Beatles or Stones?

[foolosophy]

The typical good vs. evil cliché. Both represent the biggest era in Rock & Roll history but it always seems that The Beatles get all the props. I mean you can literally make this decision with the toss of a coin, both sides are about as big as it gets in the music business. So I want this boards opinion. Beatles or Stones?

[ThePaska]

Both are timeless as can be, Beatles are more my style though. For me what it comes down to is quality and quantity of the songs and Beatles win those categories. I love both, Rolling Stones have many, many amazing songs, but I find that I enjoy the majority of The Beatles songs a lot more.

Just looking at how much I listen to each of them, I listen to the Beatles twice as much. So at this point in time The Beatles win over The Rolling Stones musically for me.

[battle_axe_of_doom]

for the most part i hate the stones. they've made their share of amazing songs, but in their 40 year career they've blown for about 70% of it.

beatles easily. not even a contest. **** the stones

[Raider87]

for the most part i hate the stones. they've made their share of amazing songs, but in their 40 year career they've blown for about 70% of it.

beatles easily. not even a contest. **** the stones

QFT!

The Stones don't even come close...

[tucsonovernite]

well if i gotta pick just one I'm taking the Rolling Stones ---the "golden era" from 68-72 is just so sweet...especially Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main St....oh, so yummy---

not to dismiss thier pre Beggars Banquet material jeez theirs a few dozen great tracks you could cull from that...

"I'm zipping through the days at lightning speed.
Plug in, flush out and fire the ****in' feed.
Heading for the overload,
Splattered on the dirty road,
Kick me like you've kicked before,
I can't even feel the pain no more."
- Rocks Off
Exile on Main Street
..man Mick only got his rocks off while he was sleeeeepppinnnn....

[cyantsunami]

Beatles hands down.

Could never get into the Rolling stones.

[no_direction_home]

for the most part i hate the stones. they've made their share of amazing songs, but in their 40 year career they've blown for about 70% of it.

beatles easily. not even a contest. **** the stones

i like you more and more every day

[JackBNimble]

To most of you this is total BLASPHEMY but I personaly can't stand the Beatles.I think what did it for me was their first few years of BUBBLE GUM pop or rock or what ever you wanna call it.I know they do have alot of good music after that era.
I do like the Stones, 40 years together, how many bands can say that?All though they did have alot of hit and miss to,and some times alot more misses.But my vote is for the Stones.

[battle_axe_of_doom]

i think technically its more of a blasphemous statement to say that the beatles suck but wutev

fact is who cares about the fact they've been together for 40 yrs when they've SUCKED for 30 of them?? also about the beatles being pop, what do you think the stones were?? i'm not saying they're pop but when the beatles were experimenting the stones were still playing their generic form of white man's r&b.

[Xzyliac]

The Beatles are far more important and influential than the Stones. The initial years weren't impressive but with age comes wisdom and they were extremely creative and unique. The writing and presentation set the standard. I respect and love the Beatles.

The Stones are the anti-Beatles. They had a similar impact but it was less diverse. They began the crunchy, raw, imperfect rock. Really the anti-everything the Beatles began with. Whereas the Beatles evolved and explored the Stones perfected their style.

[Skeleton73]

Hard to say.
On one hand, the Stones have been going on, through good and band, for 4 decades. Mick is still considered by some to all that, and Keith is still a helluva guitar player. Charlie Watts, one of the best drummers out there. Ron Wood, solid as well.
The Beatles, commercial fluff to start off with, and without a solid hand to guide them managerially, fell apart like a house of cards. Also blessed/cursed us with the whole concept album idea. (well, and that blame can also go to Zappa, but that's another thread). McCartney n Lennon, when on the ball, could write stuff that no one could touch. Harrison, amazing and overlooked guitarist, and for all intents and purposes Starr has been cited by many as being one of the steadiest beats in rock.
Although both bands have influenced many, I'd have to give the edge to the Beatles. If Frank Sinatra can give them props, as he mistakenly did when saying Macca & Lennon wrote one of the best love songs he ever heard ("Something", actually written by Harrison), then how can I argue with the Chairman of the Board?

[Xzyliac]

I still can't decide. I'm waiting for the part where Battle Axe *****es about my post.

[battle_axe_of_doom]

^ fine...


The Beatles are far more important and influential than the Stones. The initial years weren't impressive but with age comes wisdom and they were extremely creative and unique. The writing and presentation set the standard. I respect and love the Beatles.

The Stones are the anti-Beatles. They had a similar impact but it was less diverse. They began the crunchy, raw, imperfect rock. Really the anti-everything the Beatles began with. Whereas the Beatles evolved and explored the Stones perfected their style.

**** u stones suck beatles own yada yada yada

i gotta go to school thats the best i can do

[Xzyliac]

^ fine...



**** u stones suck beatles own yada yada yada

i gotta go to school thats the best i can do

Damn. I'm disappointed.

Well I chose Beatles so there. Be happy.

[WiredRacing]

Yeah I've always wondered why this is even a debate. But the again, I guess it depends on what's important to you in music.

Ultimately I'm not sure staying power (4 decades) is necessarily a component that makes a great band... except perhaps for the guys IN the band. But I challenge a lot of people to honestly lay claim to anything good out of the Stones in the last 20 years. So I think that issue is moot.

That said, I also can't say that the very early Beatles years stand up. Songs like 'Please, Please Me' and 'From Me To You' and such are very weak under todays standards and don't hold up. But they were very young and rock was still quite new, especially in the UK. So they wrote a bunch of chick songs and through it built an insane fan base. But you know they grew up, life expanded and so did the song writing.

Now grant you, I would say they wern't the best players around, but their composition is unsurpassed. I liken them (or at least George Martin) to the Beastie Boys of their time. They experimented a lot, and in turn, invented a number of technilogical advances for recording. The band is just legendary, and while all the individual members were very talented in all their own ways (and legendary), separately, they could never quite match The Beatles... which I always wonder how much is really attributed to George Martin, he obviously had a huge influence in how they sounded, there was a lot of production to their music for the time, I would have to guess the Stones were pretty raw in comparison at the time. Then there's all the styles and influences that made it into their music. Their catalog is just so much more varied.

For me, there will never be another band like the Beatles. It just can't/won't ever happen again. And even though I'm a McCartney guy, there will never be another John Lennon. And all of them influenced music from then on, so much more, than the stones ever did or will.

And I feel that way only being 30... I can just imagine how the people who were around the Beatles when they were "now" feel about them.

As for the Stones.. there's a lot of bands that had short runs that are regarded (unfairly?) as great, like.. I dunno. Soundgarden.. Nirvana.. GnR and then there's so many bands that would have benefited from quitting while they were ahead... such as.. Aerosmith (good god, they must be stopped), U2 (jesus, I just can't take them anymore), Pearl Jam... Metallica (it would seem) and of course, The Rolling Stones. I guess this has something to do with a comfort zone, or your fan base and all of it growing old... cause RHCP are a shade of their former selves.. but at least they're still putting out decent stuff that doesn't make my ears bleed.

[mhg420]

Keith Richards alone > The Beatles

[battle_axe_of_doom]

keith richards is an overrated piece of **** who should ****ing die already

[kickin]

To most of you this is total BLASPHEMY but I personaly can't stand the Beatles.I think what did it for me was their first few years of BUBBLE GUM pop or rock or what ever you wanna call it.I know they do have alot of good music after that era.
I do like the Stones, 40 years together, how many bands can say that?All though they did have alot of hit and miss to,and some times alot more misses.But my vote is for the Stones.

That was THAT time though. All of those bands were like that...but what set the Beatles apart was A) They wrote their own songs AND B) There was a certain hysteria to their performing (not in the audience's involvement), but just in their performance. The Shea Stadium performance is evidence enough. They clearly had more to them then most of the bands of their era.

So, in short, blame the era, not the band, because they obviously grew out of the confindes of their era.

[tucsonovernite]

So, in short, blame the era, not the band, because they obviously grew out of the confindes of their era.

Thank God for Bob Dylan....getting the beatles a lil puff puff action on

Richards is still rockin'...seen the Stones twice live in the last 10 years (97 and ~'03 i think) anyway the first show was very good and 5 years later they put on an even better performance...**** 40 years they can still rock Mick didn't stop moving the whole show..oh man very nice! opened w/ Street Fighting Man!

[theTolly]

I just wish Brian Jones had lived in Liverpool.:rolleyes:

[theTolly]

"Now grant you, I would say they wern't the best players around, but their composition is unsurpassed. I liken them (or at least George Martin) to the Beastie Boys of their time."

When I was a teen-ager (30 now) I used to always say that the Beastie Boys were the closest thing we had to a Beatles as far as spirit. Not the impact, not the sound, but the heart and spirt. They actually strove to enlighten people at the same time that they were constantly evolving and experimenting in their music. Of course that is like comparing a pebble against a mountain.

[WiredRacing]

Yeah I'd say that's quite true as well. They're definately an honourable band. I heard recently they've been nominated for induction into the RnR Hall of Fame. Which, is certainly well deserved. I expect history will show them to be one of the top 5 bands of my (our) generation (the best in my eyes but you gotta have a taste for their sound).

Maybe HMX can get Egg Raid on Mojo or Holy Snappers out for DLC. :) Or Heart Attack Man! I would **** a brick for Gratitude.

[Nilsen31]

The Beatles.


Noone has done more for music or written as good music.


The Beatles just had an insane amount of good songs/hits...I mean I'm talkin hundreads.


And when you take McCartney's, Lennon's, Harrison's and hell even Ringo's solo career...you add even more great songs.



You could fill an iPod with all those hits and be listening for days without hearing the same song twice.


it's just ridiculous what they've done for music.

[theTolly]

The thing about the Beatles is, they not only changed music, but they changed bits of everything. They influenced all their peers, fashion(even had their own shop, ran by the Fool), religious thinking (by helping to highlight eastern religion and spiritualism), drug culture, and even politics. They were the most respected band by other musicians not only because of their music, but their impact as well. They literally influenced the whole world in some way at the time. No other rock band has ever done this. They were four amazing personalities who could shine as bright as the sun on their own, but together they were a supernova. The Stones, while a fun band and decent songwriters, never quite accomplished the same thing. Yes, they have some great songs. Yes, Brian Jones may be the coolest rocker ever(definitely the best hair), but were they as relevant as the Beatles? No. Did they have as many hits? No. Did they do as much heroin as.. well that's a whole different discussion. Point is, the Beatles far overwhelm any band in the history of Rock as far as importance if for no other reason than the cultural impact. Even Frank Sinatra gave it up to the Beatles... kinda.

[clearGHOST]

The Beatles hands down

[vengefulmariner]

Definately the Beatles, although I still LOVE the Stones.

[SRButton]

The Beatles......no contest.

[Jealleo]

QFT!

The Stones don't even come close...

This is off topic but...

I am such a net speak newb I thought QFT was Quit F***King Talking. Turns out the people here are not as rude and agree a lot more then I thought. :p

[tucsonovernite]

They were four amazing personalities who could shine as bright as the sun on their own, but together they were a supernova. The Stones, while a fun band and decent songwriters, never quite accomplished the same thing. Yes, they have some great songs. .

ya know you can build up your beatles w/out tearing down the stones....i can appreciate your caveat, but come on, a fun band w/ decent songwriters?!?! me laughy at you!!!

Oh and I thank God Dylan took the time to share a lil puff puff w/ them beatles or who knows how things woulda turned out?!? :eek:

[King_Nuthin]

I'm not interested in debating their merits and their roles in music history, just in terms of what band is more my style, Stones, hands down.

[dlisapussy]

The typical good vs. evil cliché.

I'd have to disagree on that alone.

The Beatles were considered the good ones when compared to The Rolling Stones, but they were only good boys for about two year or three years. Then drugs came into their lives in 1965. They did just as much drugs if not more then The Stones. They never wrote about evil things, but then again, The Rolling Stones weren't exactly evil either. They just weren't afraid to offend.

[foolosophy]

I'd have to disagree on that alone.

The Beatles were considered the good ones when compared to The Rolling Stones, but they were only good boys for about two year or three years. Then drugs came into their lives in 1965. They did just as much drugs if not more then The Stones. They never wrote about evil things, but then again, The Rolling Stones weren't exactly evil either. They just weren't afraid to offend.

Well I guess I was referring to the more "family" oriented sing-a-long songs that The Beatles made. You could pop in a Beatles tune in the car with family and friends and everyone would at least know the chorus. Their mainstream songs were "good". Not to say they never made any songs under the influence or about drugs, they were just good at hiding it (ala Lucy in the Sky). The Rolling Stones didn't have "evil" lyrics in a literal sense but their songs weren't as "family friendly" I guess, given exceptions (Satisfaction). Basically I'm just saying they were opposites in figurative terms, at least in the eyes of the public.

[THEBEATLESWEREGENUIS!]

I really have to debunk the total inaccurate ignorant things some have said about The Beatles on here.

Even, Ozzy Osbourne said in an online 2002 Bender Magazine interview that The Beatles Are The Greatest Band To Ever Walk The Earth. He's been a huge fan since he's been a teenager and he says not loving The Beatles is like not loving oxogen! The Rolling Stones were very good friends and fans of The Beatles and Mick Jagger was at 4 Beatles recording sessions and Keith Richards was at 2 of them with them. Also,The Beatles even wrote one of The Rolling Stones first hits with the song, I Wanna Be You're Man in late 1963. As for the other inaccurate comments that some people say The Beatles didn't even stay together for 2 decades, well they didn't have to because they did about 50 years worth of innovative, creative, diverse, prolific great critically acclaimed popular songs and albums in just a remarkable 8 year recording career!

The Beatles are in The Song Writing Hall Of Fame & The Vocal Hall of Fame, and As The All Music Guide says in their excellent Beatles biography, "So much has been said and written about The Beatles and their story is so mythic in it's sweep that it's difficult to summarize their career without restating cliche's that have already been digested by tens of millions of rock fans, to start with the obvious, they were the greatest and most influential act of the rock era, and introduced more innovations into popular music than any other rock band of the 20th century." "As voсalists John Lennon & Paul McCartney were among the best and most expressive in rock and the groups harmonies were intricate and exhillirating."

And music critics as well as brilliant classical composer Leonard Bernstein called John & Paul the most brilliant song writers of the 20th century when they were still a band . As for The Beatles playing live, they sounded pretty good playing live considering that when they were playing in 1963, 1964, 1965, and 1966 the sound systems back then were very limited and primitive, they only had 100 watt amplifiers, no feedback monitors so they couldn't even hear themselves play and sing, yet they amazingly played in tune and in sync anyway, and at the August 1965 Shea Stadium concert which was the first big outdoor rock concert with over 55,000 fans, they were plugged into the PA system that they announce baseball games with plus the screaming crowds drowing out their great music! Can you imagine The Rolling Stones and The Who playing on these very limited primitive sound systems? They wouldn't have sounded much better! Thats why they gave up touring, because they were serious music artists, composers, and musicians and they wanted their great music to be heard and valued. It would be like Beethoven playing on these limited primitive sound systems and screaming crowds! Also they were now writing music that was too complex to reproduce on stage at that time.

On the roof top concert in The Let It Be Film, they sounded great, because by January 1969 the sound systems had improved somewhat(although not anywhere near the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's and especially today's!) and they had changed and people had changed so there were no more screaming crowds so they could be heard. When I was a teenager I met 3 people who saw The Beatles in concert two of them were teachers who saw them in 1966 and he and she told me they were great,and my cousin saw them at age 16 at The Baltimore Colsieum in 1964 the year before I was born, and she said they were great.

Former Kiss guitarist and grammy winning producer Bob Kulick who made the heavy metal Beatles tribute album Butchering The Beatles last year, says in an online interview, that he saw The Beatles at Shea Stadium in 1966 and that he could only make out pieces of the songs because of the screaming, but he could make out the songs Baby's In Black and Paperback Writer and he said they sounded amazing! He also calls The Beatles The Greatest Rock Band Ever! George Harrison at only age 14 would stay up playing his guitar until he got all of the chords exactly right and his fingers were bleeding! And One of The Beatles engineers Geoff Emerick says that in early 1966 when The Beatles were recording John's song I'm Only Sleeping, George Harrison played backwards guitar the most difficult way possible even though he could have taken an easy way,and it took him 6 hours just to do the guitar overdubs! He then made it doubly difficult by adding even more distorted gitars and Geoff says this was all George's idea and that he did all of the playing!

Eric Clapton said in a 1992 interview when he and George were asked what they admired about each other during their Japan tour, that George is a fantastic slide guitar player. He and George were very good friends and they obviously admired and respected each others guitar playing and George played guitar on Cream's song Badge. Roger McGuinn of The Byrds says The Beatles used unusual folk rock chords in their early music and that they invented folk rock without even knowing it! He started to play a 12 string guitar after he saw and heard George Harrison playing one in The Beatles great film A Hard Day's Night in early 1964. In an online Eric Clapton interview called, Eric Clapton In His Own Words, he says that John Lennon was a pretty good guitar player and he would have known since he played live in concert with John as a member of John's 1969 Plastic Ono Band.

On an excellent site called,The Evolution Of Rock Bass Playing McCartney Style by Dennis Alstrand Stanley Clarke, Will Lee, Billy Sheehan, Sting, George Martin, and John Lennon are all quoted saying what a great, melodic, influential bass guitar player Paul McCartney has always been!
Wilco's John Stirratt also said in a Bass Player interview online when asked what bass players has had the most impact on his playing and the first thing he said is,"Paul McCartney is one of the greatest bass players of all time,if you listen to what he was tracking live in the studio it's unbelievable." "With his tone and musicality he was a huge influence =,he covered all of his harmonic responsibilities really well but his lines were absolutely melodic and inventive."


The 1992 Rolling Stone Album Guide calls Paul a remarkable bass player and rightfully calls John & Paul the 2 greatest song writers in rock history! Both Phil Collins and Max Weinberg both Beatles fans and both praise Ringo's drumming and Phil Collins says that Ringo's great drumming on A Day In The Life can't be repeated even by him! Also on Rankopedia The Beatles are # 1 Greatest Rock Band,# 1 Greatest Most Innovative Rock Band,John &Paul are # 1 Greatest Rock Song Writers, John &Paul are on The Greatest Rock Male Vocalist list, and Paul McCartney is # 2 after John Enwistle as Greatest Rock Bass Players, John Paul Jones is # 6, and Bill Wynman is # 20! And on Digitaldreamdoor where many musicians post,The Beatles are # 1 Greatest Rock Artists,John &Paul are # 1 Greatest Rock Song Writers, they are both on The Greatest Rock Male Vocalists list, and Paul McCartney is # 8 out of 100 Greatest Rock Bass Players, John Paul Jones is # 21, and Bill Wynman is # 95! George Harrison is # 54 On The Greatest Rock Guitarists out of over 100.

And there are many music professors teaching music courses at good universities on the brilliance of The Beatles especially of John &Paul, including by award winning music professor and composer Dr.Glen Gass, who has been teaching a course on The Beatles and rock music at Indiana University since 1982. On his web site for his course it says the main purpose of this course is to get students to have a better appreciation of this extraordinary group and their remarkable recordings. Dr.Gary Kendal's Beatles course is the most requested course at North Western University. And a music professor by the last name of Heinonen teaches a Beatles course at JYVASKYLA University in Finland, and the university of California also teaches a Beatles course etc.

Also check out Keno's Classic Rock n Roll Site he also runs a Rolling Stones &John Lennon fan site. And he made a Top 10 List and voted and the fans voted. He voted John &Paul # 2 after Bob Dylan as Greatest Rock Song Writers, the fans voted them # 1! He voted Paul McCartney # 2 after John Entwistle as Greatest Rock Bass Player, the fans voted Paul # 3. He voted John Lennon # 2 after Keith Richards as Greatest Rock Rhythm Guitarist, and the fans voted John in a tie with Jimi Hendrix and Brian Jones at # 4 ! He voted John Lennon # 1 in a tie with Elvis as Greatest Male Rock Vocalist and the fans voted John # 1, he voted Paul # 6 and the fans voted him # 7. Ken says Darn The Beatles were one great group in his review of The Beatles album 1967-1970, and he also says that John on Get Back showed why he should have played lead guitar more often because he did such a good job! He also said that John on their hard rocking great 1968 single Revolution,played one of the first and best acid guitar parts.And he also said that John played a pretty good slide guitar on George's For Your Blue. And he says in his review of The Beatles 1962-1966,that if you don't love or at least like The Beatles and their music than you are not a true rock fan and more than likely will never get it. And Brian Wilson said on a 1995 Nightline TV Beatles tribute show, that Sgt.Pepper is the single greatest album he ever heard, and he played With A Little Help From Friends on the piano and he said I just love this song. He also said he thinks John Lennon &Paul McCartney were the 2 greatest song writers of the 20th century! He also said when he first heard The Beatles great 1965 album Rubber Soul, that he was blown away by it, he said all of the songs flowed together and it was pop music but folk rock at the same time, and this is what he couldn't believe. He said this inspired him to make Pet Sounds. Elton John said in a 1991 CBS morning news show, when he was asked who he musically admires, he said You can talk about your Rogers &Hammerstein but for the quality of quanity songs that Lennon & McCartney did in that short period of time, they were the 2 greatest song writers of the 20th century! Most music artists want to believe and want the public to believe that *their* the greatest so when they say other music artists are the greatest it really means a lot! The Beatles are also the most covered music artists of all time with everyone from Motown, jazz, classical, and even heavy metal music recording their great diverse music!

And in 2001 VH1 had a panel of well known musicans and music critcs, that voted The Beatles The Greatest Rock Band Ever, and in 2004 Rolling Stone did the same thing and several people said on message boards that Rolling Stone had a recent pael poll like this and The Beatles were voted # 1 again and for darn great reasons too! Nobody created as much innovative, creative, quality,critically acclaimed, popular diverse songs and albums in such a short amazing period of time as The Beatles and thats why most people know that The Beatles Are The Greatest Rock Band That Ever Was Or Will Be!!!! Oh and A Day's Night is a great pop rock album!!!! And even Bob Dylan said decades ago about The Beatles early music, that their chords were outrageous, and the harmonies were wonderful and they were doing things in music that nobody had done before, and music critics of The London Times were praising their interesting and unusual chords that they used even in early songs like She Loves You & I Want To Hold Your Hand. Which were not as simple as they seemed and had clever subtleties in them. In fact Bob Dylan said in a Rolling Stone interview this Spring that he's in awe of Paul McCartney and he said he's the only one he's in awe of. He said that Paul has the melody, he has the rhthym and he can sing the ballad very good, and he can play any instrument.

He also said there were no better singers than John Lennon &Paul McCartney and he said if George wasn't stuck in the shadow behind John &Paul and he said who wouldn't get stuck, he would have emerged as a great song writer in his own right anyway.

And by the way I have read some people saying on message boards that they don't think The Rolling Stones were the best technical musicians, and many even some fans have said they haven't done anything good in 35 years, and that their overrated and I have also found many people saying they hate or don't like The Rolling Stones and many people say the only Rolling Stones song they like is Paint It Black! Oh and by the way, in every major poll of The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones, The Beatles always win as # 1 even on sites and message boards that are not Beatles fan sites! And when we look at the solo career comparison of Mick Jagger's and Keith Richards solo careers with John, Paul & George's, the facts are John Lennon's first brilliant solo album, and his second great album Imagine are rightfully critically acclaimed, and I love John's Walls & Bridges album and Paul McCartney's first solo album McCartney is very good, and he played every instrument all by himself at age 27, and he played so many different instruments great! Wings 1975 Venus &Mars is a great rock album too!

And he and Denny Laine are the only musicians on Paul's great 1973 Band On The Run album, which is critically acclaimed and popular, and he played every instrument by himself again on McCartney 2 in 1979, and most of the instruments on his 1997 Flaming Pie album, and his 2 recent acclaimed popular albums, Chaos And Creation In The Backyard, and Memory Almost Full. And John Paul Jones, David Gilmore, John Bonham &Pete Townsend all played on 2 songs with Paul and Wings on the last Wings album Back To The Egg, in 1979, and they played in the last Wings concert too in December 1979. You know I have found over 50 former Beatles haters on many message boards and web sites that are noe HUGE Beatles fans and many say they are now their favorite band and that they were the Greatest Band Ever! I didn't communicate with these people but they said in their posts that they had a lot of inaccurate misperceptions of The Beatles and they hadn't even heard most of The Beatles great songs and albums!

Most people don't hate The Beatles in the first place, most people of all ages all around the world love or at least like their music, but it's really something for former haters to turn into big fans and it just goes to show how Great The Beatles music is!!!!

And I and many people understandably feel that John Lennon had the best rock voices ever! George Martin said John's voice was one of the best he ever heard, and in May 1967 when The Beatles were recording their song, Baby You're A Rich Man, two recording engineers said they were always fascinated with the sound of John Lennon's voice, and they always wanted to record it live and when they heard him singing this song live they said they couldn't believe how great his voice was and that anyone could sing that well live.

And there are many people on message boards saying they can't stand the sound of Robert Plant's and Mick Jagger's voices, and Bruce Springteen has one of the worst voices I have ever heard, he sounds like he's throwing up to a music backing! I have to turn the radio off as soon as he's on, and the same thing with Tom Petty, he has a terrible nasally bad voice! Bob Dylan has never been considered to have a good voice but I can tolerate him.







-

[MrFruitLord]

Way to necropost.

[timmay9]

At least it was a long necropost. Kudos for the effort (unless you copy/pasted it from somewhere).

[afterstasis]

At least it was a long necropost. Kudos for the effort (unless you copy/pasted it from somewhere).

i've got an affirmative on that after a quick yahoo search. :)

[TeamAliceFTW]

tl;dr. Anyways. I love the Stones, but The Beatles just fits my style for music more.

[Rockbandfan23467]

So, report that guy and get this thread locked?

[THEBEATLESWEREGENUIS!]

Also, The Beatles were *NEVER* a boy band at all not even in 1963, 1964 and 1965, and they were Mostly a Great *ROCK* Band from the start! They started out playing 8 hours a night for two years in a row playing in the sleazy strip clubs of Hamburg Germany wearing tight leather black pants and jackets, cursing and smoking on stage, and taking speed pills to awake, drinking plenty of alcohol and going to bed with many young women groupies. The cleaned up image was a fake joke that their manager Brian Epstein created which John hated and resented the most.

There were a lot of rough thugs who came into those clubs, and if they played bad live, they would have beaten the crap out of them playing 8 hours a night for 2 years! Instead they became the most popular successful group in these German clubs even with all of the competition from other groups from England and Germany! They also played live in The Cavern Club for several years. They worked very hard to get where they got!

The Beatles wrote many great rock songs that were pretty rocking for the time, John's great song You Can't Do That from early 1964 which he played lead guitar on for the first time, Paul's great blues rocker, She's A Woman from late 1964, John's I Feel Fine from late 1964, with the first use of feedback guitar, and one of the first songs to have a great guitar riff, a year before The Rolling Stone's Satisfaction came out, Paul's screaming hard rocker especially for 1965, I'm Down which they played even louder and more screaming at the August 1965 Shea Stadium concert, plus Day Tripper, Paperback Writer, She Said She Said, And You're Bird Can Sing, Taxman, all with heavy electric guitar sounds, John's 1968 hard rocking single Revolution, Yer Blues, Birthday, Back In The USSR, While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Everybody's Got Something To Hide Except Me & My Monkey, plus Paul's Helter Skeklter which as many people have pointed out was the first heavy metal songs, plus John's I Want You She's So Heavy on Abbey Road which many people have also pointed out was one of the first heavy metal songs, plus his great rocker Come Together,John's Hey Bulldog Paul's Oh Darling, You Never Give Me Your Money, and the hard rocking jam of Paul, George,and John on the song The End, etc!! So anyone saying The Beatles were not a rock band You Are Wrong!!

The Rolling Stones were very good friends and fans of The Beatles and Mick Jagger was at 4 Beatles recording sessions and Keith Richards was at 2 of them with them! The Beatles even wrote one of The Rolling Stones first hits with the song, I Wanna Be You're Man in late 1963.John and Paul wrote it front of them,and Keith and Mick were like wow,how can you write a song just like that? And it inspired them to start writing their own songs.


Mick Jagger was such a big Beatles fan that when The Beatles were recording their song, Baby You're A Rich Man in May 1967, he came there and stood on the sidelines just to watch and listen to them record it and his name was on the tape box because he likely sang at the end verses.

I also have to say, that I have always totally hated Led Zeppelin they truly sound like one of the worst groups I have ever had the misfortune of hearing! They along with Queen and Pink Floyd are the only 3 groups that I have to get up off of my chair even if I'm very tired and turn off immediately!

The Who, The Rolling Stones, and Jimi Hendrix are all a million times better! And The Beatles are Certainly a ZILLION times BETTER!! Van Halen sounds pretty good compared to them!


I have also found many other people who hate Led Zeppelin and feel they are one of the worst bands ever too, and even some people on heavy metal sites. Oh and I have also read many people on music boards saying that Led Zeppelin's lyrics are simple,and not that good and like a teenage boy wrote them !

[Rockbandfan23467]

I've seen that on a ton of other websites, you should get a life and stop posting that every time someone flames the beatles!

[THEBEATLESWEREGENUIS!]

No I have a life and it includes loving The Beatles and having studied about them since I was 11 and I have a lot of great information to debunk ignorant inaccurate garbage said about them! I was hoping to contribute my :mad: knowledge here and was hoping it would have been part of the discussion and hopefully be appreciated!

But you should get a life if you don't like reading the information I have. And I'm going to continue to debunk this inaccurate ignorant crap about them as many places as I can! A Russion site found my post on some other message board and translated it on their site Fun Distribution and they said some of what I said is suffiently interesting!

[a21schizoidman]

re-posting things that you stole or posted a million times over on other sites isn't gonna "debunck innaccurate ignorant crap" here, especially by bumping a thread no one has looked at since 2007 until you came along

[Rockbandfan23467]

Please, everyone except genre fanboys and religious fanatics love The Beatles, and you've done a fine job, but I think it's time for you to retire. For good. You need to use that dedication to The Beatles on other things. Mabye it could do us all better.

Just be thankful you aren't dealing with the harsher members of this community.

[timmay9]

Yeah, I believe everyone that posted after you is a huge fan of the Beatles (I know I am).

This is a really, really, really old thread that I had never seen before. That's saying something.

[Rockbandfan23467]

He/she/it has posted that arguement in just about every website that even mentions the Beatles name. Why he/she/it is not a celebrity for it I don't know.

[Der_Lex]

Necroposting and plagiarism? That's a lock.