quote:

---

guitarman53 wrote:
it had to happen like it was.

---

quote:

---

guitarman53 wrote:
As much as I love The Stones, the biggest band of the 20th Century in rock has been the Beatles, there's no question about that, they were the 60's, we can go back to Glenn Miller, but it's still not the same, if it wasn't for The Beatles do you honestly think the Stones would have been "known, going by history that is, can you imagine Andrew Loog Oldham coming to America & saying he's got this new band, it wouldn't have happened, America wasn't ready for a totally rebelous Rock band, it had to happen like it was.

---

quote:

---

they were the 60s

---

quote:

---

Mr.D wrote:




You've kind of answered your own question there, yes they started some stuff, but they ended it in 1970; 1969 really, thats it, you could count the bands that have been musically inspired - or otherwise - by the beatles with your hands (and feet) - the stones started everything, they did everything first, and yeh if it wasnt for the beatles maybe they wouldnt have been as accesible to america, altho if there were no beatles, there still wouldve been the stones - the managment wouldve seen money to be made in the teenage market and wouldve marketed the stones as the boys next door.

i have been thinkni about this, i not being bias (though they are my favourite band) but i think that more bands have been influenced by the stooges [iggy pop / and the stooges] than have the beatles, and probly about as many as the stone - more musically probably, as i think the stones pretty much kick started the whole thing rock n roll wise i mean - even iggy says at one stage in the late 60s they couldve called him Mick Morrison because he was trying to be mick jagger and jim morrison.


anyway i think you may have the wrong classes on, who was bigger - and still is - than both the stones and the beatles - who did they aspire to be like, who kicked the beatles into gear and got them high and got them started with one of their best albums, rubber soul .... Bob Dylan! The beatles are half dead, some one should shoot whats left, they never did anyhting of value (cept john, bit of mc cartney) after they split, the stones are still kickass live, thats really what there career has been geared towards though, even jagger said that in the late 60s, that the beatles were a studio band and they were a live band (in my opinion the reason you get into a band) anyway they have had some great albums as well, all of them, i love them all, but anyway, my point is in terms of popularity, the stones made 447milllion dollars on that last tour alone!! Thats staggering, but A Bigger Bang only sold like 300,000 copies i think [correct if wrong, thats the last count i heard] anyway, thats to be expected, it was good material, well some good songs from keith bring it up from the dumps but otherwise it was a fair and expected attempt from them, Dylan's last record Modern Times was No. 1 in the US, thats pretty impossible to get (a no.1 in US i mean) esp for someone who's been as odd, inconsistent (80s) and cryptic and sorry to say it - old as dylan. The stones couldnt get that, and the beatles certainly couldnt (with new material i mean) - [although if this itunes deal is real im sure the beatles will be number one again - though old material]

He's also got an Oscar for that song Things Have Changed, grammys (time out of mind) best selling autobiography (which is amazing btw) and a hugely popular radio series, after all he's been through is it possible he should be doing this? Lol, just saying, amean as far as music goes in the 20th Century i dont think you can get much bigger or better or more influential than Dylan
[Edited by Mr.D]
[Edited by Mr.D]

---

quote:

---

Fiji Joe wrote:
Whoever was laying down this jam...

---

quote:

---

glencar wrote:
Oh yeah, the moptops! What about Elvis, Frankie & all the others before? The Beatles were a good pop band; nothing more, nothing less.

---