10 Reasons Why The Rolling Stones Were Better Than The Beatles (rock, Ringo) - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > Rock & Metal > Rock N Roll, Classic Rock & 60s Rock
10 Reasons Why The Rolling Stones Were Better Than The Beatles 10 Reasons Why The Rolling Stones Were Better Than The Beatles (rock, Ringo)
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
Page 27 of 57 « First 172526 27 282937 Last »
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-14-2008, 09:53 AM   #1 (permalink)
dac
MB's Biggest Fanboy
 
dac's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 2,852
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by petebragansa View Post
the Beatles were produced by George Martin, whereas the Stones produced themselves. This is a crucial difference in why they are more real. In fact, this is the schism in music overall: producers and anyone not in the band usually ruin the band. Then again, Beatles are great, but as for "realness", you can't beat Exile and Sticky Fingers, two raw albums that the Beatles couldn't equal....even on their last record...where they tried!
- Peter Bragansa
"Realness?" Wtf is that?
__________________
dac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2008, 06:26 PM   #2 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2
Default drummer
Quote:
Originally Posted by dac View Post
"Realness?" Wtf is that?
I mean the drummer in the Stones is much much better. Let's say on the R&B scale...Charlie Watts is a SERIOUS drummer. Like he could rock with Coltrane! I mean that seriously. Meanwhile, you pile on top of that just about anything, with all due respect, and it will sound good. No disrespect to Ringo.

Peter Bragansa
petebragansa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 11:59 AM   #3 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Veronica Lodge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Riverdale.
Posts: 174
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by petebragansa View Post
the Beatles were produced by George Martin, whereas the Stones produced themselves. This is a crucial difference in why they are more real. In fact, this is the schism in music overall: producers and anyone not in the band usually ruin the band. Then again, Beatles are great, but as for "realness", you can't beat Exile and Sticky Fingers, two raw albums that the Beatles couldn't equal....even on their last record...where they tried!
- Peter Bragansa
George Martin was a genius. Hello, greatest producer of all time. Hi, SIR GEORGE MARTIN.

Do you not like Jeff Beck? Or James Bond films? Those also have George Martin all over them.

What the hell have the Stones ever done, other than NOT STOPPED TOURING.

Blech, over it.
__________________
- Veronica Lodge -


Yes, that IS what I said.
Veronica Lodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 12:05 PM   #4 (permalink)
The Sexual Intellectual
 
Urban Hat€monger ?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,626
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veronica Lodge View Post
What the hell have the Stones ever done, other than NOT STOPPED TOURING.


Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
__________________



Urb's RYM Stuff

Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.
Urban Hat€monger ? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 12:01 AM   #5 (permalink)
Unrepentant Ass-Mod
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,921
Default
Didn't Bill Clinton play saxophone and Mike Huckabee plays guitar?

I still say that we should elect presidents based upon their cage-fighting skills. Nothing like a MMA bout to show who's got bigger balls.
__________________
first.am
lucifer_sam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 12:07 PM   #6 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Veronica Lodge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Riverdale.
Posts: 174
Default
You don't agree?
__________________
- Veronica Lodge -


Yes, that IS what I said.
Veronica Lodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 12:09 PM   #7 (permalink)
The Sexual Intellectual
 
Urban Hat€monger ?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere cooler than you
Posts: 18,626
Default
Well considering the whole reason this was started was as satire due to Beatles fans who can't give the Stones one ounce of credit I think that post summed it up nicely.
__________________



Urb's RYM Stuff

Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.
Urban Hat€monger ? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 12:15 PM   #8 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Veronica Lodge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Riverdale.
Posts: 174
Default
Hahaha. I guess it did.

__________________
- Veronica Lodge -


Yes, that IS what I said.
Veronica Lodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 01:42 PM   #9 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Folkie2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kingston, On
Posts: 10
Default
ok the stones and the beatles are both really good bands but you're only pointing out the bad stuff in the beatles. what about john lennons and george harrisons solo careers or later on in their career when they weren't writing kiidie pop you have to give the beatles some credit i mean you've got to sell a lot of records to buy those matching suits
Folkie2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 04:59 PM   #10 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,538
Default
No comment.
someonecompletelyrandom is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 27 of 57 « First 172526 27 282937 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools
Display Modes
Hybrid Mode Hybrid Mode

Similar Threads


Terms & Privacy - Contact Us - Music Banter - Archive - Top

© 2003-2025 Advameg, Inc.