10 Reasons Why The Rolling Stones Were Better Than The Beatles

Rock N' Roll Clown · 10-09-2012, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

That's a very limited view, as you just picked probably the three biggest and said they're the best.

Why should it be limited?! I couldn't understand you. Of course that they are the best. Along with The Beach Boys and The Doors (and maybe The Clash and The Velvet Underground and 2-3 others), that three are the greatest 60s bands (I am not counting The Jimi Hendrix Experience, Smokey Robinson and The Miracles and others act like these as bands).

Edit: I wouldn't say that The Who were among the three biggest bands of the 60s. In 69 they opened a concert for The Doors, so The Doors were "bigger" back then.

Unknown Soldier · 10-09-2012, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock N' Roll Clown

Why should it be limited?! I couldn't understand you. Of course that they are the best. Along with The Beach Boys and The Doors (and maybe The Clash and The Velvet Underground and 2-3 others), that three are the greatest 60s bands (I am not counting The Jimi Hendrix Experience, Smokey Robinson and The Miracles and others act like these as bands).

Edit: I wouldn't say that The Who were among the three biggest bands of the 60s. In 69 they opened a concert for The Doors, so The Doors were "bigger" back then.

I said that you were limiting things in naming three of the very biggest, as there were a host of other bands as equally as good and interesting. BTW the Clash are 1970s and late 1970s at that.

It depends on where you define the biggest, here in the UK they were probably the third biggest behind the Beatles and the Stones from that time.

Rock N' Roll Clown · 10-09-2012, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

I said that you were limiting things in naming three of the very biggest, as there were a host of other bands as equally as good and interesting. BTW the Clash are 1970s and late 1970s at that.

It depends on where you define the biggest, here in the UK they were probably the third biggest behind the Beatles and the Stones from that time.

I wanted to say Cream, I have no idea why I wrote The Clash.
There were very good bands, of course, but all I said was:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock N' Roll Clown

The Who just can't be as great as the Stones or the Beatles. They are the third greatest band of the 60s, though.

So, isn't that what you are saying? Maybe they aren't exactly at the 3rd place, but they are around there along with Doors and Beach Boys. Maybe our interpretations of the words "greatest" and "biggest" are different and that's why we can't understand each other.

blastingas10 · 10-09-2012, 04:57 PM

Who would this "host" of bands consist of?

Oh Danny Boy · 10-09-2012, 09:14 PM

The Beatles were a good pop band but not the gods that popular myth makes them out to be. Arguably they are the most over rated band ever. They never started or created any popular movement in music, generally they became influenced by what other bands were doing, they were just skilled at taking what others were doing and making it more palatable for the mainstream audience, take psychedelic rock for example.

These days i struggle to listen to the Beatles, i can't enjoy their sound, maybe they are too pop for me. So personally i'd take the Stones, but i find their catalogue too inconsistent and they went to **** in the 70's but Aftermath and Exile on Main St are classic albums.

The Beatles are still too huge, popular perception sees the 60's music scene beginning and ending with the Beatles. Complete nonsense as there were many more competent bands around; The Kinks, the Sonics, The Small Faces, Cream, The Jimmy Hendrix Experience, The Beach Boys, The Velvet Underground, Jefferson Airplane, the Soft Machine, the Stooges, The Who to name a few. But the 60's were a golden age of music and i'd suggest that anyone who wishes to discover more check out the 'Nuggets' and Crypt Records 'Back from the Grave' compilations. There are more than a 'host' of 60's bands.

blastingas10 · 10-09-2012, 10:13 PM

No way could I agree with that. The only ones I can agree with are Hendrix experience, The Velvet underground and The Beach Boys, and I'm really hesitant to say the Beach Boys. You can try and degrade them with the term "pop" but the truth is their music was every bit if not more complex than any of those bands you mentioned, not to mention original.

Rjinn · 10-09-2012, 10:21 PM

I still don't get The Beatles and the complex thing. I don't think they're the most simplistic band ever but certainly not "complex."

blastingas10 · 10-09-2012, 10:39 PM

For their genre and time period I think they were.

Burning Down · 10-09-2012, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blastingas10

For their genre and time period I think they were.

Were complex or were not complex?

blastingas10 · 10-09-2012, 10:43 PM

Were

10-09-2012, 10:21 PM	#537 (permalink)
Rjinn The Aerosol in your Soul Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: New South Wales, Australia Posts: 1,546	I still don't get The Beatles and the complex thing. I don't think they're the most simplistic band ever but certainly not "complex." __________________ last.fm

10-09-2012, 04:57 PM	#534 (permalink)
blastingas10 Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,126	Who would this "host" of bands consist of?

10-09-2012, 09:14 PM	#535 (permalink)
Oh Danny Boy Groupie Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 35	The Beatles were a good pop band but not the gods that popular myth makes them out to be. Arguably they are the most over rated band ever. They never started or created any popular movement in music, generally they became influenced by what other bands were doing, they were just skilled at taking what others were doing and making it more palatable for the mainstream audience, take psychedelic rock for example. These days i struggle to listen to the Beatles, i can't enjoy their sound, maybe they are too pop for me. So personally i'd take the Stones, but i find their catalogue too inconsistent and they went to **** in the 70's but Aftermath and Exile on Main St are classic albums. The Beatles are still too huge, popular perception sees the 60's music scene beginning and ending with the Beatles. Complete nonsense as there were many more competent bands around; The Kinks, the Sonics, The Small Faces, Cream, The Jimmy Hendrix Experience, The Beach Boys, The Velvet Underground, Jefferson Airplane, the Soft Machine, the Stooges, The Who to name a few. But the 60's were a golden age of music and i'd suggest that anyone who wishes to discover more check out the 'Nuggets' and Crypt Records 'Back from the Grave' compilations. There are more than a 'host' of 60's bands.

10-09-2012, 10:13 PM	#536 (permalink)
blastingas10 Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,126	No way could I agree with that. The only ones I can agree with are Hendrix experience, The Velvet underground and The Beach Boys, and I'm really hesitant to say the Beach Boys. You can try and degrade them with the term "pop" but the truth is their music was every bit if not more complex than any of those bands you mentioned, not to mention original.

10-09-2012, 10:39 PM	#538 (permalink)
blastingas10 Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,126	For their genre and time period I think they were.

10-09-2012, 10:43 PM	#540 (permalink)
blastingas10 Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,126	Were