Quote:
Originally Posted by kida
The beatles pre-1966 stuff was pop aswel fool and had alot of basic love songs...
|
Many people think musically that was their most innovative. Their chord progressions amazed people like Dylan.
This is not a issue to me The Beatles trounced the Stones at everything except copying Chuck Berry and Muddy Waters.
Yeh but do the Stones have 100 great songs? Are the Stones music is widely as interpeted as the Beatles? The answer is no. Please the Stones were a covers band until the Beatles inspired them to write their songs. There is plenty of filler on all their albums.
The Stones were better at doing the Muddy Waters, Chuck Berry thing. The Beatles were better at everything else. The Beatles were better doing the pop thing they revolutionized it from everthing backward instrumentation to guitar feedback. The Beatles were more complex and innovative.
The Beatles did the prog thing better also and they helped influenced it also. The Stones for the most part floundered except for some instances like "She A Rainbow' or "2000 Light Years from Home"..
The Beatles, for instance, used so many scales including for example: diatonic, chromatic, whole tone, pentatonic, hexatonic, heptatonic have five, six, and seven tone scales, respectively.
used in prehistoric music: ditonic or two, tritonic or three, tetratonic or four
used in jazz and modern classical music: octatonic or eight. Also, diminished, augmented, minor and major scales were used by the Beatles.