The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones | Page 4 | Fab Forum

Introducing the inaugural Fab Forum February Fundraiser! Click here for more details.

Please consider registering
Guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 4 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed sp_TopicIcon
The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones
No permission to create posts
21 September 2012
1.40pm
Avatar
meanmistermustard
Moderator



Forum Posts: 17188
Member Since:
1 May 2011
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

George released one of the best solo beatles albums ever with Cloud 9 in 1987. A very well produced and well rounded album with some incredible songs from an artists who quickly got fed up with the music business and all its executives in the 70's and stopped in '82. It was also nigh-on impossible for him to ever match the quality and success of ATMP from the off.  

I agree about Double Fantasy not being Johns best release but i personally think his music would have improved if he had been lived. For me DF was a "hello, im John, im still alive and kicking and have made a new album, how you all doing?". Of course there is no way we can possibly know what would have happened if John hadnt of been killed but its what i think. He was in a far happier place when he returned having come to peace with his past and himself (thats one of the reasons why i find it incredibly difficult to read the events of September 1980 to January 1981).

I hated Driving Rain and Memory Almost Full, still absolutely detest them, but many folks praise Pauls Chaos and Creation and rank it up with his very best work (i havent heard it because im not paying £7-8 after the previous two, i'll wait till i find it for £3 second hand).

 

As for the Stones i wrote previously that whilst i like their 60's output after that they just repeated the same thing over and over ad nauseum. Saw them in Glasgow about 10/15 years ago and found their concert to be largely dull with songs i did not like at all.

Don’t make your love suffer insecurities, trade the baggage of self to set another one free. ('Paper Skin' - Kendall Payne)
21 September 2012
4.13pm
Avatar
The Walrus
Working for the national health
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1036
Member Since:
4 December 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
21 September 2012
4.48pm
Avatar
Von Bontee
A Hole In The Road
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 2838
Member Since:
14 December 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The Rolling Stones' first attempt at a "proper" rock album came out about the same time as Magical Mystery Tour, by which time The Beatles had already defined the genre with Revolver and Sgt. Pepper's.

Don't really understand this, Walrus...why aren't the Stones' first 4-5 albums "proper" rock albums? Or the Beatles' pre-Revolver albums, for that matter? Are you drawing a line between "rock" and "pop" or "rock 'n roll" or whatever?

One day, a tape-op got a tape on backwards, he went to play it, and it was all "Neeeradno-undowarrroom" and it was "Wow! Sounds Indian!" -- Paul McCartney
22 September 2012
1.15am
Avatar
tkj
The Cavern Club
Forum Posts: 82
Member Since:
7 August 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
22 September 2012
1.20am
Avatar
MKR
The Indra
Forum Posts: 42
Member Since:
29 August 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
22 September 2012
6.45pm
Avatar
The Walrus
Working for the national health
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1036
Member Since:
4 December 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Von Bontee said
The Rolling Stones' first attempt at a "proper" rock album came out about the same time as
Magical Mystery Tour, by which time The Beatles had already defined the genre with Revolver and Sgt. Pepper's.

Don't really understand this, Walrus...why aren't the Stones' first 4-5 albums "proper" rock albums? Or the Beatles' pre-Revolver albums, for that matter? Are you drawing a line between "rock" and "pop" or "rock 'n roll" or whatever?

I am kinda drawing a line between "rock" and "pop", and I don't mean that in a snobby, derogatory way like people often do when they talk about rock. For example, I would probably call Rubber Soul pop, but it is in my five favourite albums. There is also a line between the Sam Cooke/Chuck Berry Rock 'N' Roll and the rock of the Beatles etc. that I suppose comes into play.

I'm talking partly about sound, and partly about being album orientated. Satantic Majesty was the Rolling Stones' first attempt to make an album, rather than record enough songs for an album, as far as I am aware. Before that, I find most of their stuff to be easily accessible, commercial, basically Jagger and Richards' take on A Hard Day's Night or an inspiration for Blur's Parklife. MKR mentions Aftermath- in my eyes closer to pop than rock, though really somewhere in between- and Out Of Their Heads- two of the first great rock songs on here, but zero cohesion as an album, very accessible, not nearly pretentious enough, basically the height of "rock and roll". I've not listened to December's Children, in fact I hadn't heard of it until MKR mentioned it, but a quick glance at Wikipedia makes it out to be the Rolling Stones' equivalent of the Hey Jude LP.

I'd like to reiterate that I don't think being accessible, commercial, radio friendly, or anything like that is a bad thing. In fact I think those are positive qualities for music.

Von Bontee said
MKR, my only real issue with "Country Honk" is that "Honky Tonk Women" is so much better.

I am much the same. Whenever I listen to it, I think "I could be listening to that riff and those sexy vocals". I also don't think it has any particular redeeming features, whereas there are the backing vocals on Revolution #1, and the opening guitar work, and the false start, and the way John sing/sneers those opening lines. Also, I don't like "Honky Tonk Women" for the lyrics, I like it for the general sound, whereas Revolution has great lyrics to go with the sound.

And I neeeeeeeeed her all the time
26 September 2012
7.56am
linkjws
The Star-Club
Forum Posts: 68
Member Since:
24 September 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Ok so I guess here is my two cents on the topic...

I have never been able to get into the stones.  I don't really know why, they are an exciting bluesy rock band from the same time as The Beatles, but they just have never appealed to me.  So whenever this conversation comes up (and it does a bit), I kind of just say I am not in to the stones and thats end it.  I usually say The Beatles were the trail blazers, and the Stones were the gold rushers.  Which leaves some people confused, offended, or both.

That said, I don't think "apples to oranges" describes accurately enough some of the differences and similarities between the two bands.  A lasting impression I had for a while was made by John in his 1970 interview with Rolling Stone Magazine in which he basically said the Stones ripped off The Beatles every album.  I then looked up the recording and release dates of a lot of the works mentioned and a few others, and I laughed a bit.  It does seem like a blatant rip-off in my opinion regarding some material, and certainly album covers and titles.  I was not alive at the time though, but I know stylistically a lot of bands were going through these changes, so I assume that's what the times were like then maybe...?  But John does seem to raise a few good points, and a few points of praise between the bits of bashing.  However John was pretty bitter and spiteful of just about every aspect of his life that wasn't John & Yoko at the time.  

The excerpt is here: 

26 September 2012
5.34pm
Avatar
Von Bontee
A Hole In The Road
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 2838
Member Since:
14 December 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

What did John think was ripped off? The only things I can think of are "As Tears Go By"/"Yesterday" (ballad w/strings) and "Paint It Black"/"Norwegian Wood" (sitar).

One day, a tape-op got a tape on backwards, he went to play it, and it was all "Neeeradno-undowarrroom" and it was "Wow! Sounds Indian!" -- Paul McCartney
26 September 2012
6.14pm
Avatar
meanmistermustard
Moderator



Forum Posts: 17188
Member Since:
1 May 2011
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

He thought that We Love You was a rip off of All You Need Is Love tho i believe the basic tracks of We Love You were recorded first and that Their Satanic Majesties Request was a complete rip off of Pepper. Those are the two that come to mind at the moment, there will be others.

Don’t make your love suffer insecurities, trade the baggage of self to set another one free. ('Paper Skin' - Kendall Payne)
26 September 2012
7.55pm
Avatar
Von Bontee
A Hole In The Road
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 2838
Member Since:
14 December 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"Satanic Majesties" was certainly Pepper-inspired, but there was a lot of that about at that time.

"We Love You" had nothing to do with "All You Need Is Love".

I think John was a bit paranoid. What else did he mention specifically? (I can't view that clip.)

One day, a tape-op got a tape on backwards, he went to play it, and it was all "Neeeradno-undowarrroom" and it was "Wow! Sounds Indian!" -- Paul McCartney
Forum Timezone: America/Chicago

Most Users Ever Online: 597

Currently Online: Necko, meanmistermustard, Ahhh Girl, Annadog40, Merch, Silly Girl, LH64, Iamwilliame, SomertonView
49 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

meanmistermustard: 17171

Ahhh Girl: 10762

Annadog40: 9782

Zig: 7567

parlance: 7092

mr. Sun king coming together: 6980

Mr. Kite: 6092

Silly Girl: 5846

trcanberra: 5550

Ron Nasty: 4952

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 87

Members: 3336

Moderators: 4

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 3

Forums: 42

Topics: 3820

Posts: 202478

Newest Members:

SomertonView, Mercury7, babapez, tom_pw, beatlezoe

Moderators: Ahhh Girl: 10762, meanmistermustard: 17171, Zig: 7567, Joe: 4392

Administrators: Joe: 4392, Ellie: 3

Members Birthdays
sp_BirthdayIcon
Today: DrBeatle
Upcoming: None