If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salon)   Paul was the cute Beatle, George was the quiet one, Ringo was the funny one, John was the homophobic anti-Semitic douche, Yoko coulda taken a couple bullets for John, and the Stones were better anyway   (salon.com) divider line 84
    More: Obvious, Beatles, Mick Jagger, History of Rock and Roll, rocks, John Lennon, Paul McCartney  
•       •       •

3339 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 25 Sep 2013 at 9:44 AM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



84 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-09-25 09:49:15 AM
I think we're supposed to never say anything remotely negative about a dead musician, ever.  Imagine.
 
2013-09-25 09:57:36 AM
My mother liked the Beatles, HATED the Rolling Stones. Guess who I liked better?

/Listen to the Rolling Stones' cover of the Fab Four's "I Wanna Be Your Man"
 
2013-09-25 10:08:28 AM
The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money
 
2013-09-25 10:11:32 AM
And The Who was better than both of them. And the Small Faces was seriously underrated.
 
2013-09-25 10:25:01 AM
Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.
 
2013-09-25 10:27:12 AM

Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money


IntertubeUser: Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.


I like you guys.
 
2013-09-25 10:27:56 AM
"Beatles vs. Stones": What fueled rock's greatest rivalry

$
 
2013-09-25 10:30:20 AM

Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money


They also invented metal, which makes then first grindcore band
 
2013-09-25 10:30:59 AM

LewDux: Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money

They also invented metal, which makes then first grindcore band


Wait, Who?
 
2013-09-25 10:31:28 AM
This thread is going to be smugtrolldouchetastic.
*gets popcorn*
 
2013-09-25 10:32:27 AM
I can't get enough of this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miUdjQ8zs8Q
 
2013-09-25 10:36:58 AM
The Stones are better in some ways, but out of their 5,000 songs I probably only want to listen to about 10 of them.
 
2013-09-25 10:39:44 AM
I love both bands but I have to give the edge to The Beatles because of their greater range. I can listen to their whole catalog and only skip a few song. The Stones are fun, but I don't really need to listen to them for more than an hour.
 
2013-09-25 10:41:36 AM

IntertubeUser: Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.


Yea, but Ringo was great in Shining Time Station.
 
2013-09-25 10:46:09 AM

LewDux: "Beatles vs. Stones": What fueled rock's greatest rivalry

$

£

/ftfy
 
2013-09-25 10:50:03 AM
I prefer classic Stones to classic Beatles. But the Beatles went out on top. The Stones have been coasting on fumes for literally decades.
 
2013-09-25 10:50:29 AM
Which makes his bunning of Andy Warhol in front of Abby Hoffman even more confusing.
 
2013-09-25 11:00:45 AM
"Meanwhile, Mick Jagger passively encouraged the Beatles to sign with Allen Klein, knowing all too well that he was a thief."

This is the opposite of everything else I've read. From what I've heard, Klein was actively pursuing the Beatles, and while Paul wanted to hire his future father-in-law Lee Eastman, John Lennon convinced Ringo & George that Allan Klein was the guy for the job. When Mick heard about this, he called Lennon and told him that hiring Klein would be "the biggest mistake of his life".
 
2013-09-25 11:16:50 AM

GibbyTheMole: "Meanwhile, Mick Jagger passively encouraged the Beatles to sign with Allen Klein, knowing all too well that he was a thief."

This is the opposite of everything else I've read. From what I've heard, Klein was actively pursuing the Beatles, and while Paul wanted to hire his future father-in-law Lee Eastman, John Lennon convinced Ringo & George that Allan Klein was the guy for the job. When Mick heard about this, he called Lennon and told him that hiring Klein would be "the biggest mistake of his life".


That's pretty much the version via both Philip Norman's and Hunter Davies' books. Apparently Klein's mismanagement/theft of their funds is one of the things that prompted McCartney to start buying up the rights to a lot of their songs, which angered John when he found out about it and added fuel to the fire that ended with their breaking up.
 
2013-09-25 11:17:02 AM
The Rutles beat them all
 
2013-09-25 11:18:34 AM
I liked Ringo (as the Pope, wearing cowboy boots) in Lisztomania. Did they ever out that out on modern media? I have a VHS copy somewhere.
 
2013-09-25 11:25:12 AM

SlagginOff: I love both bands but I have to give the edge to The Beatles because of their greater range. I can listen to their whole catalog and only skip a few song. The Stones are fun, but I don't really need to listen to them for more than an hour.


^^^THIS^^^^

Plus, who didn't know John was a talented hypocritical dickface?  It's pretty common knowledge he hid his first wife, shunned his kid Julian, and hooked up with a weird talentless hack who apparently knew how to get him off better than his wife.
 
2013-09-25 11:27:14 AM

whither_apophis: The Rutles Colon beat them all

 
2013-09-25 11:29:54 AM

LewDux: LewDux: Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money

They also invented metal, which makes then first grindcore band

Wait, Who?


The band onstage.
 
2013-09-25 11:31:35 AM
Ringo is/was the Butt-Ugly Beatle.
 
2013-09-25 11:32:30 AM

fickenchucker: SlagginOff: I love both bands but I have to give the edge to The Beatles because of their greater range. I can listen to their whole catalog and only skip a few song. The Stones are fun, but I don't really need to listen to them for more than an hour.

^^^THIS^^^^

Plus, who didn't know John was a talented hypocritical dickface?  It's pretty common knowledge he hid his first wife, shunned his kid Julian, and hooked up with a weird talentless hack who apparently knew how to get him off better than his wife.


For me, the Stones = Mick Taylor. I can listen to Stones' from that era all the time, and the Brian Jones stuff as well. Later efforts sound tired to me and they REALLY should have retired ages ago. Like, back in 1977 when Lester Banks said they should retire and save us all a lot of embarrassment.

Magical Mystery Tour is an album I'll never get tired of. Yeah, even over Sgt. Pepper. Sue me.
 
2013-09-25 11:33:02 AM

someonelse: I prefer classic Stones to classic Beatles. But the Beatles went out on top. The Stones have been coasting on fumes for literally decades.


IMO, "Voodoo Lounge" is proof that the Stones are far past their prime.
 
2013-09-25 11:37:49 AM

fickenchucker: SlagginOff: I love both bands but I have to give the edge to The Beatles because of their greater range. I can listen to their whole catalog and only skip a few song. The Stones are fun, but I don't really need to listen to them for more than an hour.

^^^THIS^^^^

Plus, who didn't know John was a talented hypocritical dickface?  It's pretty common knowledge he hid his first wife, shunned his kid Julian, and hooked up with a weird talentless hack who apparently knew how to get him off better than his wife.


I read Pam's (John's first wife) autobiography.  She claims he only hit her once and that was in high school long before they got married.  She broke up with him for it and it took John a great deal of time and energy to convince her to go back out with him.  She claims he never hit her again.

Now as to him hitting Yoko I can't profess knowledge nor would I blame him if he did.
 
2013-09-25 11:43:55 AM
Stones got good about the time the Beatles broke up.
For a little while.
 
2013-09-25 11:44:13 AM

Tyrone Slothrop: LewDux: LewDux: Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money

They also invented metal, which makes then first grindcore band

Wait, Who?

The band onstage.


The Band onstage? Did they play Cripple Creek yet?
 
2013-09-25 11:47:55 AM

smimmy: fickenchucker: SlagginOff: I love both bands but I have to give the edge to The Beatles because of their greater range. I can listen to their whole catalog and only skip a few song. The Stones are fun, but I don't really need to listen to them for more than an hour.

^^^THIS^^^^

Plus, who didn't know John was a talented hypocritical dickface?  It's pretty common knowledge he hid his first wife, shunned his kid Julian, and hooked up with a weird talentless hack who apparently knew how to get him off better than his wife.

I read Pam's (John's first wife) autobiography.  She claims he only hit her once and that was in high school long before they got married.  She broke up with him for it and it took John a great deal of time and energy to convince her to go back out with him.  She claims he never hit her again.

Now as to him hitting Yoko I can't profess knowledge nor would I blame him if he did.


That would be 'Cynthia.'
 
2013-09-25 11:50:10 AM

smimmy: fickenchucker: SlagginOff: I love both bands but I have to give the edge to The Beatles because of their greater range. I can listen to their whole catalog and only skip a few song. The Stones are fun, but I don't really need to listen to them for more than an hour.

^^^THIS^^^^

Plus, who didn't know John was a talented hypocritical dickface?  It's pretty common knowledge he hid his first wife, shunned his kid Julian, and hooked up with a weird talentless hack who apparently knew how to get him off better than his wife.

I read Pam's (John's first wife) autobiography.  She claims he only hit her once and that was in high school long before they got married.  She broke up with him for it and it took John a great deal of time and energy to convince her to go back out with him.  She claims he never hit her again.

Now as to him hitting Yoko I can't profess knowledge nor would I blame him if he did.


You apparently didn't read it very carefully, since his first wife was named Cynthia.
 
2013-09-25 11:52:28 AM
I'll put "Silly Love Songs" and "Band on the Run" up against anything Lennon put out in the 70s.

/And what's wrong with that?
//I'd like to know
///'Cause here I go again!
 
2013-09-25 11:52:58 AM

IntertubeUser: Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.


The bong, put it down!  NOW!

McCartney's post-Beatles career was one step above bubblegum music, except bubblegum music had more gravitas.

Stones to Beatles - Classic apples to oranges.  How are you going to compare a pop band (Beatles) to a rock band (Stones)?

Live performance, Stones > Beatles.  Can you imagine the Beatles singing "Gimme Shelter", their own fans would have laughed them off the stage.

Early Who, was the best Who.  Same for the Stones.  These things have a short shelf life.
 
2013-09-25 11:56:10 AM

Victoly: Tyrone Slothrop: LewDux: LewDux: Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money

They also invented metal, which makes then first grindcore band

Wait, Who?

The band onstage.

The Band onstage? Did they play Cripple Creek yet?


Yes.
 
2013-09-25 11:58:50 AM
I hope that webpage isn't a sign of things to come. After loading, it then opened up the App Store on this iPhone to some shiat blackjack game's page. And since redirects like that close the webpage that brought you there, I can never read that article on this phone.
 
2013-09-25 12:10:38 PM
I liked Klaatu better than either of them.
 
2013-09-25 12:13:17 PM

zimbomba63: IntertubeUser: Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.

The bong, put it down!  NOW!

McCartney's post-Beatles career was one step above bubblegum music, except bubblegum music had more gravitas.

Stones to Beatles - Classic apples to oranges.  How are you going to compare a pop band (Beatles) to a rock band (Stones)?

Live performance, Stones > Beatles.  Can you imagine the Beatles singing "Gimme Shelter", their own fans would have laughed them off the stage.

Early Who, was the best Who.  Same for the Stones.  These things have a short shelf life.


Yeah, I could, seeing as Paul has preformed Helter Skelter live many times.  Can you imagine the Stones singing Paperback Writer or Yesterday with the same skill as the Beatles did at Candlestick Park?
 
2013-09-25 12:22:03 PM
The Beatles are better by a long shot. "Tomorrow Never Knows' is better than every Rolling Stone song combined. Plus the Stones have been shiating on their legacy for almost 40 years now.
 
2013-09-25 12:34:28 PM

drongozone: My mother liked the Beatles, HATED the Rolling Stones. Guess who I liked better?

/Listen to the Rolling Stones' cover of the Fab Four's "I Wanna Be Your Man"


From this article:

McCartney had only the chorus for "I Wanna Be Your Man" when the Beatles' former PR agent, 19-year old Andrew Oldham, mentioned that he needed a single for the new group he was managing, the Rolling Stones. Lennon and McCartney, who had met the Stones weeks earlier, joined them in the studio and finished off the song for them in 20 minutes.

The Stones' version of "Man" came out on November 1, 1963, and made it to No. 12 in the U.K., giving them their first Top 20 hit. Ringo Starr sang it on the album, With the Beatles, which came out three weeks later.
 
2013-09-25 12:42:19 PM
All I know is that Charlie Watts is cooler than Ringo, although Ginger Baker will beat the shiat out of anybody who chooses either of them.
 
2013-09-25 12:53:32 PM

Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money


Your money loses.

thatshowkidsdie.files.wordpress.com

And the Trashmen are probably not the first either but they predate The Who by 2-3 years
 
2013-09-25 12:53:47 PM
check out the video of "yer blues" from the stones Rock n Roll circus.
While everybody was arguing about who was better, they were hangin out,havin a little fun.
 
2013-09-25 12:54:21 PM

IntertubeUser: Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.


It took me so many years to learn this fact.
 
2013-09-25 01:00:48 PM

OldManDownDRoad: Victoly: Tyrone Slothrop: LewDux: LewDux: Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money

They also invented metal, which makes then first grindcore band

Wait, Who?

The band onstage.

The Band onstage? Did they play Cripple Creek yet?

Yes.


No, that wasn't them. You'll just have to Guess Who.
 
2013-09-25 01:01:14 PM

The Dynamite Monkey: IntertubeUser: Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.

It took me so many years to learn this fact.


a majority of the hooks are lennons.
Day Tripper is the best example.
 
2013-09-25 01:01:48 PM

The Dynamite Monkey: Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money

Your money loses.

[thatshowkidsdie.files.wordpress.com image 598x600]

And the Trashmen are probably not the first either but they predate The Who by 2-3 years


Punk? did I hear someone say Punk?

Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the greatest punk band of all time: http://www.shaggs.com/album_potw.html
 
2013-09-25 01:08:40 PM

Khazar-Khum: The Dynamite Monkey: Onkel Buck: The Who is better than both of them! First punk band for my money

Your money loses.

[thatshowkidsdie.files.wordpress.com image 598x600]

And the Trashmen are probably not the first either but they predate The Who by 2-3 years

Punk? did I hear someone say Punk?

Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the greatest punk band of all time: http://www.shaggs.com/album_potw.html


Terry Adams of NRBQ, a fan of the bizarre and the inexplicable, has long played their albums during breaks in NRBQ shows.

Surreal is the best word for the Shaggs.
 
2013-09-25 01:08:41 PM

Bongo Blue: a majority of the hooks are lennons.


As an obsessive rock nerd (and I am not bragging about that, it's like admitting you are alcoholic) most of my reading of their writing and recording sessions indicates otherwise.  Lennon was the visceral rocker and the Dylanesque poet.  Macca focused on melodies, harmony and his background in traditional music.  It all came together in a beautiful sweet and salty mix which is further proven by their solo work after the Beatles.

None of those points are absolute ("Julia", "Helter Skelter") but generally true.
 
2013-09-25 01:25:49 PM

The Dynamite Monkey: Bongo Blue: a majority of the hooks are lennons.

As an obsessive rock nerd (and I am not bragging about that, it's like admitting you are alcoholic) most of my reading of their writing and recording sessions indicates otherwise.  Lennon was the visceral rocker and the Dylanesque poet.  Macca focused on melodies, harmony and his background in traditional music.  It all came together in a beautiful sweet and salty mix which is further proven by their solo work after the Beatles.

None of those points are absolute ("Julia", "Helter Skelter") but generally true.


in my life
ticket to ride
i feel fine
it won't be long.
Guitar hooks ain't Paul's thing.
I do believe they were all rockers at the core.
 
2013-09-25 01:33:01 PM

Bongo Blue: Guitar hooks ain't Paul's thing.


Ahh sorry, I did not know you were referring to riffs,  I will agree with what you said then.  But don't forget Macca wrote the riffs in Paperback Writer, Birthday, and of course Helter Skelter among others.
 
2013-09-25 01:33:26 PM
The kinks, beachboys or love make them all look like amateurs.
 
2013-09-25 01:35:32 PM
Oh, and if anyone cares, Macca was probably the best guitar soloist n the band also.

http://www.guitarworld.com/top-five-beatles-guitar-solos-paul-mccart ne y?page=0,0
 
2013-09-25 01:39:45 PM

udhq: The kinks, beachboys or love make them all look like amateurs.


The Beatles and Beach Boys were extremely competitive with each other and I don't think either one would have achieved the greatness they did without the other.

The Kinks are great, rocked hard for decades, and shared Macca's English Music Hall influences, and probably had the first/best distorted guitar, but you cant really put them in the same category as the Beatles or the Stones.

Love is way cool but c'mon that's just a troll.
 
2013-09-25 01:50:22 PM

The Dynamite Monkey: Bongo Blue: Guitar hooks ain't Paul's thing.

Ahh sorry, I did not know you were referring to riffs,  I will agree with what you said then.  But don't forget Macca wrote the riffs in Paperback Writer, Birthday, and of course Helter Skelter among others.


ah yes, Paperback writer!
Great rock song.
I should put that into my rotation.
 
2013-09-25 01:52:31 PM
and the Stones were better anyway

[You's a trollin'.jpg]

The Stones totally ripped off Muddy Waters. Not that this is uncommon - plenty of bands borrow from others and improve on the product. The Stones were great at bluesy rock, and put some real flair into the genre; but they were not nearly as creative in their actual products. The Beatles were all-stars at creativity, it really shows in their body of work, and this is by far the most important aspect of why they are so influential on other musicians.
 
2013-09-25 02:03:24 PM

stupiddream: zimbomba63: IntertubeUser: Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.

Yeah, I could, seeing as Paul has preformed Helter Skelter live many times.  Can you imagine the Stones singing Paperback Writer or Yesterday with the same skill as the Beatles did at Candlestick Park?


Ah, no, I can't see the Stones singing Paperback Writer or Yesterday.And why would they have wanted to?  One's a pop ditty, and the other is a turgid, lost-love moan.  And if some one had held a gun to their heads and forced them belt out those two "masterpieces", I hope their interpretation bring a little something more, rock-wise, to the performance, than the boys did.  But, that's just my opinion.
 
Ant
2013-09-25 02:15:50 PM
I can't remember where I read it, but I heard that John's insults against Brian Epstein were the result of endless unwanted advances from Epstein.
 
2013-09-25 02:18:31 PM

zimbomba63: stupiddream: zimbomba63: IntertubeUser: Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.

Yeah, I could, seeing as Paul has preformed Helter Skelter live many times.  Can you imagine the Stones singing Paperback Writer or Yesterday with the same skill as the Beatles did at Candlestick Park?

Ah, no, I can't see the Stones singing Paperback Writer or Yesterday.And why would they have wanted to?  One's a pop ditty, and the other is a turgid, lost-love moan.  And if some one had held a gun to their heads and forced them belt out those two "masterpieces", I hope their interpretation bring a little something more, rock-wise, to the performance, than the boys did.  But, that's just my opinion.


Like maybe Angie or Get Off of My Cloud?  Ones a 'turgid, lost-love moan' and the other is a 'pop ditty'.  Neither has anything on the two songs I mentioned.
 
2013-09-25 02:20:31 PM

dj_spanmaster: and the Stones were better anyway

[You's a trollin'.jpg]

The Stones totally ripped off Muddy Waters. Not that this is uncommon - plenty of bands borrow from others and improve on the product. The Stones were great at bluesy rock, and put some real flair into the genre; but they were not nearly as creative in their actual products. The Beatles were all-stars at creativity, it really shows in their body of work, and this is by far the most important aspect of why they are so influential on other musicians.


Yeah, the Stones never gave any mention to the fact that Muddy Waters and Howlin' Wolf, were their muses.  They just kept it a great, big secret.  "Psss, what ever you do, don't mention the old black guys."

Where as, with the Beatles "creativity", it simply sprang forth, new, original and fully formed, due to their unimaginable talents.

OK, then.  I think I understand, now.
 
2013-09-25 02:38:23 PM

stupiddream: zimbomba63: stupiddream: zimbomba63: IntertubeUser: Paul McCartney has more talent than the rest of the Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and The Who put together.

Yeah, I could, seeing as Paul has preformed Helter Skelter live many times.  Can you imagine the Stones singing Paperback Writer or Yesterday with the same skill as the Beatles did at Candlestick Park?

Ah, no, I can't see the Stones singing Paperback Writer or Yesterday.And why would they have wanted to?  One's a pop ditty, and the other is a turgid, lost-love moan.  And if some one had held a gun to their heads and forced them belt out those two "masterpieces", I hope their interpretation bring a little something more, rock-wise, to the performance, than the boys did.  But, that's just my opinion.

Like maybe Angie or Get Off of My Cloud?  Ones a 'turgid, lost-love moan' and the other is a 'pop ditty'.  Neither has anything on the two songs I mentioned.


Angie, I'll concede, but, it was in the years beginning their decline.  Get Off of My Cloud, pop?  I don't think so.  Try again.
 
2013-09-25 02:41:29 PM
The Who is    KINKS  Are  better than both of them

ftfy
 
2013-09-25 02:58:48 PM

zimbomba63: Where as, with the Beatles "creativity", it simply sprang forth, new, original and fully formed, due to their unimaginable talents.


Don't you think the stones' best work was later, after they had stopped playing re-hashed chicago blues, and started playing country (thanks Gram!) R&B and other styles?  Long after the Beatles has disbanded....  it's almost apples and oranges.

my opinion, By Decade:

60s: Beatles re-define pop creativity, Stones essentially Chicago Blues cover band.
70s: Stones incredibly creative and great, no Beatles in existence, all Beatles solo material is inferior to stones
 
2013-09-25 03:03:34 PM

zimbomba63: Get Off of My Cloud, pop?  I don't think so.


Stylistically I do not see a big difference between Paperback Writer and Get Off My Cloud, except in one of them the singing is on key, ;-)

/ I love Get Off My Cloud
// sorry I am on day 2, hour 9 of hte same conference call and I am losing my mind.
 
2013-09-25 03:04:30 PM
I dig the Stones.  I enjoy the Beatles.  I listen to the Who on occasion.
But if I want earth shattering, genre defining music that has changed the world as we know it ...

Motown
 
2013-09-25 03:06:09 PM

Dr. Kefarkian: Motown


Stax > Motown

/ end obvious troll
 
2013-09-25 03:21:31 PM

udhq: The kinks, beachboys or love make them all look like amateurs.


Not really, no. The Kinks have some good songs and a ton of meh ones, and 95% of Beach Boys songs are as bad as the early Beatles fluff.
 
2013-09-25 04:04:20 PM

The Dynamite Monkey: Dr. Kefarkian: Motown

Stax > Motown

/ end obvious troll


What a sec, Tempting T's and Smokey Robinson for the win.
 
2013-09-25 04:09:08 PM

The Dynamite Monkey: zimbomba63: Get Off of My Cloud, pop?  I don't think so.

Stylistically I do not see a big difference between Paperback Writer and Get Off My Cloud, except in one of them the singing is on key, ;-)

/ I love Get Off My Cloud
// sorry I am on day 2, hour 9 of hte same conference call and I am losing my mind.


The Dynamite Monkey: Dr. Kefarkian: Motown

Stax > Motown

/ end obvious troll


What a sec, Tempting T's and Smokey Robinson for the win.
 
2013-09-25 04:10:36 PM

zimbomba63: The Dynamite Monkey: zimbomba63: Get Off of My Cloud, pop?  I don't think so.

Stylistically I do not see a big difference between Paperback Writer and Get Off My Cloud, except in one of them the singing is on key, ;-)

/ I love Get Off My Cloud
// sorry I am on day 2, hour 9 of hte same conference call and I am losing my mind.

The Dynamite Monkey: Dr. Kefarkian: Motown

Stax > Motown

/ end obvious troll

What a sec, Tempting T's and Smokey Robinson for the win.


oops!
 
2013-09-25 04:21:08 PM

LewDux: "Beatles vs. Stones": What fueled rock's greatest rivalry

$


Wrong Metric.
 
2013-09-25 04:26:45 PM

The Dynamite Monkey: zimbomba63: Get Off of My Cloud, pop?  I don't think so.

Stylistically I do not see a big difference between Paperback Writer and Get Off My Cloud, except in one of them the singing is on key, ;-)

/ I love Get Off My Cloud
// sorry I am on day 2, hour 9 of hte same conference call and I am losing my mind.


Well, one song was about paperback writing?!?!  The other was about a guy, telling another guy to get away/off of his girlfriend.  Thematically, one was pop and the other, rock.  Musically, Cloud, was edgier, while Writer, was a bit more mellow, with some Beatles sonic effects, thrown in.

I grew up during this period, and you were either a fan of one or the other.  Those who said they liked both were considered to be on par with child molesters.
 
2013-09-25 05:29:48 PM

zimbomba63: I grew up during this period, and you were either a fan of one or the other. Those who said they liked both were considered to be on par with child molesters.


Really?  Is that true (serious question, I was born in 1975)?

Even in the later years?
 
2013-09-25 07:22:13 PM
Apples and Oranges. It's unfair to both to compare them head-to-head.
 
2013-09-25 08:40:34 PM

The Dynamite Monkey: udhq: The kinks, beachboys or love make them all look like amateurs.

The Beatles and Beach Boys were extremely competitive with each other and I don't think either one would have achieved the greatness they did without the other.

The Kinks are great, rocked hard for decades, and shared Macca's English Music Hall influences, and probably had the first/best distorted guitar, but you cant really put them in the same category as the Beatles or the Stones.

Love is way cool but c'mon that's just a troll.


Revolver -> Pet Sounds -> Sgt. Peppers, best album rotation ever

/I really really love Revolver, my favorite album by the Beatles, but holy crap is Pet Sounds amazing.  As in, if you don't enjoy this album from start to finish I think you may be missing a soul amazing.

The Dynamite Monkey: zimbomba63: Where as, with the Beatles "creativity", it simply sprang forth, new, original and fully formed, due to their unimaginable talents.

Don't you think the stones' best work was later, after they had stopped playing re-hashed chicago blues, and started playing country (thanks Gram!) R&B and other styles?  Long after the Beatles has disbanded....  it's almost apples and oranges.

my opinion, By Decade:

60s: Beatles re-define pop creativity, Stones essentially Chicago Blues cover band.
70s: Stones incredibly creative and great, no Beatles in existence, all Beatles solo material is inferior to stones


to me the 70s are Led Zeppelin and The Who.

/Wild Horses makes me want to cut off my ears
//50 licks is the only album you need to own for the Stones
 
2013-09-25 08:47:38 PM
blog.yellowdoggdesigns.com
Twice in one night, in 2 different threads. Yay me.
 
2013-09-25 09:09:39 PM
Fail on the picture that accompanies the article. John, Paul and George are there, but I don't know who that other guy is. Ringo missed a few shows on one of their tours due to illness. I'm assuming that picture was taken during that tour.
 
2013-09-25 09:36:47 PM
The headline sounds about right.
 
2013-09-25 09:40:20 PM

bingethinker: Fail on the picture that accompanies the article. John, Paul and George are there, but I don't know who that other guy is. Ringo missed a few shows on one of their tours due to illness. I'm assuming that picture was taken during that tour.


No....that's definitely not Jimmy Nicol (the drummer who replaced Ringo in a few shows due to tonsiliitis in the summer of '64) in that photo. It looks like it was shot during the filming of 'Help!' in the Bahamas....going by the presence the nice Nikon on the step, he might be a photographer.
 
2013-09-25 10:08:28 PM
Whaddya think about that, Keith?

Keith?

i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-26 12:41:45 AM
95% of Beach Boys songs are as bad as the early Beatles fluff.

there were NO Beatles fluff songs, the Beach Boys were almost all fluff until Pet Sounds
 
2013-09-26 12:42:56 AM
To those who claim that Stones were blues influenced while the Beatles were more pop oriented. That's Heavy. Heavy but untrue.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4CzqrPZtXk
 
2013-09-26 06:55:27 AM

TV's Vinnie: Ringo is/was the Butt-Ugly Beatle.


Not at all, young Ringo was adorable and would probably be my first pick.
I like the Beatles music but their personalities are all insufferable.
 
2013-09-26 08:10:52 AM

imspartacus: To those who claim that Stones were blues influenced while the Beatles were more pop oriented. That's Heavy. Heavy but untrue.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4CzqrPZtXk


I don't think anyone is claiming that at all.  The Beatles played tons of blues, especially early in their career.  But you have to admit their influences were much more diverse than the Stones.  And that is not a failing of the Stones, per se, it was by design.  Brian was religious about the blues.

Also, while I guess you could say "I Want You" is a minor blues, it's nowhere near the 1-4-5 progression that is the hallmark of Chicago Blues.
 
Displayed 84 of 84 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report