| February 5th, 2005 10:55 AM |
|
|
| JumpingKentFlash |
I am writing a paper for a Danish Beatles website. Since I'm a Rolling Stones fan I offered them to do this paper on the Beatles/Stones debate seen from a Stones fans view. I would like some Rocks Off members to give their views on this. Especially the old fans who actually experienced the whole thing in the sixties.
Why do you prefer Stones over Beatles?
How is Stones better? And why?
Qustions like that I need answered.
Please post views, opinions and so on.
Thanks. |
| February 5th, 2005 11:03 AM |
|
|
| charlotte |
Beatles-studio band
Stones-live band |
| February 5th, 2005 11:07 AM |
|
|
| rolling who |
The Rolling Stones are the Greatest Rock 'n Roll Band in the World. Still.
The Beatles are the Greatest Musical Band in the World. Ever.
I personally prefer the Stones to the Beatles, but objectively, I can say that the Beatles were the more important band. They changed the world, and while that's an overused phrase for many different artists/athletes/performers/actors, etc., in the Beatles' case, it's true. The world would actually be a different place if the Beatles hadn't come along. You can't quite say the same about the Stones.
That said, there's no doubt that the rock 'n roll world would be a far different place if the Stones never rolled through. Mick and Keith basically established the blueprint for rock 'n roll bands: the outlandish, arrogant, androgynous, pain-in-the-ass singer and the cool, dark-haired, cigarette-smoking, riff-meister guitar player. Just look at everyone from the obvious (Aerosmith's Tyler and Perry, Black Crowes' Robinsons, Guns 'n Roses Axl and Slash) to even the less obvious (REM's Stipe and Buck, U2's Bono and Edge, Led Zep's Plant and Page) and they're all basically following the Stones' blueprint.
Then there's the songs -- WOW!!! So many unbelievably great songs. Whenever I hear someone say "The Stones are boring" or "I'm sick of their songs", I tell them they're not listening to the right songs. Never mind "Honky Tonk Women" and "Jumpin' Jack Flash" and "Start Me Up," the songs you hear on the radio all the time. Try "Factory Girl" or "Time Waits for No One" or "Sway" or "Waiting on a Friend" or "Just My Imagination" or "2000 Man" or "Child of the Moon" or "Blue Turns to Grey" or "Prodigal Son" or "Before They Make Me Run" or ... I could go on and on. |
| February 5th, 2005 11:07 AM |
|
|
| JumpingKentFlash |
Only serious replies please.
Please send replies to: JumpingKentFlash to avoid the possible heated discussion that this might fire.
RollingWho's post is useful. That's the sort of thing I need.
[Edited by JumpingKentFlash] |
| February 5th, 2005 11:15 AM |
|
|
| caro |
It doesn't have to be long to be serious... I would probably have written a 500-words reply and ended up saying the exact same thing as Charlotte said in two lines. |
| February 5th, 2005 11:25 AM |
|
|
| JumpingKentFlash |
True. But I need more than that. The thing Charlotte posted isn't unserious. It's just obvious. It's a fact, and facts I already have. I need personal views. |
| February 5th, 2005 12:07 PM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
Josh tells me that he still demands an apology from you |
| February 5th, 2005 12:13 PM |
|
|
| Navin |
Beatles - Past
Stones - Past, Present, and future |
| February 5th, 2005 12:19 PM |
|
|
| caro |
*grin* |
| February 5th, 2005 12:25 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
quote:
JumpingKentFlash wrote:
It's just obvious. It's a fact, and facts I already have. I need personal views.
Is it obvious? Who say's the Beatles were a better studio band? Folklore? Conventional wisdom? The critics? The Parrots? Music history professors? D.J.S?
It's all actually quite simple. You got Brand X against Brand Y. Alot depends on what you want in a product. And once one analyizes all the variables; ingredients, effectiveness, expectations and all other such things the Stones come out on top.
|
| February 5th, 2005 12:38 PM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
Is it obvious? Who say's the Beatles were a better studio band? Folklore? Conventional wisdom? The critics? The Parrots? Music history professors? D.J.S?
It's all actually quite simple. You got Brand X against Brand Y. Alot depends on what you want in a product. And once one analyizes all the variables; ingredients, effectiveness, expectations and all other such things the Stones come out on top.
why ask for peoples opinions if you are going to shoot them down and assume yourself as the "expert" You may need to re-think your strategy as it seems you are not looking for others opinoins, but rather people to agree with yours.
and please apologize to jb |
| February 5th, 2005 01:29 PM |
|
|
| Scottfree |
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
Is it obvious? Who say's the Beatles were a better studio band? Folklore? Conventional wisdom? The critics? The Parrots? Music history professors? D.J.S?
It's all actually quite simple. You got Brand X against Brand Y. Alot depends on what you want in a product. And once one analyizes all the variables; ingredients, effectiveness, expectations and all other such things the Stones come out on top.
That was Fucking brilliant, never heard it explained so elequently... |
| February 5th, 2005 01:39 PM |
|
|
| Bloozehound |
it's real simple...
Beatles = chick music, greatest pop band (if your into the girlie stuff)
Stones = it's a mans world, greatest rock n roll band EVER |
| February 5th, 2005 03:03 PM |
|
|
| JumpingKentFlash |
I think any Stones fan would be able to write this. I'm not writing this on behalf of any Stones fan but myself. But it's still good, not to mention important, to have more than just one view. I'm not gonna quote anyone either, except the Stones and the Beatles. Also the fact that I wasn't born when all this came down is only valid if I was writing a paper on Stones/Beatles in the sixties only. I'm not. This goes from the sixties up to today. With solo years of the Beatles too.
As for JB: Why on Earth should I apologize to him? It seems that he wants me to apologize to him for things I don't even realize having done.......... |
| February 5th, 2005 03:37 PM |
|
|
| MrPleasant |
Why do you prefer Stones over Beatles?
Because they rock better and more consistently. Also, because of their themes.
How is Stones better? And why?
Read above, carefully considering that they also worked upon striking melodies. |
| February 5th, 2005 04:15 PM |
|
|
| LesPaul |
Yep, end of discussion...
/LesPaul |
| February 5th, 2005 04:35 PM |
|
|
| T&A |
Why is the premise that a Stones fan (I'm one) "prefers" the Stones over the Beatles? That's a fallacious premise.
BTW, sure everyone has personal preferences and biases - it is never a "contest" between or among musical acts. I really get tired of treating it like a football game. The Beatles and Stones are/were two great bands. End of story. |
| February 5th, 2005 04:52 PM |
|
|
| MrPleasant |
quote:
T&A wrote:
Beatles and Stones are/were two great bands. End of story.
I agree. |
| February 5th, 2005 07:21 PM |
|
|
| kath |
well, if nothing else, this'll bring josh outta lurk mode......
jkf check your PM
[Edited by kath] |
| February 6th, 2005 12:37 AM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
quote:
JumpingKentFlash wrote:
I think any Stones fan would be able to write this. I'm not writing this on behalf of any Stones fan but myself. But it's still good, not to mention important, to have more than just one view. I'm not gonna quote anyone either, except the Stones and the Beatles. Also the fact that I wasn't born when all this came down is only valid if I was writing a paper on Stones/Beatles in the sixties only. I'm not. This goes from the sixties up to today. With solo years of the Beatles too.
As for JB: Why on Earth should I apologize to him? It seems that he wants me to apologize to him for things I don't even realize having done..........
He feels you have been out of order with him in the past, and a person in the upper class such as himself, does not deserve it.
I hope this unfortunate event can be sorted out and differences could be worked out without anyone permanently leaving the board. |
| February 6th, 2005 05:08 AM |
|
|
| Jumping Jack |
Macca will stoop so low as to play the Superbowl, the Stones are above that. |
| February 6th, 2005 08:34 AM |
|
|
| JumpingKentFlash |
quote:
voodoopug wrote:
He feels you have been out of order with him in the past, and a person in the upper class such as himself, does not deserve it.
I hope this unfortunate event can be sorted out and differences could be worked out without anyone permanently leaving the board.
Well, not my problem. To me it doesn't matter if you're upper class, hobo, King of Scotland, wino, fat, thin, rich or poor. We're all equal in my mind. And if anyone have been out of order it's him. 'Nuff said. |
| February 6th, 2005 11:48 AM |
|
|
| JaggerLips |
The Rolling Stones may not be as stylistic musically as the Beatles but what they do have is a variety of different themed songs.
The Beatles sing of love almost all of the time except for I am a Walrus and Yellow Submarine and quirky songs like that.
The Stones sing of death, war, love, peace, love lost, sex, anger, partying, new cars, the yellow pages (Thru and Thru) murder, FBI conspiracies, The Devil, Jesus Christ, Heaven, life and the love of life, friends, lovers, nervous breakdowns, angels, Julius Caesar, Cleopatra, Arab Cahrgers , drugs, etc etc. I could spend ages trying to think of everything they have sung about, they've pretty much sung about every subject there is.
Sympathy for the Devil is pretty much a history lesson in itself.
The Beatles do short and sweet songs the only album where they realy strayed from that is The White Album where they got a bit rugged and started singing about more painful things like suicide.
The Stones are less afraid of what people thought of them than The Beatles. Jagger/Richards are more gutsy than Lennon/McCartney.
In my eyes The Rolling Stones will be remembered more in 40 years or so time than The Beatles mainly because they are still together and doing their stuff now and their music will live for longer because the words in the songs still mean something to teenagers and adults alike in the 2000s as a 21 year old The Rolling Stones mean more to me than The Beatles for their tell it how it is attitude, The Beatles are far too saccarine and don't truly represent society.
I love The Beatles just not as much as I do The Rolling Stones it used to be the other way around but I have grown up and I am wiser to the world now. |
| February 6th, 2005 01:53 PM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
quote:
JumpingKentFlash wrote:
Well, not my problem. To me it doesn't matter if you're upper class, hobo, King of Scotland, wino, fat, thin, rich or poor. We're all equal in my mind. And if anyone have been out of order it's him. 'Nuff said.
I will forward him your message, be aware though, that your thoughts and refusal to apologize may truly be the nail in the coffin for jb's pressence on this site. I am doing my best to reach peace, but even I cannot work miracles. I urge you to reconsider and apologize to the man. |
| February 6th, 2005 03:44 PM |
|
|
| JumpingKentFlash |
Tell him NO WAY IN HELL!!!!! He left because he isn't allowed to post the single letter posts anymore. If he can't stand the smell he better get out of the kitchen. |
| February 6th, 2005 03:59 PM |
|
|
| Scottfree |
quote:
kath wrote:
well, if nothing else, this'll bring josh outta lurk mode......
jkf check your PM
[Edited by kath]
His mommy took his computer away... |
| February 6th, 2005 04:35 PM |
|
|
| Moonisup |
quote:
charlotte wrote:
Beatles-studio band
Stones-live band
that sums it up! |
| February 6th, 2005 04:43 PM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
quote:
JumpingKentFlash wrote:
Tell him NO WAY IN HELL!!!!! He left because he isn't allowed to post the single letter posts anymore. If he can't stand the smell he better get out of the kitchen.
I am disappointed in your decision to not work this problem out diplomatically. This may drastically decrease the chances of having Josh buying you a drink at Walters this tour.
I miss Joey |
| February 6th, 2005 04:54 PM |
|
|
| rolling who |
quote:
JaggerLips wrote:
The Beatles sing of love almost all of the time except for I am a Walrus and Yellow Submarine and quirky songs like that.
The Stones sing of death, war, love, peace, love lost, sex, anger, partying, new cars, the yellow pages (Thru and Thru) murder, FBI conspiracies, The Devil, Jesus Christ, Heaven, life and the love of life, friends, lovers, nervous breakdowns, angels, Julius Caesar, Cleopatra, Arab Cahrgers , drugs, etc etc. I could spend ages trying to think of everything they have sung about, they've pretty much sung about every subject there is.
Sympathy for the Devil is pretty much a history lesson in itself.
The Beatles do short and sweet songs the only album where they realy strayed from that is The White Album where they got a bit rugged and started singing about more painful things like suicide.
Well, this isn't exactly true. I think "Sympathy for the Devil" is one of the greatest pieces of literature in rock history, truly brilliant lyrics. During this same time span, Jagger also wrote about the Boston Strangler ("Midnight Rambler"), murder and rape ("Gimmie Shelter"), revolution ("Street Fighting Man"), and other heavy subjects. He's unfairly not considered a "singer/songwriter" like lightweights such as James Taylor or Paul Simon, but during that period he wrote some of the deepest rock songs of all-time.
HOWEVER, from about 1973 on, let's face it, Mick hasn't really written on a huge variety of subjects. "Emotional Rescue" isn't "about" Arab chargers, as your post suggests.
The Beatles (Lennon in particular) wrote of a great variety of subjects and emotions and the Lennon/McCartney songwriting team should not be disparaged. |
| February 6th, 2005 05:42 PM |
|
|
| JumpingKentFlash |
quote:
voodoopug wrote:
I am disappointed in your decision to not work this problem out diplomatically. This may drastically decrease the chances of having Josh buying you a drink at Walters this tour.
I miss Joey
Yada yada yada. To me there is no problem. It's not my fault that the dude has a low self-esteem. I don't even want a drink from him anymore. |
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]