>>929 I know this is ancient kopipe, but it makes the mistake of assuming the ideal goal that rock music strives for is to be regarded as "a serious art" when it's actually foundationally about the opposite - letting your primal self take over and losing yourself in the moment, going wild and getting fucked up. Since the days of the Beatles, other music styles have appeared for this purpose, whether it was disco or house or trance or dubstep or whatever, and in all cases it's a bit silly to view them as the "serious art" efforts they were not intended as, no matter how timeless a tune it might be.

Saying that, the Beatles really did change a lot with their later albums, from a young band playing rhythm 'n' blues rockers to opening their third eyes and making double albums overloaded with musical ideas. They opened the door (no pun intended) for that shift to AOR that desolated the 70s - after Sgt. Peppers (and also Pet Sounds by the Beach Boys) suddenly everyone wanted to make flabby overwrought timeless albums for the critics. And if that never happened, there'd have been nothing to burn down when the punks came along to return to the spirit of rock 'n' roll. And without that dying breath that punk brought, we wouldn't have got to the REAL interesting stuff the post-punk scene brought to the table.