Beatles vs Stones

Sarek

Sarek

Povar
Messages
8,099
Reaction score
12,006
Ok so most know i am a Stones fan, on a side note i will add that i never really enjoyed The Beatles music, i think some of it is ok, but it rarley ever makes me feel anything like wow or excitement or anything really. I know The Beatles were first and they had many hit records in a very short time and they could be considered to never really have had any bad or terrible records. I understand all that.

What i want to know is what is it to you that makes The Beatles so good? What does their music make you feel like and why do you consider them to be very good/great/the best ever.

I'm not really trying to compare bands, maybe i should have picked a better title for this thread, i also want to know why so many people see them as untouchable and beyond comparison.

Something that can't be answered now is, how will these two bands be matched up aganist each other 100 years from now. Most people who grew up with these bands will probably have bias myself included, but i think down the road that bias will be gone and how will those peoples judge these two bands.

I wish i enjoyed The Beatles music more than i do, but everytime i try to listen to it i feel almost nothing and quickly find myself getting bored.

I made this thread for information purposes for myself and anyone who might find it useful, most times when this topic is brought up in RL quickly emotions are brought into it and the whole discussion spirals downward.

I really want to enjoy The beatles music more than i do, maybe some opinions/facts/info will help me do that.

I'm all ear's or should i say eyes. :)

Here's alittle something both bands did together or atleast i think they did.
 
Well to start, I should say that I prefer the Beatles over the Stones. The only Stones album I'll ever own is Some Girls. I just love that album. They have other individual songs I like, such as Waiting on a Friend, Time Is on My Side, Wild Horses, and a few others, but generally I don't care for Mick Jagger's voice or his stage presence.

The Beatles early stuff I could do without, but once they got into the psychedelic and experimental stuff, I love it. I also like a lot of the solo stuff the band members did, especially Paul.

While I don't consider John's Imagine to be one of my absolute favorite songs, I do think it's possibly the most important song ever written, from a philosophical standpoint.
 
Runwildboys said:
Well to start, I should say that I prefer the Beatles over the Stones. The only Stones album I'll ever own is Some Girls. I just love that album. They have other individual songs I like, such as Waiting on a Friend, Time Is on My Side, Wild Horses, and a few others, but generally I don't care for Mick Jagger's voice or his stage presence.

The Beatles early stuff I could do without, but once they got into the psychedelic and experimental stuff, I love it. I also like a lot of the solo stuff the band members did, especially Paul.

While I don't consider John's Imagine to be one of my absolute favorite songs, I do think it's possibly the most important song ever written, from a philosophical standpoint.
Click to expand...
Have you ever seen The Beatles live in concert and would you consider them a good/great live band?
 
Sarek said:
Have you ever seen The Beatles live in concert and would you consider them a good/great live band?
Click to expand...
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:
 
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...
I dismissed the Jagger statement. I'm really just looking for statements about what makes The Beatles great to somebody. I'm still looking for more opinions/info/facts about The Beatles. Are they considered a great live band or just a great studio band or both?
 
Sarek said:
I dismissed the Jagger statement. I'm really just looking for statements about what makes The Beatles great to somebody. I'm still looking for more opinions/info/facts about The Beatles. Are they considered a great live band or just a great studio band or both?
Click to expand...
I don't think I've ever heard anyone call them a great live band. To me, it's about the writing, the originality, and the way they played off each other. If the Beatles had never existed, I think music would be so much different and so much lesser than it is now.
 
I was much more a Stones guy, growing up. The only Beatles album I bought was the White Album. Band On The Run was one of the first albums I ever bought if that counts. I grew to appreciate them more for what they brought to the table as I got older. Kinda like I appreciate the Tin Lizzie because it lead to the Shelby GT's.

I had this conversation with a couple "old" guys at work a long time ago. Both were big Beatles fans and they responded to my lukewarm opinion by saying, "I guess you had to be there". Makes sense. I'm sure I'd appreciate the Model-T more If I lived in that time and had no clue what the future held in its advancement.

On a side note. The night I bought the White Album I listened to it beginning to end. When it finished I switched the receiver to FM and the very first thing I heard was the news of Lennon being shot.
 
This is such a tough call which could go either way. If I had to pick one it would be Rush, err I mean the Beatles because their stuff on Rubber Soul and afterwards was awesome.
 
Never cared for the Beatles. The music is just too pop and too soft for me. Not that I don't recognize their influence and contribution, I just don't dig their sound.

I am not a Stones junkie, but there are three Stones albums that I consider outstanding works and music I could solely rely on for a long time with nothing else.

Can you name those three albums?
 
I'll take a shot at it. :laugh:

I would say Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main St are two of three. The third one might be a little tricky, but i'm gonna go with let Let it Bleed. Now if you don't consider Exile a regular album cause it's a double well then i will need to guess again.
 
Sarek said:
I'll take a shot at it. :laugh:

I would say Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main St are two of three. The third one might be a little tricky, but i'm gonna go with let Let it Bleed. Now if you don't consider Exile a regular album cause it's a double well then i will need to guess again.
Click to expand...
Damn........dead bang! Nice work.
 
nightrain said:
Damn........dead bang! Nice work.
Click to expand...
The Stones have a few albums that aren't so good, those three are their best. I also enjoy, Beggars Banquet - Goats Head Soup - It's only Rock n Roll. Other albums have some good songs but not the whole album.
 
Stones best live Album used to be bootleg, not sure if it's considered such anymore........Brussels Affair 1973, it's very fast tempo which i like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

Total: 753 (members: 100, guests: 653)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
465,455
Messages
13,876,057
Members
23,791
Latest member
mashburn
Back
Top