Well in the definition of a musician according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary
I brought this because I want to explore the ideas/concepts behind what a musician is. Performers like you mentioned Lady Gaga, Beyonce, and Rihanna do fall under the category of being a musician mainly due to the fact they sing music (and Lady Gaga has used the piano before in her music, but I don't see her playing the drums, guitar, etc.). But understand this, by definition those three singers are musician, but should they be considered a greater musician then say the Beatles or compete in that sense against each other?
Well in the definition itself, to write music does not mean create lyrics to your favorite song, it means writing dots on a stanza.
Like this. Hence where the music actually starts.
But let me place the definition of music here
So many singers can definitely be accredited as a musician. From my perspective since I am entitled to my own opinion, a musician who not only sings but can also create the pieces of music from putting the sounds/rhythms together to make a piece of music in my eyes is a more valued musician then say the artists you listed. Well actually I agree with my previous point that a musician can just be a singer, but i give a higher priority to those who can produce ie. write out the music stanza and all plus perform the actual music picking up their instruments and playing it.
The Beatles in fact could sing, write, and perform musical instruments to their actual songs. Solo artists today can maybe play one instrument while singing but with a band like the Beatles they could do all of the above points made in the definition of a musician.
Also I cannot agree with even declaring the Beatles overrated. I can assume we are posters under the age of 40 (I'm not 40 or else I wouldn't be wasting my time on a pop music forum lol), so from my standpoint I cannot have judged any standpoint of the Beatles phenomenon since it was in fact before our existence their impact onto the world of music. All I can do is give respect to the phenomenon of the Beatles because whatever it was that people saw in their music at the time, it drove people to set interest into it. Millions upon millions of people mind you
Their sound drove the music industry hard into Rock n Roll more then any other music act existing. No other artist to date has taken the world by storm and made about every single person love the artists music like the Beatles. I mean some artists have definitely come close and now a days song trends happen in the music industry, but nothing to the equivalent of a phenomenon the Beatles had.
"If there wasn't a damn unit on the Beatles that is required for History + Music class,
they wouldn't even be half as relevant as they are now."
If you knew anything about the music industry and the history of music you know the bolded here is a darn lie.
"People accredit The Beatles with literally everything. They "changed" the face of music. Good for them"
Well if another musical act literally moves the music of the times in an entire new direction so that everyone would have their music, then that act deserves to have credit for making a new impact in the world of music. For now since the world of music has yet to have as big of a phenomenon as The Beatles, one should note they had impact and not question it.
But I'm one poster. If multiple sources among millions of sources have given props to the Beatles, it might be time to check one's self if one cannot understand the impact of the Beatles.
Lyrics really don't have much with being a musician, but its more with the fact the artists they mentioned only do one aspect of being a musician, but those 3 artists could be more then just a performer and craft their own works from the notes on the page to performing the song with the instruments (aside from vocals) to perform the music they created