What if? (rock, beatles, rolling stones, Kiss, quote)

~~bungalow~~ · 03-31-2006, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adidasss

i think times have changed and the internet makes it possible for every band to get an audience.

but to move on from green day bashing ( i like green day by the way ), no i don't think the beatles made such an impact on music and it would have developed just as well without them.....besides, the rolling stones were their contemporaries which means that not every rock band derived from the beatles' music.

I seriously hope that you are joking.

MURDER JUNKIE · 03-31-2006, 08:34 AM

They sold 1.45 million copies of American Idiot in their first week, in the age of downloading this is a very impressive feat. I have never weighed in on the Green Day issue so I would like to tell you that it is a very good and daring album. It brought up issues the public was thinking at the right time. I don't own it but it is quite good compared to anything else on the charts

shiftael · 03-31-2006, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MURDER JUNKIE

They sold 1.45 million copies of American Idiot in their first week, in the age of downloading this is a very impressive feat. I have never weighed in on the Green Day issue so I would like to tell you that it is a very good and daring album. It brought up issues the public was thinking at the right time. I don't own it but it is quite good compared to anything else on the charts

I would heartily agree with this comment, anything sold half of a million copies in the moden age by any music style is good and well I used to bash them and mostly blindly until I head the live allbum, and well I won't bash them anymore.. They're far form my favorite but I don't hate them BLINDLY anymore like I used to.. Uusally the more critics/'normal' people hate a band or an artist that'll make me want to hear 'em een more and judge for myself..
They're far from my favorite, but the live effort gets a nod of respect from this 'hardened' and jaded music fanatic.

Muzak · 03-31-2006, 02:34 PM

Does anyone here know who The Aquabats and The Hippos are?

jr. · 03-31-2006, 04:33 PM

Geez. Maybe I should have picked a different song and artist. The last thing I wanted to start was the 10,000th Green Day argument.

About the Beatles, though, they came along at exactly the right time. The 50's sound was on its last leg, and the Beatles were the shot in the arm the music scene needed. They captured lightning in a bottle, because music fans from the 50s were in their 20s by then and the next generation was left with the residual effect of Ricky Nelson, The Penguins, The Platters, etc, etc.

The early 60's was a transitional period for rock and roll, even at its early age. After the flash point of Elvis, Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, and the like, rock and roll wasn't ten years old, and already the flame was starting to flicker. The initial craze had settled, and it was pretty much par for course, a sort of subdued, steady as she goes type vibe in music back then. No real daredevils or what have you. It was as though all the artists from that time had taken the recipe for rock and roll, and just stirred it, without adding anything new.

When the Beatles came along, they were the 60's equivalent of Elvis. Where Elvis had long sideburns, they had mop tops. They had the Italian boots and the tight cut pantlegs. The 'new' wild.

Kids ate it up, for a few reasons. They were bored with music, and, on top of everything else, their parents hated it. LOL. That is the one thing that has not changed in 50 years of Rock and Roll. If my parents hate it, it must be good.

My own personal opinion is, I thought the Stones were, if not better, more interesting. While the Beatles sang "I Wanna Hold Your Hand", the Stones sang "I Wanna Be Your Man". The counter-culture Beatles.

Anyway, my two cents.

Merkaba · 03-31-2006, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jr.

My own personal opinion is, I thought the Stones were, if not better, more interesting. While the Beatles sang "I Wanna Hold Your Hand", the Stones sang "I Wanna Be Your Man". The counter-culture Beatles.

Anyway, my two cents.

I was thinking about these two bands 2 pages ago and you've prompted me to ask the next question.

What if The Rolling Stones were the more widely regarded of the two bands.

i.e What if it were the Rolling Stones who were revered the way the Beatles are today. The possible impact on todays music?

Urban Hat€monger ? · 03-31-2006, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merkaba

I was thinking about these two bands 2 pages ago and you've prompted me to ask the next question.

What if The Rolling Stones were the more widely regarded of the two bands.

i.e What if it were the Rolling Stones who were revered the way the Beatles are today. The possible impact on todays music?

They are for me

The Beatles were nice clean cut boys who wrote nice pop songs , at least to start with anyway .I think the Stones were more in tune with how rock bands are now.You just have to look at their image & attitude .. shaggy hair ,didn`t wear matching suits & write songs about the seedier side of life with dirty great blues riffs.You can see their influence the whole way through rock music not just musically but the attitude & the imagery.

boo boo · 03-31-2006, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

The Beatles were nice clean cut boys who wrote nice pop songs , at least to start with anyway.

Then they started trying new things and became a influence on everything from prog to pop to alternative rock to metal.

Quote:

I think the Stones were more in tune with how rock bands are now.You just have to look at their image & attitude

Only depending on how you define "rock band", if you mean only the glam, hard rock and punk bands then yeah...I think you are just including the kind of rock you like, and not everything else.

Quote:

.. shaggy hair ,didn`t wear matching suits

They make better music than The Beatles because they dress better?...Is it just me or do you really let a bands pysical appearence have way too much influence on your opinion about them?

Quote:

& write songs about the seedier side of life with dirty great blues riffs.

Thats certainly never been done before, how innovative.

Quote:

You can see their influence the whole way through rock music not just musically but the attitude & the imagery.

But if you take away the imagry and fashion sense, The Beatles still had more musical influence overall...They opened the gates for many genres of music to come, after the mid 60s they began to try a handfull of different things, and didnt give a **** about the consequence's of the risks they took, they just took them...Not to mention they were the first rock band who learned how to use the recording studio to its full potential...The music industry would be a hell of a lot different without The Beatles than The Stones, both are great bands, but The Beatles are greater in my opinion.

Whoever's better is completely up to you.

dog · 04-01-2006, 04:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jr.

My own personal opinion is, I thought the Stones were, if not better, more interesting. While the Beatles sang "I Wanna Hold Your Hand", the Stones sang "I Wanna Be Your Man". The counter-culture Beatles.

Anyway, my two cents.

how many times must i say that beatles didnt only play "love-ballad-happy-go-lucky" stuff?

self titled album is much much better than anything stones have ever done.

so funny how many times we've this discussion. boo boo and urbanhatemonger being the main guys in it.

MY two cents.

~~bungalow~~ · 04-01-2006, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jr.

While the Beatles sang "I Wanna Hold Your Hand", the Stones sang "I Wanna Be Your Man". The counter-culture Beatles.

Anyway, my two cents.

You are aware that John Lennon and Paul McCartney wrote I Wanne Be Your Man for the Rolling Stones right?

03-31-2006, 04:33 PM	#5 (permalink)
jr. Seeker of Peace Join Date: May 2005 Location: Newark, De. Posts: 340	Geez. Maybe I should have picked a different song and artist. The last thing I wanted to start was the 10,000th Green Day argument. About the Beatles, though, they came along at exactly the right time. The 50's sound was on its last leg, and the Beatles were the shot in the arm the music scene needed. They captured lightning in a bottle, because music fans from the 50s were in their 20s by then and the next generation was left with the residual effect of Ricky Nelson, The Penguins, The Platters, etc, etc. The early 60's was a transitional period for rock and roll, even at its early age. After the flash point of Elvis, Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, and the like, rock and roll wasn't ten years old, and already the flame was starting to flicker. The initial craze had settled, and it was pretty much par for course, a sort of subdued, steady as she goes type vibe in music back then. No real daredevils or what have you. It was as though all the artists from that time had taken the recipe for rock and roll, and just stirred it, without adding anything new. When the Beatles came along, they were the 60's equivalent of Elvis. Where Elvis had long sideburns, they had mop tops. They had the Italian boots and the tight cut pantlegs. The 'new' wild. Kids ate it up, for a few reasons. They were bored with music, and, on top of everything else, their parents hated it. LOL. That is the one thing that has not changed in 50 years of Rock and Roll. If my parents hate it, it must be good. My own personal opinion is, I thought the Stones were, if not better, more interesting. While the Beatles sang "I Wanna Hold Your Hand", the Stones sang "I Wanna Be Your Man". The counter-culture Beatles. Anyway, my two cents. __________________ Be strong then, and enter into your own body; there you have a solid place for your feet. ~ Kabir

03-31-2006, 08:34 AM	#2 (permalink)
MURDER JUNKIE The Wetter The Better!! Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: SH1TTY London Ontario Canada Posts: 2,484	They sold 1.45 million copies of American Idiot in their first week, in the age of downloading this is a very impressive feat. I have never weighed in on the Green Day issue so I would like to tell you that it is a very good and daring album. It brought up issues the public was thinking at the right time. I don't own it but it is quite good compared to anything else on the charts

03-31-2006, 02:34 PM	#4 (permalink)
Muzak Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,040	Does anyone here know who The Aquabats and The Hippos are?