A few, Up The Bracket was still seen as quite an important album by some even before Doherty was a household name, but significantly less.

this thread is awful+++

score :yeah:

Of your 10 posts most of them are in here so if it is you are contributing in making it awful.

ha. true that.

I like both because I like to claim that I'm diverse... but I have a personal preferance for the Stones. When anyone asks me my favorite band, I tell them the Stones. Just cuz I always got the impression that they weren't bull****tin' ya. It was real. It was exciting. It was taboo at the time. You could HEAR the Stones. Cuz it was just so in your face and even obscene at times... but that significant kind of obscene done to make a point... ergo, Shattered. But Star****er was just a great laugh. Etcetc.

On the contrary... even Hitler thought what he was doing was right. The Beatles probably were the "realest" they could be, their songs reflected their personal perception of things. When The Beatles sung about trips using a lot of admiration-deserving metaphors and trippy coolness, they were singing about trips. When The Stones sung about drugs using rawness and obscenity, they were singing about drugs. And as someone on here said, LSD is different from cocaine and morphine, obviously. So, I mean, think a little bit before anyone disowns the Beatles for colourful songs as opposed to gritty ones (White Album aside, we're speaking of the Lucy in the Sky days, yes?).

I always find it impossible to put two completely different things in juxtapose and try and say what's "better". I can never make a decision like that, people have been having opinions since the beginning of time, it's all subjective, and no matter how long anyone talks it out for, that's not gonna change.

Pattie Boyd beats them both. :thumb:

Pattie Boyd's who Clapton wrote the Layla album for. /obviousknowledge. Dint she also go with Keef for a while? Not to mention Joe Boyd's wife - aye? (White Bicycles - yeah? Good ****.)

your reasons are absolutely ridiculous... they focus more around how the band looks and acts than the music itself, which is the only thing that matters. reason number 1 alone makes this thread ridiculous because you're stating your opinion as pure, accepted fact

its completely ok to like the stones more, many do, but if you're gonna make a thread about it then give some reasons that aren't just stated opinions on how the band looks

It's weird that opinions even exist when people aren't stating them.

Anyhow... that's what a debate thread is about though, y'know? One person posts an opinion, then another to counteract, then people join in and you debate. It's supposed to be a constructive thread with a clever name, is all.