I hope you're wrong!!

I didnt realise that "music" was a first accross the line competitive sport. If it was it would be no reflection on anyone coming second the The Beatles.
What this band achieved may be hard to comprhend these days. They changed the "popular" music scene is so many ways,its hard to know if the fact that the had the cheek to write their own songs, but write them so damn well.
If it wasnt for the Beatles would Andrew loog Oldham locked Keith and Mick in a room and made them write a song ? and if not how long would they have lasted as just another blues based band, ok one of the best but even the best had a short shelf life.

I recall as kids in the schoolyard bickering over who was better "Slade" or "T.Rex"
They joy of ther Beatles for me was thinking I knew how good they were and thinking all I needed was the Red & Blue albums, Revolver, pepper etc, and then discovering HArd Days Night,Help and more. Similar to the Stones, We all knew the "hits" and damn fine they were, but I still recall as a spotty teenager buying a ragged copy of "exile" in a second hand shop and getting totally immersed in it.

I tend to ignore music thats doesnt move me and cant be too arsed getting in a tizz over it, i reserve that for the music I love.

Quote
kovach
One of our local FM stations here in St. Louis played selections from the White Album during afternoon drivetime. Even over my standard FM car stereo with the roof off, the sound improvement was stunning. So clear and the seperation of instruments was fantastic, I heard guitar and vocal parts I've never heard before.

Yeah I heard some on the radio this morning as well. Heard some of Sgt Pepper. Sounded really good. I may have to look into purchasing these at some point.

"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"

I think the sound quality has undoubtedly improved but the stereo separation is quite bad on Rubber Soul and robs many of the songs of their power. The singing out of one speaker and music out of the other really sounds quite primitive. The mono versions i'm sure will sound a lot better.

Quote
@#$%&
I thought what Kick Jaggards said about Manson was pretty underrated.

LOL Exactly! I don't mean to say that I don't like the beatles but quite frankly, it's the Stones who move me. It's the Stones I listen to every day. It's the Stones I rearrange my life for when they tour. It's the Stones I spend way too many hours on boards like this & worse! If I thought the Beatles were better, I'd be posting mostly at their boards. I never understand when folks who like the beatles or dylan or the 'boss' better spend hours at work & home posting on Stones boards.

Quote
Edward Twining
I think the sound quality has undoubtedly improved but the stereo separation is quite bad on Rubber Soul and robs many of the songs of their power. The singing out of one speaker and music out of the other really sounds quite primitive. The mono versions i'm sure will sound a lot better.

Re; Rubber Soul. The hard panning "vocals on one side, instruments on the other" is the way George Martin originally mixed the stereo version. It was the first album where he actually took more time doing the stereo mix. When it came out on CD in the 80s, MArtin was kind of taken aback on why he did such a thing so he kind of centered them a little. Martin now calls his stereo mix of Rubber Soul as "experimenting" and "exaggerating a stereo mix to get a bigger effect."
I haven't heard the new Rubber Soul, but if it has the hard panning, that's the way Martin mixed it in 1965.

listened to some tracks on the radio last nite. i am reserving an opinion till i hear more but the sampling they played...Helter skelter, day in the life...sgt. pepper reprise etc...were kinda not so impressive to me...my ear had to adjust...so far not impressed particularly...i need the stones.

I agree with the above posters. I have listened to about seven of the albums.
The overall sound is good. The early albums "stereophonic" aspect could have been improved.

From Sgt Peppers forward I really think they sound better. Much better soundstaging. If you are not going to buy a box set, I would look from
1967 on. I agree the mono versions are the way to go especially if you are
into the pre 1965 albums.

I actually think they did a good job.
Sound much more like the original album than the original cd pressing.

Quote
tomk

Quote
Edward Twining
I think the sound quality has undoubtedly improved but the stereo separation is quite bad on Rubber Soul and robs many of the songs of their power. The singing out of one speaker and music out of the other really sounds quite primitive. The mono versions i'm sure will sound a lot better.

Re; Rubber Soul. The hard panning "vocals on one side, instruments on the other" is the way George Martin originally mixed the stereo version. It was the first album where he actually took more time doing the stereo mix. When it came out on CD in the 80s, MArtin was kind of taken aback on why he did such a thing so he kind of centered them a little. Martin now calls his stereo mix of Rubber Soul as "experimenting" and "exaggerating a stereo mix to get a bigger effect."
I haven't heard the new Rubber Soul, but if it has the hard panning, that's the way Martin mixed it in 1965.

The remastered stereo Rubber Soul uses Martin's 1987 "centered" remix. The remastered mono Rubber Soul includes BOTH the 1965 mono mix AND, as a bonus, the original 1965 "hard panning" stereo mix.

Anyone heard Revolution on Past Masters? It's MASSIVE! Who says the Beatles didn't invent heavy metal?

Quote
glencar
LOL Exactly! I don't mean to say that I don't like the beatles but quite frankly, it's the Stones who move me. It's the Stones I listen to every day. It's the Stones I rearrange my life for when they tour. It's the Stones I spend way too many hours on boards like this & worse! If I thought the Beatles were better, I'd be posting mostly at their boards. I never understand when folks who like the beatles or dylan or the 'boss' better spend hours at work & home posting on Stones boards.

So you think that is a good reason to close your ears off from the rest of the music world out there, and insist that fans of all other bands do exactly the same?

If you are into one band, and one band only, to such a ridiculous extent, then I'm afraid young sir, that nobody will ever take your wider music views seriously; all of which would explain why others have mocked and toyed with you in this thread so far.

They know, like I do, that anything outside the Stones, is way, way out of your depth.

Quote
tatters
Anyone heard Revolution on Past Masters? It's MASSIVE! Who says the Beatles didn't invent heavy metal?

I agree, that is really one of the standout tracks. Can´t believe how much fresher it sounds compared to the old version.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-09-11 00:45 by Tornandfrayed.

Quote
Tornandfrayed

Quote
tatters
Anyone heard Revolution on Past Masters? It's MASSIVE! Who says the Beatles didn't invent heavy metal?

I agree, that is really one of the standout tracks. Can´t believe how much fresher it sounds compared to the old version.

Another big surprise is We Can Work It Out. Unbelievably full and lush. Can't believe that was done in '65. It sounds like a brand new recording.

I had a browse through the Abbey Road album this morning and was knocked out by Come Together. The bass is so much chunkier and crisper than before, while Lennon's vocals are far more distinctive.

Wonderful stuff.

Does anyone remember the Beatles cartoons? Remember the Ringo character's silly laugh: "Heh heh heh...uh, yeah"? This song was used as the title theme, and it's one of my all-time fave fab tunes:





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-09-11 01:18 by bassplayer617.

Ah, here it is, the cartoons' title segment. This is what made me fall in love with the song, aside from George's melodic riff and Paul's basslines:





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-09-11 01:15 by bassplayer617.

Quote
LOGIE

Quote
glencar
LOL Exactly! I don't mean to say that I don't like the beatles but quite frankly, it's the Stones who move me. It's the Stones I listen to every day. It's the Stones I rearrange my life for when they tour. It's the Stones I spend way too many hours on boards like this & worse! If I thought the Beatles were better, I'd be posting mostly at their boards. I never understand when folks who like the beatles or dylan or the 'boss' better spend hours at work & home posting on Stones boards.

So you think that is a good reason to close your ears off from the rest of the music world out there, and insist that fans of all other bands do exactly the same?

If you are into one band, and one band only, to such a ridiculous extent, then I'm afraid young sir, that nobody will ever take your wider music views seriously; all of which would explain why others have mocked and toyed with you in this thread so far.

They know, like I do, that anything outside the Stones, is way, way out of your depth.

Why do YOU keep making this personal? I haven't slagged beatles fanatics & their overall lack of taste/class. Not only don't I think that way, it's immature. I have stated about 6 times on this thread that I like the beatles & even considered buying the Past Masters CD albeit only briefly. What I disagree with is the idea that the beatles AREN'T overrated or that they're better than the Stones. Clearly it's a matter of opinion & mine is that the Stones are the best. It's why I post on a Stones board. Please grow up & stop inssulting me in these various threads. I've noticed you; now you can disappear.

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
sdstonesguy
I like the headline on msnbc about the release in that they call it "ear candy". That is a good way to describe the beat less...bad for you...just like candy. Low quality pap...just like candy is low quality food. Again...here is a GREAT write up on the beat less: [www.scaruffi.com]

I guess just ingoring this this thread and commenting on the couple hundred other threads on IORR just wasn't a possibility? No, you only get your jolly's by laying in wait for a thread where the majority of people actually enjoy what they are talking about to spread your sorrowful opinion on life.....Wow, we really have reached a new low.

Laying in wait? A new low? hahaha...you're an idiot. You actually believe this stuff? Too funny...dumber than a dog.

dumber than a dog? i dare to say my german shepherd is smarter than the majority of folks on this site....they know who they are....

Quote
glencar

Quote
LOGIE

Quote
glencar
LOL Exactly! I don't mean to say that I don't like the beatles but quite frankly, it's the Stones who move me. It's the Stones I listen to every day. It's the Stones I rearrange my life for when they tour. It's the Stones I spend way too many hours on boards like this & worse! If I thought the Beatles were better, I'd be posting mostly at their boards. I never understand when folks who like the beatles or dylan or the 'boss' better spend hours at work & home posting on Stones boards.

So you think that is a good reason to close your ears off from the rest of the music world out there, and insist that fans of all other bands do exactly the same?

If you are into one band, and one band only, to such a ridiculous extent, then I'm afraid young sir, that nobody will ever take your wider music views seriously; all of which would explain why others have mocked and toyed with you in this thread so far.

They know, like I do, that anything outside the Stones, is way, way out of your depth.

Why do YOU keep making this personal? I haven't slagged beatles fanatics & their overall lack of taste/class. Not only don't I think that way, it's immature. I have stated about 6 times on this thread that I like the beatles & even considered buying the Past Masters CD albeit only briefly. What I disagree with is the idea that the beatles AREN'T overrated or that they're better than the Stones. Clearly it's a matter of opinion & mine is that the Stones are the best. It's why I post on a Stones board. Please grow up & stop inssulting me in these various threads. I've noticed you; now you can disappear.

Let me assure you that this is NOT personal.

However, when someone confesses to having their entire lives run and influenced by the Rolling Stones, to the point where they become severely agitated by the mere mention of other bands on a Stones message board, I cannot help but wonder as to why they should become so obsessed with a thread about the Beatles.

Nobody has invited you onto this thread. In fact, even the guy who started it, expressed a desire that Beatles detractors stay away.

Of course, in a cowardly manner, you again, confess to actually liking the Beatles, as if that somehow gives you premise or license to state over and over again that they are “overrated”. However, in all of your postings (and there are many), I have yet to see even one good word from you about the Beatles, which I find somewhat odd for someone who says that they “like” them. More to the point, you haven’t really got round either, to stating exactly WHY the Beatles are overrated or even, for that matter, provided an alternative as to who may be better or greater than them.

As a consequence, I see your use of the term “overrated” as a way of really admitting that you really DO accept that the Beatles are the greatest band ever, but that you do not yet have the mental capacity to come to terms with that reality; mainly, because in that tiny, infantile mind of yours, the Rolling Stones rule (!), irrespective of anything else; and in the absence of a decent argument, “overrated” is a term that you believe you can somehow get away with.

By all means, stay within your Stones bunker. Please don’t come out. We don’t want you to. Just stay there safe within your own little world while you fester those irrelevant, inane, childish, one-dimensional, parochial dislikes for anything that isn’t otherwise transfixed into that tiny cubby-hole of a brain of yours.

If it doesn’t wear the same badge or share the same mascot as that within your tiny world, then it must be alien; it must be criticised, or in the case of the insurmountable, slagged off for being overrated.

You’re a complete and utter gobshite, glencar; and if you don’t realise it now, you never will.

Quote
sdstonesguy

Laying in wait? A new low? hahaha...you're an idiot. You actually believe this stuff? Too funny...dumber than a dog.

...and whilst on the subject of gobshites...

Quote
sdstonesguy
hahaha...you're an idiot. You actually believe this stuff? Too funny...dumber than a dog.

Wow... now we´ve really reached a new low.

The ignorance and plain stupidity displayed be some of the posters in this thread is quite shocking. It´s amazing how many people seem to have a problem with the fact that some of us actually manage to enjoy something else besides the Stones´ music.

Beatles rule!

Quote
Tornandfrayed

Quote
sdstonesguy
hahaha...you're an idiot. You actually believe this stuff? Too funny...dumber than a dog.

Wow... now we´ve really reached a new low.

The ignorance and plain stupidity displayed be some of the posters in this thread is quite shocking. It´s amazing how many people seem to have a problem with the fact that some of us actually manage to enjoy something else besides the Stones´ music.

Beatles rule!

it's sorta fun to have beatlemania and the anti-beatle-maniacs all sharing the same space again, eh?

Reporter: Are you a mod or a rocker?
Ringo: Um, no. I'm a mocker.

After listening to some of these remastered tracks, I think you can make a strong case that the Beatles are, in fact, UNDER-rated. They were even BETTER than we THOUGHT they were!

Quote
sdstonesguy

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
sdstonesguy
I like the headline on msnbc about the release in that they call it "ear candy". That is a good way to describe the beat less...bad for you...just like candy. Low quality pap...just like candy is low quality food. Again...here is a GREAT write up on the beat less: [www.scaruffi.com]

I guess just ingoring this this thread and commenting on the couple hundred other threads on IORR just wasn't a possibility? No, you only get your jolly's by laying in wait for a thread where the majority of people actually enjoy what they are talking about to spread your sorrowful opinion on life.....Wow, we really have reached a new low.

Laying in wait? A new low? hahaha...you're an idiot. You actually believe this stuff? Too funny...dumber than a dog.

Dumber than a dog....Nahhh,youre the Bitch... Not me.

"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"

Quote
LOGIE

Quote
glencar

Quote
LOGIE

Quote
glencar
LOL Exactly! I don't mean to say that I don't like the beatles but quite frankly, it's the Stones who move me. It's the Stones I listen to every day. It's the Stones I rearrange my life for when they tour. It's the Stones I spend way too many hours on boards like this & worse! If I thought the Beatles were better, I'd be posting mostly at their boards. I never understand when folks who like the beatles or dylan or the 'boss' better spend hours at work & home posting on Stones boards.

So you think that is a good reason to close your ears off from the rest of the music world out there, and insist that fans of all other bands do exactly the same?

If you are into one band, and one band only, to such a ridiculous extent, then I'm afraid young sir, that nobody will ever take your wider music views seriously; all of which would explain why others have mocked and toyed with you in this thread so far.

They know, like I do, that anything outside the Stones, is way, way out of your depth.

Why do YOU keep making this personal? I haven't slagged beatles fanatics & their overall lack of taste/class. Not only don't I think that way, it's immature. I have stated about 6 times on this thread that I like the beatles & even considered buying the Past Masters CD albeit only briefly. What I disagree with is the idea that the beatles AREN'T overrated or that they're better than the Stones. Clearly it's a matter of opinion & mine is that the Stones are the best. It's why I post on a Stones board. Please grow up & stop inssulting me in these various threads. I've noticed you; now you can disappear.

Let me assure you that this is NOT personal.

However, when someone confesses to having their entire lives run and influenced by the Rolling Stones, to the point where they become severely agitated by the mere mention of other bands on a Stones message board, I cannot help but wonder as to why they should become so obsessed with a thread about the Beatles.

Nobody has invited you onto this thread. In fact, even the guy who started it, expressed a desire that Beatles detractors stay away.

Of course, in a cowardly manner, you again, confess to actually liking the Beatles, as if that somehow gives you premise or license to state over and over again that they are “overrated”. However, in all of your postings (and there are many), I have yet to see even one good word from you about the Beatles, which I find somewhat odd for someone who says that they “like” them. More to the point, you haven’t really got round either, to stating exactly WHY the Beatles are overrated or even, for that matter, provided an alternative as to who may be better or greater than them.

As a consequence, I see your use of the term “overrated” as a way of really admitting that you really DO accept that the Beatles are the greatest band ever, but that you do not yet have the mental capacity to come to terms with that reality; mainly, because in that tiny, infantile mind of yours, the Rolling Stones rule (!), irrespective of anything else; and in the absence of a decent argument, “overrated” is a term that you believe you can somehow get away with.

By all means, stay within your Stones bunker. Please don’t come out. We don’t want you to. Just stay there safe within your own little world while you fester those irrelevant, inane, childish, one-dimensional, parochial dislikes for anything that isn’t otherwise transfixed into that tiny cubby-hole of a brain of yours.

If it doesn’t wear the same badge or share the same mascot as that within your tiny world, then it must be alien; it must be criticised, or in the case of the insurmountable, slagged off for being overrated.

You’re a complete and utter gobshite, glencar; and if you don’t realise it now, you never will.

Again, you fill your post with personal insults. This is a Stones board & it's a bit odd to find people claiming that the beatles are the best. They were a good pop band. End of story. I'll leave the personal insults to you.

I don't think that being on a Stones messageboard necessarily means that one has to think that they are the best. Are we all brainwashed here??!? Are we zombies?! I post messages on various messageboards. I post on a Lou Reed forum once in awhile. I love Lou but does the fact that I write on a messageboard with his name on it mean that I think he's the best in the entire world? No. It's just a way to communicate and have conversations. Do people that attend concerts only attend them because they think that the band they are seeing is the best in the world? No.

I post at other boards but I never go there & say, "STONES ARE THE BEST!!!!" which is what I see on this board. Again, the beatles are a fine pop band; no more & no less. Please Please Me is probably the equivalent of Tell Me but around 1967 the Stones started soaring well above. BTW Thanks for disagreeing respectfully. Others could learn.

Logie: Get it straight man. I said they were overrated simply because the term "The Best Ever" screams overrating. Nobody is the best ever, but some come close. If most people say you're the best ever, that's a good indication that there's overrating going on. And tune down your tone please. It sounds as if YOU'RE the agressive one.

JumpingKentFlash