ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
A Bigger Bang Tour 2007

Slane Castle, Slane (near Dublin), Aug 18, 2007
© Stray Cat UK
[ ROCKSOFF.ORG ] [ IORR NEWS ] [ SETLISTS 1962-2006 ] [ FORO EN ESPAÑOL ] [ BIT TORRENT TRACKER ] [ BIT TORRENT HELP ] [ BIRTHDAY'S LIST ] [ MICK JAGGER ] [ KEITHFUCIUS ] [ CHARLIE WATTS ] [ RONNIE WOOD ] [ BRIAN JONES ] [ MICK TAYLOR ] [ BILL WYMAN ] [ IAN "STU" STEWART ] [ NICKY HOPKINS ] [ MERRY CLAYTON ] [ IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN ] [ LINKS ] [ PHOTOS ] [ JIMI HENDRIX ] [ TEMPLE ] [GUESTBOOK ] [ ADMIN ]
CHAT ROOM aka The Fun HOUSE Rest rooms last days
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Dave clark 5 Or Rolling Stones. Return to archive Page: 1 2
11th August 2007 12:22 AM
guitarman53 In '64 it was a serious question, the Dave Clark 5 or the Rolling Stones, The DC5 were the good looking guys for all the tenny booper magazines, the Rolling stones were consitered the ugliest band in history, there are still girls who think Mick Jagger is gross.
11th August 2007 12:46 AM
vox12string Dave Clark AND the Rolling Stones. Dave owns the vids of 'Ready Steady Go' the best TV pop show of the 60's, Mick stated in an interview that RSG was way ahead of it's time.

The musicians started off miming to playback but eventually the show went live & ALL the top perfomers of the times appeared on that show including the Stones.

They were brilliant, it was almost a small club setting, Glynn Johns states that they played loud, the band was close miked, hand picked, screaming audience. Some of the live trax are out there on boots & I recorded some of them off the TV, they're my Precious.

Dave is somewhat of a recluse I believe, & is hanging onto these tapes but not doing anything with them so it's doubtfull if we'll get anything in first rate quality for a long time
[Edited by vox12string]
11th August 2007 01:21 AM
guitarman53 I think that Dave Clark has been one of the few who never got caught up in in the Booze & Drugs scene, but has approcated it as a investment, it's miles away from what Mick Jagger would do, he's probably a well contented man, living of "Ready Steady Go", Mick is a smart investment man too, but his band has been really fucked up by Keith Richards, & it is his band, he's the one who's only been keeping it together, along with Charlie & Ron.
11th August 2007 02:29 AM
Honky Tonk Man guitarmam53, are you taking the micky? The Dave Clark 5?? I think in the States they may have rivalled the Stones, but here in the UK, it was very much just a Beatles/Stones affair.

A shockingly awful band.
11th August 2007 09:48 AM
Ten Thousand Motels
quote:
Honky Tonk Man wrote:
I think in the States they may have rivalled the Stones,...



No way. Not even close.
11th August 2007 10:24 AM
Fiji Joe Dave Clark 5 were like the Beatles...except they could move other parts of their bodies other than their heads



But in comparison to the Stones?...In America?...Dude, we had far more funky than that long before the DC5 ever came about...fuck..we gave the world rock n' roll...





But back to the Stones...Does this remotely reesemble the DC5?







[Edited by Fiji Joe]
11th August 2007 10:37 AM
Kilroy Saw the Dave Clark 5 in 1965
Saw the Rolling Stones in 2005
The girl screamed louder at the DC5
But there was more of them At the Stones.
Both concerts were great.

11th August 2007 12:10 PM
Honky Tonk Man After watching the Dave Clark 5 on those Ready Steady Go! repeats (a programe they were never on first time round btw), I just think they were embarrising. It's all stupid grins and stomping feet.

11th August 2007 01:20 PM
guitarman53 Don't get me wrong, in no way am I a DC5 fan, never have been, but in the 60's, they were very popular, until people discovered the Stones, who were not that popular in '64.
11th August 2007 01:36 PM
Fiji Joe
quote:
guitarman53 wrote:
Don't get me wrong, in no way am I a DC5 fan, never have been, but in the 60's, they were very popular, until people discovered the Stones, who were not that popular in '64.



Right...it's like work before there ever was a casual Friday
11th August 2007 01:43 PM
Gazza
quote:
guitarman53 wrote:
Don't get me wrong, in no way am I a DC5 fan, never have been, but in the 60's, they were very popular, until people discovered the Stones, who were not that popular in '64.



they certainly were over here....
11th August 2007 05:16 PM
glencar Weren't Herman's Hermits also considered rivals for the Stones at one point?
11th August 2007 05:21 PM
Gazza
quote:
glencar wrote:
Weren't Herman's Hermits also considered rivals for the Stones at one point?



Only by very distoibed people...
11th August 2007 05:59 PM
GotToRollMe No kiddin'. The Dave Clark Five weren't even in the same ballpark. The only contenders the Stones ever had (in the U.S. anyway) were the Beatles.
11th August 2007 07:34 PM
the good
quote:
guitarman53 wrote:
In '64 it was a serious question, the Dave Clark 5 or the Rolling Stones, The DC5 were the good looking guys for all the tenny booper magazines, the Rolling stones were consitered the ugliest band in history, there are still girls who think Mick Jagger is gross.



I think we can all agree the Dave Clark 5 have emerged the winners. The Rolling who?
12th August 2007 07:35 AM
Honky Tonk Man Didn't Peter Noon once say that he used to get offended when people in America confused him with Mick Jagger? Or was it the other way round?
12th August 2007 09:50 AM
gimmekeef A fairer thread might be..DC5 versus The Monkees?....From my view the battle was always versus Beatles of course with these bands forming a great second tier:

Who
Animals
Kinks
Yardbirds
12th August 2007 12:26 PM
Your Cousin Lou
quote:
gimmekeef wrote:
A fairer thread might be..DC5 versus The Monkees?....From my view the battle was always versus Beatles of course with these bands forming a great second tier:

Who
Animals
Kinks
Yardbirds


In retrospect, yes. If you look at the charts from 1964, though, you would see that the performance of the DC5 and the Stones is pretty similar. Considering the DC5 wrote most of their own material, they might have somewhat of a case. Of course, they didn't have the longevity. As for your list, the Kinks had some early success in the US, but basically dropped off the radar between 1966 and 1969, when they refused to follow the current trends in music and were banned from the US. The Who were not even on the radar in 1964 (The Who Sing My Generation was not released until 1965) and the Yardbirds were a solid band but did not break as big as the other acts of the British Invasion. In 1964, DC5, the Stones, the Animals and Gerry and the Pacemakers were probably the biggest competition next to the Beatles.
12th August 2007 03:06 PM
Nasty Habits While it is pretty obvious that the Stones had the longevity AND were the superior artists, the Dave Clark Five were far from embarassing, and are not at all the same sort of thing as Herman's Hermits, Gerry & the Pacemakers etc. - their best hits completely stomp and have a killer, huge sound. I equate them more to a hugely underappreciated American band, Paul Revere and the Raiders, than I do with the Freddie and the Dreamers set. Their sound was similar to that of the Pacific Northwest Rockers like the Wailers, the Kingsmen, the Raiders, the Sonics.

I mean, all you have to do is listen to Any Way You Want It to know those guys could go nuclear and get wild if the situation called for it.

If they had a cooler name people would have more respect.

13th August 2007 10:44 AM
gimmekeef If you want to base the case on pure chart power..The Beatles success in the 60's has and never will be challenged.At times they had 6 or 7 of the Top 10.Unprecedented and unmatched...Theres no one during that period worthy of discussion as the Beatles numbers were that staggering....Bands like DC5/Hermans Hermitts/Manfred Mann/Turtles/ etc made some catchy fun tunes but quickly faded.The Stones prominence grew in 69 when the "live" experience grew from small arena PA's with screaming kids to massive sound systems where you could hear the band.Stones just took over that genre and I have always thought the Beatles quitting late 60's may have been tied partially to their inability to carry their studio work effectively over to the developing live scene.Regardless boy those were great times to have lived through!
13th August 2007 10:44 AM
Ten Thousand Motels
quote:
GotToRollMe wrote:
The only contenders the Stones ever had (in the U.S. anyway) were the Beatles.



Well, the Archies gave the Stones a run for their money in 1969 when they knocked HTW off the top of the charts.
13th August 2007 10:49 AM
guitarman53
quote:
gimmekeef wrote:
If you want to base the case on pure chart power..The Beatles success in the 60's has and never will be challenged.At times they had 6 or 7 of the Top 10.Unprecedented and unmatched...Theres no one during that period worthy of discussion as the Beatles numbers were that staggering....Bands like DC5/Hermans Hermitts/Manfred Mann/Turtles/ etc made some catchy fun tunes but quickly faded.The Stones prominence grew in 69 when the "live" experience grew from small arena PA's with screaming kids to massive sound systems where you could hear the band.Stones just took over that genre and I have always thought the Beatles quitting late 60's may have been tied partially to their inability to carry their studio work effectively over to the developing live scene.Regardless boy those were great times to have lived through!


Right on, explained really well.
13th August 2007 01:04 PM
Honky Tonk Man Dave Clark didn't play the drums on their records. According to their Wikipedia entry, a session drummer called Bobby Graham did. This may be disputed, but it's beleivable. Graham was the most respected session drummer in the UK in the 1960's. He played drums on all the early Kinks records.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Clark_5
13th August 2007 01:15 PM
Saint Sway best Rocks Off poll since "Muppets vs. Gwar"?
13th August 2007 02:08 PM
GotToRollMe
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:

Well, the Archies gave the Stones a run for their money in 1969 when they knocked HTW off the top of the charts.




Humiliating!
13th August 2007 02:16 PM
glencar Even worse, "Open Arms" knocked Start Me Up out of the #2 spot in 1981.
13th August 2007 03:49 PM
Ten Thousand Motels
quote:
GotToRollMe wrote:
Humiliating!



13th August 2007 04:45 PM
Chuck The Pretty Things---anybody remember them?



14th August 2007 07:22 AM
glencar
quote:
Nasty Habits wrote:
While it is pretty obvious that the Stones had the longevity AND were the superior artists, the Dave Clark Five were far from embarassing, and are not at all the same sort of thing as Herman's Hermits, Gerry & the Pacemakers etc. - their best hits completely stomp and have a killer, huge sound. I equate them more to a hugely underappreciated American band, Paul Revere and the Raiders, than I do with the Freddie and the Dreamers set. Their sound was similar to that of the Pacific Northwest Rockers like the Wailers, the Kingsmen, the Raiders, the Sonics.

I mean, all you have to do is listen to Any Way You Want It to know those guys could go nuclear and get wild if the situation called for it.

If they had a cooler name people would have more respect.



Good psot, as usual!
14th August 2007 08:55 AM
gimmekeef I agree the DC5 had a big sound and I liked it..But you could loop almost all their tunes into one "sound the same" tune....Actually what attracted me to the Stones was their blues sound versus all the pop stuff coming out back then...
Page: 1 2
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
The Rolling Stones World Tour 2005 Rolling Stones Bigger Bang Tour 2005 2006 Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood - Rolling Stones 2005 Tour - Farewell Tour - Rolling Stones: Onstage World Tour A Bigger Bang US Tour

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED)