figuring out where new lyrics might connect back to older ones.  They went to a handful of shows in Australia, the last of which they were invited to by Taylor herself, who had her dad meet them at the show, where he let them sit in the VIP tent and handed both personalized letters Taylor had written to both of them.  Very cool.

And yeah, I suspect much of the new album that is not in the every show set will get played at some point in the surprise slots.  She did My Boy Only Breaks His Favorite Toys last week on just piano, and my guess is that is how she wrote the song since it is one of the six solo writes on the record.

[MirrorMask]

She played Peter in Sweden whoohooo!

I was just doing other stuff, went on YouTube to save a video I wanted to see later, noticed a live streaming of the show, clicked on it just for the passing curiosity of seeing what she was playing....... and it was acoustic set time and I got to hear most of Peter live!

It's still my favorite song on the second disc, alongside with The Albatross, I Hate it Here and The Black Dog.

In the chaotic mess of properly getting to know 31 songs, I vastly overlooked Guilty as Sin in the main album, that is in the upper half for me. Florida is still my favorite song but Who's Afraid is a close second. Other great tracks are Smallest Man and But Daddy I Love him. The title track is great but I realized the lyrics annoy me for whatever reason, too personal with specific references. Maybe it's the knowledge that it was for a rebound guy with whom the fling expired long before she even had a chance to record the song  talking of personal specific lyrics, I don't know why I accept "we danced around the kitchen in the refrigerator's light" but not "You smoked, then ate seven baras of chocolate, we declared Charlie Puth should be a bigger artist". It's something untangible related to the feel of the song I guess.

[KevShmev]

But Daddy I Love Him is the one song here that I feel should have recorded with her live band and nothing else (credits show it was recorded with both live instruments and programmed ones).  The programmed effects in between the vocals in the chorus are a bit bothersome.  That should have been a straight rock song with her band.  I still like the song, but that's the one song where I feel the production lets it down a little.

I do feel like the run of songs from Fresh Out the Slammer through Who's Afraid... is THE best stretch on the album.  I hum "Florida!" to myself at least once a day.   And yeah, Guilty as Sin went from being a bit of a blur at first to a major standout.

I did see that she played Peter yesterday, which was great to see.   That is still my favorite song from this, with Who's Afraid of Little Old Me, My Boy Only Breaks His Favorite Toys, How Did It End?, The Prophecy, Guilty as Sin, I Hate It Here and So Long, London all on my list of next tier favorites.  Cassandra has been making a major charge lately, to where that could be one of my top favorites here soon.

The Black Dog is still a bit of a struggle for me.  I like it, but it's not one I ever seek out on its own to hear. 

[TheBarstoolWarrior]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxrwjJHXPlQ

Interesting take on how a lot of her songs are made. Reminds me of a discussion we had a while back on how much of the end product is really from the stroke of her pen.

[KevShmev]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxrwjJHXPlQ

Interesting take on how a lot of her songs are made.

It's not a take, it's misleading information.  Sad too, because Beato used to create good content, but now he is into spreading misinformation and coming off like an old man who is mad than anyone is being compared to his beloved Beatles.  I guess when you were a failure in the industry, you eventually get off on trying to denigrate one of the most successful songwriters of the last 60+ years.

(I saw it earlier and rolled my eyes at it already)

And before anyone rolls their eyes at me and thinks I am just being a defensive Swiftie, Beato has been complimentary of Swift's songwriting, but in the video he flat out lied and said he didn't know anything about her.  That is a lie.  He cannot be taken seriously.  Bummer, because I used to be a fan of his.

[TheBarstoolWarrior]

It's not a take, it's misleading information.  Sad too, because Beato used to create good content, but now he is into spreading misinformation and coming off like an old man who is mad than anyone is being compared to his beloved Beatles.  I guess when you were a failure in the industry, you eventually get off on trying to denigrate one of the most successful songwriters of the last 60+ years.

(I saw it earlier and rolled my eyes at it already)

What did he say that constitutes misinformation?

[KevShmev]

What did he say that constitutes misinformation?

He was clever and strongly implied it rather than directly saying it, but he all but said that her co-writers do all of the heavy lifting in her songs (untrue) and that what she does contribute is always over the top of what someone else wrote first (this constitutes a very small percentage of her history, if one does their research).  He conveniently ignored the 75+ songs she has written by herself over the years.

That is all I will say on this since I know this forum is loaded with people ready to believe anything negative about her and will merely roll their eyes at any facts I present (or simply ignore them), so I am not going to keep pissing into the wind.  Believe his misinformation if you want, but it won't make a bit of difference as she continues to rule the music world. 

[TheBarstoolWarrior]

He was clever and strongly implied it rather than directly saying it, but he all but said that her co-writers do all of the heavy lifting in her songs (untrue) and that what she does contribute is always over the top of what someone else wrote first (this constitutes a very small percentage of her history, if one does their research).  He conveniently ignored the 75+ songs she has written by herself over the years.

That is all I will say on this since I know this forum is loaded with people ready to believe anything negative about her and will merely roll their eyes at any facts I present (or simply ignore them), so I am not going to keep pissing into the wind.  Believe his misinformation if you want, but it won't make a bit of difference as she continues to rule the music world. 

I don't think he was intending to make any difference in her success or spreading misinformation. Putting aside his opinion and the real driving force behind his video which is his conviction that the Beatles songwriting is just superior to hers (I probably tend to agree with him but I am really not a huge fan of either), what he says about pop music sausage creation shouldn't be outright dismissed because of how one feels about Taylor Swift.

I think he is right in his assessment of how pop music tends to be produced these days and he is right that other people in the room are doing way more than consumers realize. That doesn't diminish her tremendous success but I could see why someone who thought all the output is all her and 'she's the songwriter' might get defensive. What Rick describes is not a unique or new arrangement in popular music...extremely talented producers do heavy lifting all of the time. I see no reason why what he said about this sample of her music - that her output is a sum of musical contributions that go beyond her alone - must be false given the prevalence of these artist-producer relationships.

Some things in the music industry can be funny in. I never appreciated there was this whole army of talented women behind so many timeless songs until I saw 20 Feet From Stardom. When I listen to Elvis only later did I realize he didn't write his own songs; but it doesn't diminish him. Outside of music, I understand that when I read an opinion attributed to Justice XXX that there was more than likely a first draft written by very talented law clerks whose names few people know. When I read an equity research report I know that the analyst whose name appears on the report gets the credit, but he has a bunch of co-workers creating the models and writing the draft. I understand why accepting some of what Rick says could be upsetting but it doesn't have to be.

[Dream Team]

Unless anyone is sitting in the same room when the songs are being written ( this applies to ANY band) then everyone is talking out their arse when it comes to who did what.

[KevShmev]

Yep, and literally everyone who has been in a room with her during the songwriting process (or was there when she brought a finished song to be produced/recorded) has raved about what a great songwriter she is (look it up), so I will take their word for it.

[HOF]

I don't think he was intending to make any difference in her success or spreading misinformation. Putting aside his opinion and the real driving force behind his video which is his conviction that the Beatles songwriting is just superior to hers (I probably tend to agree with him but I am really not a huge fan of either), what he says about pop music sausage creation shouldn't be outright dismissed because of how one feels about Taylor Swift.

I think he is right in his assessment of how pop music tends to be produced these days and he is right that other people in the room are doing way more than consumers realize. That doesn't diminish her tremendous success but I could see why someone who thought all the output is all her and 'she's the songwriter' might get defensive. What Rick describes is not a unique or new arrangement in popular music...extremely talented producers do heavy lifting all of the time. I see no reason why what he said about this sample of her music - that her output is a sum of musical contributions that go beyond her alone - must be false given the prevalence of these artist-producer relationships.

Some things in the music industry can be funny in. I never appreciated there was this whole army of talented women behind so many timeless songs until I saw 20 Feet From Stardom. When I listen to Elvis only later did I realize he didn't write his own songs; but it doesn't diminish him. Outside of music, I understand that when I read an opinion attributed to Justice XXX that there was more than likely a first draft written by very talented law clerks whose names few people know. When I read an equity research report I know that the analyst whose name appears on the report gets the credit, but he has a bunch of co-workers creating the models and writing the draft. I understand why accepting some of what Rick says could be upsetting but it doesn't have to be.

It's funny, because I watched a little bit of that Beatles thing that Peter Jackson did a couple years back, and there were like 15 people in the room when The Beatles were writing those songs in that movie.

I kid, and I know it wasn't the same thing Beato is talking about, but the idea of producers and executives having input into the creative process for artists isn't anything new. I think it's all probably just done a bit more to the nth degree these days (not necessarily for Taylor, just in general).

[The Realm]

A really interesting take by Beato and I am not really sure why he felt the need to do this. I guess it was to defend The Beatles?

I think his view here is very biased and really doesn't give Taylor enough or any credit. Her lyrics and storytelling, combined with her melodies are what makes all her songs what they are whether she had co-writers or not. To me, this means everything. I have written 100s of riffs etc on the guitar over the years but not many 'good melodies and lyrics' over the top of these riffs or as Beato calls them 'loops'. She has a gift and of course Lennon/McCartney also did.

[Zantera]

I always thought artists who used a ton of outside songwriters was a big turnoff no matter what artist we're talking about (even if it applies to Taylor in this case). It really blurs the lines for me and you can obviously enjoy the music as you would enjoy any other music but when it comes to who deserves credit for what it becomes more of a grey area. I watched Beato's video and I don't even get why people are so defensive about it, sure he had some points that were maybe negative towards Taylor but I don't think he said anything that came off as slanderous or anything. The guy loves The Beatles and for whatever reason he felt he needed to make a point about that. I think it's a fair point to suggest that if you are working with outside people on every album there's surely ideas floating around before she even gets to the stage of making another album. Some of those guys she is working with are literally spitting out ideas daily.

[Skeever]

I watched Beato's video and I don't even get why people are so defensive about it, sure he had some points that were maybe negative towards Taylor but I don't think he said anything that came off as slanderous or anything.

Because for some reason nobody can just be normal about Taylor Swift. This is why the whole Swifty psychosis is such a thing to encounter.

[KevShmev]

There are certainly some overzeaous Swift fans, but, by and large, they are no worse than fans of just about any other artist; there are just many more of them.

Let's put it this way: if Beato had made a video about Dream Theater and misrepresented how they write songs and applied the worst stereotypes to them from their main genre ("great chops, but they can't write a good song"), are you going to tell me with a straight face that fans here wouldn't be criticizing him for it and supporting Dream Theater with actual facts?  Of course they would.  Fan is short for fanatic for a reason.

Also, while some might find the average Swift fan to be a bit too "defensive" or fanatical, the other side is way worse.  Go look at the Apple Music Twitter/X account. They are currently doing a top 100 album countdown, and before a Swift album was even listed, nearly every time an album was listed, people were flipping out in the comments about the inevitable Swift album that would be featured being higher than this album or that album.  She wasn't even being featured or talked about yet and people were already flipping out about her.  That is how unhinged the haters are these days.  And there are many of them too.

[soupytwist]

A really interesting take by Beato and I am not really sure why he felt the need to do this. I guess it was to defend The Beatles?

From what exactly?

[Zantera]

That's the catch 22 of anything popular is that when someone or something becomes so huge and you can't escape hearing about it constantly, the backlash follows. While I agree there are some insane people carrying a grudge for silly reasons and taking the hate to the extreme, those people are born out of the other polar opposite of the crazy Swifties who think she hasn't made an album that's worse than a 9.5/10. But you get those people with anything that dominates the zeitgeist. Look at how Star Wars went from a beloved childhood franchise for many people to something you can't bring up in conversation anymore because someone loses their mind about how they ruined it. Game of Thrones is another example of something that was touted as the greatest thing presented to us since sliced bread, but when the backlash came it came hard.

Personally I think it's fair to have the argument about how much an artist is carried by external songwriters if they use them. That's not to say the artist themselves don't contribute anything. But you would imagine someone like Taylor keeps going back to these songwriters for a reason right? The truth probably lies somewhere between the polar opposites of "Taylor doesn't do anything and the songwriters make the magic happen" and "The other guys are just sitting around the studio making coffee while she makes history". I'm no expert by any means but I've heard several Taylor songs that sound just like any other boring (in my opinion) radio pop and weirdly enough some of her co-songwriters have been behind similar songs by other artists so there's some connective tissue there. I'd be curious to hear an album made entirely by her so that I could see the real talent behind the hype not blurred by 10 other songwriters but as long as she keeps working with these boring people like Jack Hackonoff the result will still be fairly uninteresting to me.

Regarding the DT fans I think some might defend them in a similar situation but fanbases are different. I feel like a lot of DT fans are probably okay with DT having a stamp of not being the best songwriters or whatever, they might be into DT for the musicianship and interesting song structures. Not strong vocal hooks or radio friendliness. Similar to how I think Taylor fans would be more relaxed about any criticism towards her music being lackluster. It's when people say anything negative about her songwriting that the fans seem to lose their minds, similar to how I guess some DT fans would lose their minds if they heard someone saying the guys can't play their instruments.

[KevShmev]

Also, with the regards to the Beatles, a band I love, it has been chatted about before that credit when it comes to songwriting was much different back then now it is now.  If the Beatles had existed in the 2010s, how many of their songs would have George Martin listed as a co-writer? Many of them, IIRC.  But it was different back then.  Fast forward to now, yes, Swift worked with Max Martin and Shellbeck on three albums from 2012 to 2017 (19 of the 44 songs from those proper albums), but Martin is one of those people who will not produce your song unless he also receives a co-writing credit.  Take her song Blank Space.  If you listen to the demo of it she played for them in the studio on the guitar, the melodies, arrangement and bulk of the lyrics were all in place, yet Martin and Shellbeck received co-writing credits. Why?  Because they produced it and poppified it.  To be fair, she probably worked with them to maximize the pop qualities and ensure that her transition from country to pop was a success, but that's an example of a song where she didn't need anyone else to write the song.  And to their credit, Martin and Shellbeck produced it in a way that ensure it would be huge, and it was, but there is obviously a difference between writing a song and producing a song. 

[Lonk]

I'm not a Swift fan by any means. I've given her music plenty of chances and it's just not for me. With that said, that video by Rick screams "old man yelling at clouds".

[TheHoveringSojourn808]

If he thinks the Beatles are the best thing ever, he can't be that good of a critic, lol

[Skeever]

There are certainly some overzeaous Swift fans, but, by and large, they are no worse than fans of just about any other artist; there are just many more of them.

Let's put it this way: if Beato had made a video about Dream Theater and misrepresented how they write songs and applied the worst stereotypes to them from their main genre ("great chops, but they can't write a good song"), are you going to tell me with a straight face that fans here wouldn't be criticizing him for it and supporting Dream Theater with actual facts?  Of course they would.  Fan is short for fanatic for a reason.

Also, while some might find the average Swift fan to be a bit too "defensive" or fanatical, the other side is way worse.  Go look at the Apple Music Twitter/X account. They are currently doing a top 100 album countdown, and before a Swift album was even listed, nearly every time an album was listed, people were flipping out in the comments about the inevitable Swift album that would be featured being higher than this album or that album.  She wasn't even being featured or talked about yet and people were already flipping out about her.  That is how unhinged the haters are these days.  And there are many of them too.

That would be a valid criticism of DT to make, and fans here would be wrong to get defensive about it too.

As far as what Beato said about Taylor... I don't know or claim to know everything about how she makes music. But I think Beato's generally making valid criticisms also. I think Taylor's seeming lack of artistic growth over the last few years has contrasted greatly with the types of things people say about her. Stadler has compared her to The Boss, Bob Dylan, The Beatles, etc... but this is nothing like that. She doesn't have a Sgt. Peppers. She doesn't have a Born in the USA. She doesn't have a Pet Sounds. She doesn't have a Bob Dylan "going electric", changing the music world, then going on a weirdo isolated journey through Americana, before coming out of that period of supposed domestic bliss divorced with Blood on the Tracks. If Taytay wants to be make lasting art, at some point she is going to have to start doing something other than endlessly dredging up her past, both in terms of these self-important reissues as well as new music that doesn't seem to demonstrate any personal, musical, or artistic growth at all.

[Stadler]

I don't think he was intending to make any difference in her success or spreading misinformation. Putting aside his opinion and the real driving force behind his video which is his conviction that the Beatles songwriting is just superior to hers (I probably tend to agree with him but I am really not a huge fan of either), what he says about pop music sausage creation shouldn't be outright dismissed because of how one feels about Taylor Swift.

I think he is right in his assessment of how pop music tends to be produced these days and he is right that other people in the room are doing way more than consumers realize. That doesn't diminish her tremendous success but I could see why someone who thought all the output is all her and 'she's the songwriter' might get defensive. What Rick describes is not a unique or new arrangement in popular music...extremely talented producers do heavy lifting all of the time. I see no reason why what he said about this sample of her music - that her output is a sum of musical contributions that go beyond her alone - must be false given the prevalence of these artist-producer relationships.

Some things in the music industry can be funny in. I never appreciated there was this whole army of talented women behind so many timeless songs until I saw 20 Feet From Stardom. When I listen to Elvis only later did I realize he didn't write his own songs; but it doesn't diminish him. Outside of music, I understand that when I read an opinion attributed to Justice XXX that there was more than likely a first draft written by very talented law clerks whose names few people know. When I read an equity research report I know that the analyst whose name appears on the report gets the credit, but he has a bunch of co-workers creating the models and writing the draft. I understand why accepting some of what Rick says could be upsetting but it doesn't have to be.

But don't fall victim to the fallacy that seems so prevalent these days (I can point to about four examples in P/R alone), whereby a generality about a meaningful segment of a population is automatically applied to ONE MEMBER of the population as actionable fact. 

She may in fact be the exception that proves the rule for all I know, but that's a difference conversation.  Some of you talk about this stuff like it's an indictment of her specifically when in fact it's a facet of music that many of us have loved for decades (going back to the 50s).  Elvis; Sinatra; Aretha, Tina... do they now suck because they had "other people in the room"?!?  Of course not. 

Beato is good, and I like a lot of his stuff, but a constant thread from day one with him is that his videos are a revenue stream for him, and he's got to do what he's got to do to get eyeballs.  He is also one of the more vocal critics of people like Don Henley, who protect their copyrights; why? Because it impacts Rick Beato's revenue stream.  I'll watch his video, eventually, but while I'm a huge Beatles fan, it's a bit unrealistic to use Paul Fucking McCartney as the standard.  Bob Dylan and Bruce Springsteen both fail using that standard; does that call into question THEIR writing abilities?  Of course not; it's a meaningless standard at the end of the day.

(And I am, for the time being, staying away from the the fact that we seem to be continually comparing Taylor Swift - a female in the height of her career - with the standard of MALES who have been doing this for the better part of a HALF OF A CENTURY.  If I'm Taylor, I'm like "fuck off, you're comparing me to PAUL MCCARTNEY; I win by default.").

[KevShmev]

Yep, she doesn't have a Born in the USA or a Pet Sounds; she has a 1989 and a Folklore (both considered radical departures at the time).

This is the 19th year of her professional career...

What did Springsteen release in his 19th year as a professional?  Answer: nothing.

What did the Beach Boys release in their 19th year as a professional band?  I looked it up; they released an album that was considered the low point of their professional career.

I'd saying she's doing just fine, as she just released an album that is wildly popular with fans (the streaming numbers and sales would have dropped off badly already if it was the bad album some think it is) and, despite a few negative ones, has gotten very good reviews overall (if that matters). 

[MirrorMask]

What did Springsteen release in his 19th year as a professional?  Answer: nothing.

Well, depending on where you start to count, his debut album was in 1973, 19 years later makes it 1992, the release of Human Touch and Lucky Town.

Both are among the least favorite of his albums among the fanbase, and the E-Street Band was disbanded some years before, but he still was out there, that's better than nothing 

I guess that the real point in Taylor's favor that almost 20 years in, she's at her very peak. If we still keep Bruce as reference, he commercially peaked in 1984 - 1987 and in his 19 year, he was already "winding down" and it wouldn't be until 1999 with the E-Street Band reunion that fortunes would start to go up again. I guess Taylor's worst moment was just keeping quiet one year before releasing Reputation.

[TheHoveringSojourn808]

Did anyone see the New York Times piece that was trying to analyze her success and place it in context against other huge chart records and moments? It had a lot of interesting points to be made about how comparing things like The Beatles to TS can be daunting, if not outright impossible because of how much things have changed. For example, in the 1960s "Record Sales" were just that, but since the early 2000s "Record Sales" also include album streams, and other things. Additionally, in the Beatles' day, "Charting Singles" had to be released as singles to be considered, where today, that is not the case. Without making a judgement about whether these are good or bad things I think we could agree trying to compare some of this stuff is purely for speculation and shooting the shit and not really anything academic.

Here is the article, FWIW https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/05/17/arts/music/taylor-swift-sales-tours-grammys.html?searchResultPosition=1

[KevShmev]

No, no, 1991 was his 19th year, just like 1993 would have been his 21st year.

This is Swift's 19th year, but it's been 18 years since her debut (2006). 

Semantics, I know, but I worded it that way as to be clearer and not cause confusion, which clearly worked. 

But, to circle back to the above, if she is already been held to the standard of McCartney, Dylan, Bruce, etc., like Bill said, she has already won.

[KevShmev]

Comparing chart success of current stars to those of the past is an exercise in futility. Thanks to streaming and other factors, the way the charts are calculated now is so different than how they used to be; it feels like apples and oranges. I get that it can be fun, though.

Honestly though, it almost feels pointless to compare the success of anyone to the Beatles.  They were so huge and did it all in such a short span of time that it boggles the mind.  Swift is now second all-time in most cumulative weeks at number 1 on the Billboard 200 (having an album at number 1), and she is still miles behind the Beatles. 

Weeks at
number one   Artist   
132   The Beatles   
73   Taylor Swift   
67   Elvis Presley
52   Garth Brooks   
51   Michael Jackson   
46   Whitney Houston
46 The Kingston Trio   
40   Adele   
39   Elton John   
38   Fleetwood Mac   
38 The Rolling Stones   
37   Harry Belafonte   
37 The Monkees   

[Stadler]

I always thought artists who used a ton of outside songwriters was a big turnoff no matter what artist we're talking about (even if it applies to Taylor in this case). It really blurs the lines for me and you can obviously enjoy the music as you would enjoy any other music but when it comes to who deserves credit for what it becomes more of a grey area. I watched Beato's video and I don't even get why people are so defensive about it, sure he had some points that were maybe negative towards Taylor but I don't think he said anything that came off as slanderous or anything. The guy loves The Beatles and for whatever reason he felt he needed to make a point about that. I think it's a fair point to suggest that if you are working with outside people on every album there's surely ideas floating around before she even gets to the stage of making another album. Some of those guys she is working with are literally spitting out ideas daily.

I think the point is that even in the case of the so-called "pure" creators, there is always influence.   Someone mentioned the Let It Be film (the reference was to Peter Jackson, but it's just as clear in the original film), but there it's pretty clear that these artists are sponges.  They take influence and input from wherever it comes from.   Does it really matter that George Harrison wrote most of "Octopus' Garden" (and later, "It Don't Come Easy")?    Does it really matter that many of John's songs are Ringo-isms set to music ("Eight Days A Week")?   Or cobbled from a poster ("Being For The Benefit Of Mr. Kite")?

You watch those documentary-type films and it's amazing to me how often things are random; "Jojo left his home in Tuscon Arizona" is a completely random phrasing, the location having changed several times during the early writing.  It's clear from the extant record that there is no specific meaning to the "Tucson" reference.   

Jon Anderson is another one; are his creations diminished because he had four of the greatest musicians in the world behind him as he mouthed out the changes on songs like "Going For The One" and "Time And A Word"? 

Ozzy is a third; Eddie Trunk was all up in arms that Howard Stern credited Ozzy with writing songs on the early solo material; we all know Bob Daisley had a big hand in the lyrics (Geezer did most of the lyrics in the Ozzy-years of Sabbath) but that doesn't mean he wasn't there, he wasn't the catalyst, or that he didn't have final say when it came to issues in dispute. 

I think we overestimate the simplicity and the "black and whiteness" of the creative process.  When money is involved, it's easy to do.

[TheHoveringSojourn808]

Another thing was the competition being much scarcer in 1964 lol. The Beatles blew up in an environment where there were like 3 other bands even comparable to what they were doing (and perhaps even less in the second half of their career). In the modern age Taylor Swift is competing with like 200 other artists you could reasonably compare her to (as far as genre/market/etc)