Beatles or Stones?

[Parsnip]

1 minute ago, Lambchop said:

I just don’t like anything about them. None of them were great vocalists, instrumentalists or performers, and I find the vast majority of their songs really irritating. They had nothing of significance to say and they perpetuated naff, adolescent stereotypes.  Their films were also excruciatingly dull.

Compared to the output of the Stones, Dylan, Neil Young, or even the Doors or the Byrds, they were lightweight in the extreme.

This is all very upsetting. The Byrds are very special to me - more so than the Beatles - and I thoroughly appreciate Dylan and the Stones. But the Beatles had incredible moments. You cant say Lennon and McCartney weren't great performers you maniac! Lennon was a horrid human but he was a great performer. Harrison was a great guitarist and all three were great lyricists. Ringo was there too.

I'm not comfortable with this thread. Can we talk about white privilege again?

[StringerBell]

I think The Beatles were great vocalists actually, instantly recognisable voices all of them - but Ringo’s voice is destined for novelty songs ?.

But then I like people who sing the melody. Too much of this around these days

 

[Pearl Ram]

The Beatles paid their dues in their early days, playing sets of upto six hours a time of rock n roll in Germany before anybody here had heard of them. It served them well but they really could play. 

Younger people forget there was no Radio one until 1967, four years after their first hit, group or beat music was frowned upon by the BBC and so the I Wanna Hold Your Hand kind of stuff was a way to breaking down those barriers and getting the music out to the masses via the only broadcaster available.

And @StringerBell great call on the Beach Boys, they produced some mighty music. 

[StringerBell]

Just now, Parsnip said:

This is all very upsetting. The Byrds are very special to me - more so than the Beatles - and I thoroughly appreciate Dylan and the Stones. But the Beatles had incredible moments. You cant say Lennon and McCartney weren't great performers you maniac! Lennon was a horrid human but he was a great performer. Harrison was a great guitarist and all three were great lyricists. Ringo was there too.

I'm not comfortable with this thread. Can we talk about white privilege again?

Yeah. He was a hero of mine as a teenager but I’d probably think Lennon was a bit of a pillock if he was around now.

[Parsnip]

Yeah i agree also on Beach Boys - still sounds amazing today. I nearly went to see Brian Wilson at the Sydney Opera house once but i didn't have enough money

[Rev]

I like them both.

It must have been a great time to be young and talented, and however you view them, the bands and sounds emerging during that mid to late 60s period must have been mind blowing to be a part of, certainly when compared to what had come before.

Kinks, Stones, Beatles, Beach Boys, Motown, Faces, The Doors, Dylan, Bowie etc.

Second only to Punk as a movement I wish I'd have lived through.

[McRainy]

4 minutes ago, Parsnip said:

This is all very upsetting. The Byrds are very special to me - more so than the Beatles - and I thoroughly appreciate Dylan and the Stones.

Let’s just agree on The Byrds, then, although I prefer the later stuff with Clarence White on guitar. 

[StringerBell]

2 minutes ago, Pearl Ram said:

And @StringerBell great call on the Beach Boys, they produced some mighty music. 

 

Yeah, it’s weird to think, considering his general demeanour and naffness what a rebel someone like Tony Blackburn was out there on his pirate ship.

I saw Brian Wilson at Glasto in 2005. He looked utterly perplexed when someone was literally crowd surfing (on an actual surfboard).

[Pearl Ram]

5 minutes ago, reveldevil said:

I like them both.

It must have been a great time to be young and talented, and however you view them, the bands and sounds emerging during that mid to late 60s period must have been mind blowing to be a part of, certainly when compared to what had come before.

Kinks, Stones, Beatles, Beach Boys, Motown, Faces, The Doors, Dylan, Bowie etc.

Second only to Punk as a movement I wish I'd have lived through.

Chuck Jimi Hendrix in there as well Rev, boy was he ahead of his time, don’t love all his stuff granted but a lot of it is...a gas, as they used to say back then.  

[Rev]

Just now, Pearl Ram said:

Chuck Jimi Hendrix in there as well Rev, boy was he ahead of his time, don’t love all his stuff granted but a lot of it is...a gas, as they used to say back then.  

Always a danger when you knock a quick list off that you'll forget someone. 

In this case loads.

If someone asked me to name my favourite 10 bands/artists, I'd give 10 different responses each time, each with complete honesty!!

[StringerBell]

In true Tupac style, Jimi Hendrix has a new album out.

[StringerBell]

8 minutes ago, Pearl Ram said:

Chuck Jimi Hendrix in there as well Rev, boy was he ahead of his time, don’t love all his stuff granted but a lot of it is...a gas, as they used to say back then.  

I was thinking of him. Perhaps not to everyone’s taste but as an indie kid I love Velvet Underground from that era too.

[McRainy]

4 minutes ago, Pearl Ram said:

Chuck Jimi Hendrix in there as well Rev, boy was he ahead of his time, don’t love all his stuff granted but a lot of it is...a gas, as they used to say back then.  

I don’t like Jimi Hendrix either, or Eric Clapton. 

This is cool though:

https://youtu.be/-IxHM3qsYW8

[RamNut]

The nearest i got to liking this sort of music was Free, altho i bought a few Stones albums.

Never liked the Beatles apart from Get Back and one or two late tracks. Cannot abide the Mersey Beat and the Sergeant Pepper stuff.

 

But tbh......the best black music, Blues and Atlantic Soul still knocks all of this into a cocked wotsit.

 

[Parsnip]

15 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

I don’t like Jimi Hendrix either, or Eric Clapton. 

This is cool though:

https://youtu.be/-IxHM3qsYW8

Yeah Jimi Hendrix was basically the Justin Timberlake of the 60's.

[Stripperg-ram]

34 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

I just don’t like anything about them. None of them were great vocalists, instrumentalists or performers, and I find the vast majority of their songs really irritating. They had nothing of significance to say and they perpetuated naff, adolescent stereotypes.  Their films were also excruciatingly dull.

Compared to the output of the Stones, Dylan, Neil Young, or even the Doors or the Byrds, they were lightweight in the extreme.

I’ve got to stop you there. I get you that you don’t like them - that’s fine, I understand - but you can’t criticize their playing and singing and then compare them to Dylan - who is a songwriting genius, sure. But as a performer in comparison to either of the 3 main singing Beatles? You’re having a laugh!

and to bring The Doors into a competition with the Beatles? It’s like comparing Connor Sammon to Messi!!

I get why people don’t like their music- to some it’s lightweight, when they prefer more heavier, rockier stuff.

But in ‘67 the ‘lunatics took over the asylum’. They stopped listening to George Martin and just used him as means to gaining what they wanted sonically.

From Pepper to Abbey Road they created music which not only transcended genres, defined new ones, built on rich melodies (the likes of which no band has ever consistently emulated) but wrote the rule book that, in pop/rock music simply states ‘There is no rule book’. 

The Kinks, The Who, The Stones, The Small Faces, Dylan, Neil Young etc etc. All had a trope that they played to, used to their best advantage and did it well.

 

The Beatles did all of those tropes too, then some others, and did them with Melodies that brought the world to its knees.

‘The Doors’....?

Pah!

[PistoldPete2]

47 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

I just don’t like anything about them. None of them were great vocalists, instrumentalists or performers, and I find the vast majority of their songs really irritating. They had nothing of significance to say and they perpetuated naff, adolescent stereotypes.  Their films were also excruciatingly dull.

Compared to the output of the Stones, Dylan, Neil Young, or even the Doors or the Byrds, they were lightweight in the extreme.

I think you can say that about the stones... Jagger certainly isn't a greAt vocalist. But the Beatles and the stones were both much bigger than the sum of the parts. They were the best two pop/ rock and roll bands ever.

as for the Beatles being a boy band well yes they were all boys, and the girls screamed at them. But they weren't manufactured and they were proper musicians and songwriters so they have nothing in common with the boy bands of today.

i like the stones and Dylan too, but their strengths are more limited. Dylan is a much better lyricist than anything done by the Beatles its true. But music isn't just about the lyrics . 

[ariotofmyown]

3 hours ago, angieram said:

Rubber Soul for me, though I think Abbey Road is a close second favourite. 

Not so familiar with Stones' albums so I will go for Goat's Head Soup as it contains the track that has followed me around for years! 

...and what a tune that is

[ariotofmyown]

First time I heard 'Get of my cloud' was at an Indie club at Uni in mid 90s.

Loved it but assumed it was a new song with Primal Scream/Chemical Bros/Happy Mondays/Beck influences.

Felt a bit daft when discovered it was the Stones, but was a different world back then, pre-streaming and over 10 pints for an album compared to 1 pint now.

This proves the Stones are the best though!

Only Beatles song I really like is Here Comes the Sun, maybe cos it was George Harrison rather than them other 2.

I am the Walrus is decent but Oasis version was better.

Macca wrote Yesterday in his sleep. You can tell.

Hey Jude and Let it Be are annoying.

When I'm 64 sounds like an ok Rolf Harris tune.

Like Ticket to Ride, but Ticket to Pride was better (anyone remember that from when Pride Park opened?)

Probably prefer earlier 'innocent' stuff as it had more sex appeal.

The Beatles wrote* the Frog Chorous. Stones wrote Tumblin' Dice. Case closed.

*sort of.

[McRainy]

32 minutes ago, Stripperg-ram said:

to bring The Doors into a competition with the Beatles? It’s like comparing Connor Sammon to Messi!!

As a performer, Morrison was venturing further than anyone had gone before. Robbie Krieger’s guitar playing is in a different league, combining and developing styles from flamenco to bottle neck, Manzarak was a far more accomplished musician, and Densmore certainly pips Ringo. 

And Morrison got his dick out, so winner.