Beatles vs Stones

If you ever get the chance to watch the Sgt. Pepper doc about the making of that with George Martin and McCartney, it is an eye opener as to which of them was the pioneer moving them in that movement that Sgt Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour took the music in. I had always assumed it was Lennon and I was wrong.

Those two albums mark the change from single 45 buyers to albums and is also responsible for the birth of FM rock because the formula was no longer what they had to follow.

I was fortunate to know the two pioneers of the Album Oriented Rock format, Lee Abrams and John Sebastian, and the awakening of musicians to the album as a work of art and some indeed had artists do their jackets and liner notes. This also marked the movement of the labels no longer being in 100% control of the artists. The labels didn't tell the AOR programmers what the singles were, they picked their own album cuts.
 
CouchCoach said:
This was my first Stones song that hooked me forever. This was the only song on the album that they wrote, the rest were covers.
Click to expand...

I think that since The Stones did mostly covers when they first started it had a negative effect on the whole Beatles vs Stones debate. The Beatles were sharp pretty much right out of the gate. The Stones needed time to become who they really are/were. When Jimmy Miller arrived The Stones found their true sound and all the pieces started fitting perfectly. Sad to say but even Brian Jones's removal from the band was necessary for their evolution into the blues/rock sound. Without Jimmy Miller and a few other names people don't mention the Stones might never have become the great band they are known to be.
 
Runwildboys said:
In person? No, never. In fact, the only live performances I've ever seen on TV were the early days, before they started to get psychedelic and experimental.

Oh, but if you're asking because of what I said about Jagger's stage presence, I'd rather they just stand around singing, and concentrating on the music, than dancing badly and making faces.
:laugh:
Click to expand...

My sentiments exactly. I think I love only 1 Stones song, and that's Gimme Shelter.
 
It's a Coke or Pepsi thing. I think both bands are really great bands, like All Time Great bands but to me, the biggest difference in the two was timing and the fact that the Beatles were, if not the best song writers, among the best song writers of all time. Not really very good musicians, per say. Stones were much better musicians IMO but writing songs, harmonies, Beatles were really, really good IMO.
 
As a kid I was 100% Rolling Stones and not a big fan of the Beatles. But over time I began to appreciate the Beatles more and more while my love of the Stones faded. Honestly, (I can't get no) Satisfaction was probably one of the top 3 or 4 Rock & Roll songs ever recorded. But the Stones were not the creative geniuses the Beatles were. Over time this became more apparent as the Beatles changed their style several times pushing the envelope. The White Album was simply a work of genius.

Paul McCartney was as talented as they came back in that era. His bass guitar patterns always fit their songs perfectly. Think of all the tunes he wrote or helped write. He was capable of writing different styles and tempos. He was robbed of an Academy Award for his soundtrack to the James Bond movie Live and Let Die I thought. If you were more into Rock & Roll you probably liked the Stones better. That's what drew me to them first.

So many good bands shifted their music style and it killed them. The Beatles were one of the few that did it multiple times with success. They are not may favorite band of all time but I really do appreciate what they brought to their fans. Today I prefer the Eagles to the Beatles. Led Zep to the Stones. Moody Blues to Pink Floyd. Early Pearl Jam to recent Pearl Jam. And music to lyrics.
 
I love the Beatles. But that doesn't mean I hate the Stones. Sympathy for the Devil could be my all time favorite song. It's brilliant!! Both bands are iconic and stood the test of time. And that's pretty amazing for the Beatles since they broke up in 1969. For a band that was together roughly 7 years they made quite a lasting impression and put out a serious catalog that's still very relevant 49 years later. The Stones on the other hand started at the same time and are still going. Also amazing and impressive!
 
Never was much of a huge Stones fan. Always loved the Beatles. My favorite. As liked them at 14-years old in 1989!
 
Big_D said:
I love the Beatles. But that doesn't mean I hate the Stones. Sympathy for the Devil could be my all time favorite song. It's brilliant!! Both bands are iconic and stood the test of time. And that's pretty amazing for the Beatles since they broke up in 1969. For a band that was together roughly 7 years they made quite a lasting impression and put out a serious catalog that's still very relevant 49 years later. The Stones on the other hand started at the same time and are still going. Also amazing and impressive!
Click to expand...
How odd. Sympathy for the Devil is playing on my radio right now.
 
I just bought The Beatles Blue and Red greatest hits albums plus one single song when i'm sixty four on itunes $41.27 total. As a lifelong Stones fan this kind of feels like i sinned and need to go to confession now :laugh:. None the less this Friday night will be all Beatles music for me. Time for me to sit back listen and enjoy a single malt or two. Salut.
 
I'm now wondering if The Beatles would have stayed together and Lennon would have lived, would The Beattles have become more of a rockin style band. Problem i have with The Beatles is some of their music has such a sleepy effect to it. I feel like i'm struggling to get through some of these songs.
 
Sarek said:
I'm now wondering if The Beatles would have stayed together and Lennon would have lived, would The Beattles have become more of a rockin style band. Problem i have with The Beatles is some of their music has such a sleepy effect to it. I feel like i'm struggling to get through some of these songs.
Click to expand...
They're not all hard rock, no...but almost all are very well written and often deep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 90 more.
Total: 1,232 (members: 190, guests: 1,042)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
465,453
Messages
13,875,792
Members
23,791
Latest member
mashburn
Back
Top