Reasons Judas Priest is Better Than the BeatlesI have always considered The Beatles to be the second most overrated band in rock; they were only active for ten years, their music was really not anything special, John Lennon was a boring vocalist, and also a terrible person.
I like The Beatles, but they’re super overrated.
Judas Priest does literally everything better.
The Top Ten
True, Halford's vocal ability is better. But I don't think it's entirely fair to compare a metal band to a pop rock band. Both bands were going for different sounds.
Saying John Lennon is better than Rob Halford is like saying having AIDS and Ebola at the same time is better than the common cold.
Saying Lennon is better than Halford is like saying LuLu by Metallica is better than Paranoid by Black Sabbath.
Objectively this item is true but people may prefer one over another
Yep, not even a real competition. Rob is also better than Paul.
Yes, true - Judas Priest can play all The Beatles songs but not vice versa. Musically, the Beatles songs are for 7-11 year olds. They actually have many children songs, if you think about it.
@Metal_Treasure-Yep. Yellow Submarine is mostly a children's song (and the official song to the film Yellow Submarine, a children's movie).
Listen to Electric Eye and then listen to Yellow Submarine. Listen to The Sentinel and then listen to Hey Jude.
The Beatles aren’t anything special; Judas Priest is a far more skilled band, in every aspect.
Yeah, I agree. The Beatles were great for their time, but I think Judas Priest definitely were well ahead.
These reasons apply to Iron Maiden as well, I’ll probably do a list on that next.
The Beatles managed to stay active for ten years and record 13 studio albums, but a lot of their music was filler. The majority of their songs are under three minutes.
Judas Priest has managed to stay active for 48 years and has 17 studio albums.
Judas Priest has only slightly more because Judas Priest works harder than the Beatles, plus their music is less filler, more good, genuine songs.
Yeah, I know they worked really hard in the later albums, but Priest worked harder throughout their entire career.
Fair point there, but of course there are some great bands that barely lasted. Motorhead, for example.
Beatles- thirteen year life span
Priest- Almost 50 years and still trucking.
Absolutely! This doesn't even need a discussion. The best guitar solo by the Beatles is played by Eric Clapton, who isn't a band member.
Listen to Here Comes The Sun and then listen to Beyond The Realms Of Death. PRIEST HAS BETTER GUITAR WORK.
I’m a huge Judas Priest fan, and I’ve seen my fair share of bad Judas Priest fans.
One YouTube user who I see in the comments section of a lot of videos related or pertaining to Judas Priest is an elitist Judas Priest fanboy who has an incessant need to say Judas Priest is amazing and Iron Maiden sucks, when really the bands are just equally amazing bands overall.
Even he can’t hold a candle to The Beatles’ fanbase.
If you say anything even slightly critical or negative of The Beatles, it’s seen as blasphemy by their fans; you’re seen as an outcast with no taste in music, when really you just have the stones to criticize a band as well known and loved as The Beatles.
You would never see Judas Priest fans doing that. I’ve never seen Judas Priest fans get that bad, and almost every fan of The Beatles I’ve seen on this site, or elsewhere on the internet is like this. I’ve never even seen a Judas Priest elitist fanboy get that bad, and I’ve seen a ...more
"You would never see Judas Priest fans doing that", well, except for you of course.
Every fasnbase has its bad side.
I have to disagree here. Sure Judas Priest have some variety, but the Beatles have dived into genres such as Psychedelic, Rock n Roll, Progressive rock, Folk, Hard Rock (Helter Skelter), whatever you would call Revolution 9. The band does have some serious variety especially in their later albums that is hard to deny.
Judas Priest has hard rock, heavy metal, glam metal, pure metal, thrash metal, progressive metal, etc. Priest is more varied, sorry to disagree.
Same as CJ I don't think this is true
Not all of the Beatles’s music sound the same; but some of it does. Judas Priest has far more variety; you can’t even try to deny that.
Everything from Hard Rock (Rocka Rolla) to Glam Metal (Turbo) to Pure Metal (Painkiller)
I don't think The Beatles had a bad album. They had mediocre albums but nothing bad. Of course that's subjective though
The Beatles never really had a "bad" album.
16 of Judas Priest’s albums are good.
10-12 of The Beatles’ were good.
16/17 is better than 11/13
I thought your comment was you getting your time signatures wrong for a second.
The Beatles definitely earnt it. They changed music completely and inspired many artists
The Beatles debatably earned their iconic status; Judas Priest undeniably did.
Judas Priest worked much harder than the Beatles to earn being called one of the best metal bands of all time; the Beatles aren’t good enough. They’re just not that good, there’s nothing special about them, if you really think about it.
I’m ready for the hate; bring it on.
I definitely agree that they had a special place and were very influential, but Priest is a much more unique band in my opinion. No other band around the time Priest firmed was like them; you can find a lot of similarities between The Beatles, Queen, Led Zeppelin, etc.
This reason has less to do with the band’s music and more to do with the members themselves; John Lennon was a terrible person.
He abused his wife and child, both emotionally and physically, he cheated on his wife LITERALLY IN THE NEXT ROOM, and many other things.
You’d never see a member of Judas Priest doing that.
John Lennon wasn't a good person but he had an interesting personality which made his songs more interesting in my opinion
Not really much of a reason but whatever.