Some Beatles fans here would probably also rewrite the history stating that Beatles influenced: Buddy Holly, Elvis, Robert Johnson, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Bill Haley. To say - The Beatles where The Bridge from old to modern music.

Come on, Beatles where are a part of a continuous stream of music developement. Remember, it was also in the 50'ies / 60'ies you had the spread of wealth - that means new equpiment for spreading music, more and more people had access to radio, tv and other music equipment, that made it possible to spread out the music.

So if you say No Beatles, No Stones - we can also say No Elvis, No Beatles etc.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-10-02 08:59 by mtaylor.

i don't know

1. Absolutely, the Beatles were more influential than any other rock band of the era. I was and remain a huge Beatles fan, and purchased both the remastered Stereo Box and the Mono box.

2. I have listened to Sticky Fingers more over the past 10 years than I have the entire Beatles catalogue.

But Exile is not exactly a product from a Band like Sgt.Pepper is. Isn't it Keith and Micks solo projekt just like also Beatles white album is? Stones had more band-feeling again when Ron joined...

2 1 2 0

Ha ha - almost responses. The hilarity is the sugar songs matched by an evil song.

Ticket To Ride...Stupid Girl
Revolution...Jumpin' Jack Flash
Hey Jude...You Can't Always Get What You Want
Taxman...Under My Thumb
With A Little Help From My Friends...Jigsaw Puzzle
Across The Universe...Salt Of The Earth
Lady Madonna...Parachute Woman
I Am The Walrus...Sympathy For The Devil
All You Need Is Love...Midnight Rambler
Hello, Goodbye...Live With Me
The Fool On The Hill...Monkey Man
Magical Mystery Tour...2000 Light Years From Home
Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da...Let's Spend The Night Together
Let It Be...Let It Bleed
The Long And Winding Road...Gimme Shelter
While My Guitar Gently Weeps...Street Fighting Man

And the "sugar"songs all suck

Stones easily the best

Quote
mickscarey
And the "sugar"songs all suck

Stones easily the best

easy now - if it was that easy we'd be able to settle this with greater ease.

beatles

Quote
mickscarey
Not even close. The Stones!

Care to offer any substantive reasons as to why you think so? Thus far your rhetoric has done little to lend weight to your argument...

Quote
skipstone
Ha ha - almost responses. The hilarity is the sugar songs matched by an evil song.

Ticket To Ride...Stupid Girl
Revolution...Jumpin' Jack Flash
Hey Jude...You Can't Always Get What You Want
Taxman...Under My Thumb
With A Little Help From My Friends...Jigsaw Puzzle
Across The Universe...Salt Of The Earth
Lady Madonna...Parachute Woman
I Am The Walrus...Sympathy For The Devil
All You Need Is Love...Midnight Rambler
Hello, Goodbye...Live With Me
The Fool On The Hill...Monkey Man
Magical Mystery Tour...2000 Light Years From Home
Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da...Let's Spend The Night Together
Let It Be...Let It Bleed
The Long And Winding Road...Gimme Shelter
While My Guitar Gently Weeps...Street Fighting Man

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha - I Am The Walrus.
Yes, that's what you are - just like a walrus.
Hillbilly man - just like the Beatles audience / The Beatles group - Hillbilly stupid people.
Skipstone, the walrus, the hillbilly man, the hillbilly man, the hillbilly man, the hillbilly man, the hillbilly man, the hillbilly man, the hillbilly man, the hillbilly man.

This is as no brainer as it gets.

The Beatles influenced a generation (and ergo beyond) in the West and even moved in partially on the East. Music, attitude and fashion along with the way products were marketed and a number of other things - some of which most of us will never fully (or even partially) come to realize. They captivated and changed the world in some very minor ways that some of which inevitably become major.

The Stones changed nothing. Let's face it - they were an advert Oldham conjured. It just so happened that they were able to back up the nothinglessness of the myth/advertising with brilliant music that captured the public to some extent. Granted it was a large public - but to compare it to the Beatles is pointless.

I do not own a crystal ball but it's a fair bet that the name "Beatles" will be kicking around in society as a known in a few hundred years where as the Stones will be playing Salieri to their Mozart.

Quote
squando
This is as no brainer as it gets.

The Beatles influenced a generation (and ergo beyond) in the West and even moved in partially on the East. Music, attitude and fashion along with the way products were marketed and a number of other things - some of which most of us will never fully (or even partially) come to realize. They captivated and changed the world in some very minor ways that some of which inevitably become major.

The Stones changed nothing. Let's face it - they were an advert Oldham conjured. It just so happened that they were able to back up the nothinglessness of the myth/advertising with brilliant music that captured the public to some extent. Granted it was a large public - but to compare it to the Beatles is pointless.

I do not own a crystal ball but it's a fair bet that the name "Beatles" will be kicking around in society as a known in a few hundred years where as the Stones will be playing Salieri to their Mozart.

Leaving aside musical influence, I'd argue exactly the opposite. In terms of attitude, fashion etc the Stones influenced far more than a generation. "Peace and love" and hanging out with yogis lasted a few years. Pissing on garage forecourts, taking drugs, defying authority and all the rest became the template for all succeeding rock bands and still is. Nearly every socio-political analysis/ study of the 60's (as opposed to musical) accords the Stones and what they came to stand (rightly or wrongly) for, as far more influential on the zeitgeist of that period than the Beatles

I see they let mtaylor out of Hanwell. Making the usual sense as usual.

Hey mtaylor, let me hear you squeal like a pig.

Bought the Mono-box when it came out and 2 days ago I came home with the Stereo one and I like them for what they represent. Fantastic music from a great time in history but in the end it all sounds dated in a way. Honestly, Sympathy or Midnight Rambler still stand strong - I can't find 2 Beatles songs of that calibre - great tunes but from way back in the past.
Today I listened again to Seether's "Finding Beauty In Negative Spaces" - one of the hottest rock acts today IMHO - almost everybody who knows this record might agree that - as far as there's influence from a 60s band involved - it's not the Beatles, it's the Stones.

But who cares - "Beatles" must be another word for sacrosanct.

Interesting reads...

[en.wikipedia.org]

[en.wikipedia.org]

mtaylor either start or stop taking drugs.

Hello my sweet Lady Jayne.

Well I guess we will just have to be left in the land of disagreement. The Beatles influenced fashion extensively re haorcuts, apparell etc whereas the Stones really did little on such a huge scale as the Beatles. The piece below that I've nicked from Wikipedia probably gets to the point better than I will:

Influence on popular culture
Main article: The Beatles' influence on popular culture
The Beatles' influence on popular culture was—and remains—immense. Former Rolling Stone associate editor Robert Greenfield said, "People are still looking at Picasso. People are still looking at artists who broke through the constraints of their time period to come up with something that was unique and original. In the form that they worked in, in the form of popular music, no one will ever be more revolutionary, more creative and more distinctive than The Beatles were."[2] From the 1920s, the United States had dominated popular entertainment culture throughout the world, with the show business and superstars of Broadway, Tin Pan Alley and Hollywood and the music of Memphis, Tennessee.[208] Known as the "Birthplace of the Blues",[209] the city of Memphis had led a musical evolution from blues in the 1920s, through rock and roll in the 1950s to, in the early 1960s, soul.[210] British bands in the 1960s, among them The Beatles, aspired to emulate the sounds of Memphis musicians including Elvis Presley—without whom, according to Lennon, "there would not have been the Beatles".[176] But The Beatles, triggering the British Invasion, became a major new influence in the United States and internationally, establishing the popularity of British bands and inspiring the music of other bands worldwide[211] — including those subsequently formed in Memphis.[212] The Beatles redefined the album as something more than just a small number of hits padded out with "filler" tracks,[213] and they were the originators in the United Kingdom of the now common practice of releasing video clips to accompany singles. They became the first entertainment act to stage a large stadium concert when they opened their 1965 North American tour at Shea Stadium. A large number of artists have acknowledged The Beatles as a musical influence or have had chart successes with covers of Beatles songs.[214] The band also affected attitudes to fashion worldwide when in the 1960s there was widespread imitation of their haircuts and clothing. The arrival of The Beatles is seen in radio as a touchstone in music signalling an end to the rock-and-roll era of the 1950s. Program Directors like Rick Sklar of WABC in New York went as far as forbidding DJs from playing any "pre-Beatles" music.[215]

Quote
Jah Paul
Interesting reads...

[en.wikipedia.org]

[en.wikipedia.org]

just one example from the above articles:

Let It Be was imitated by Demon Days (Gorillaz) and Let it Bleed (Rolling Stones), that was released 6 months before Let It Be, but its recording started just 9 months after.

This is silly or should I say sick?!

You gotta love the brilliance of wikipedia. For instance, a statement like this: "The Beatles (AKA "The White Album") was imitated by Boyd Rice, Prince, Metallica, and Jay-Z,..."

So...having an album be self-titled is imitating The Beatles? Wow. Then I guess when The Rolling Stones released 'The Rolling Stones' in 1964 they had predicted the future? And any other act that has a self-titled album is imitating The Beatles? Like Led Zeppelin's fourth album or The Cult's sixth album or etc...

One thing I was thinking about today; I think no one even comes close to what the Beatles gave to popular music, and their influence. I say this as a diehard Stoner. But I don't agree at all that the Stones really did not give anything besides fashion, attitude and look (which is HUGE in itself).
What I am talking about is how instrumental and vital the Stones were in giving back the US musical history, the tradition, the roots to this very US. I am watching them do "Prodigal Son" and "You Gotta Move" in 69, and it hit me how monumental this was. There is this clichee that it took a bunch of Brits to show the Americans what they were really sitting on, and it's true.
Sure, now everyone is all versed in Robert Johnson, Blind Willie, Muddy and Bo. The Stones carried the word. This can not be taken from them.

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
One thing I was thinking about today; I think no one even comes close to what the Beatles gave to popular music, and their influence. I say this as a diehard Stoner. But I don't agree at all that the Stones really did not give anything besides fashion, attitude and look (which is HUGE in itself).
What I am talking about is how instrumental and vital the Stones were in giving back the US musical history, the tradition, the roots to this very US. I am watching them do "Prodigal Son" and "You Gotta Move" in 69, and it hit me how monumental this was. There is this clichee that it took a bunch of Brits to show the Americans what they were really sitting on, and it's true.
Sure, now everyone is all versed in Robert Johnson, Blind Willie, Muddy and Bo. The Stones carried the word. This can not be taken from them.

Excellent post. Absolutely true. The Stones helped the Blues musicians financially as well, through royalty payments for their songs.

Quote
skipstone
You gotta love the brilliance of wikipedia. For instance, a statement like this: "The Beatles (AKA "The White Album"winking smiley was imitated by Boyd Rice, Prince, Metallica, and Jay-Z,..."

So...having an album be self-titled is imitating The Beatles?

I think that wiki quote is referring to the naming of an album after a colour. Those four artists released albums entitled The Black Album, or more commonly known as that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-10-04 22:10 by @#$%&.

Ah right. That makes more sense. Although I'm not sure that it is exactly that way. The Beatles just called it The Beatles where as it was critics and fans et al that called it The White Album. Right? Obviously it's just a casual normal thing to do. However, when one thinks of The White Album, they are talking about The Beatles. Of course, Metallica's got The Black Album but Prince had that titled album first (although I'm not sure if it is actually called that where as the Metallica album is actually called Metallica).

Oddly enough, I actually have that Prince album. I saw it at, of all things, a yard sale. It's a Warner Bros official pressing but to my knowledge it was never actually released. And the funniest thing? I got it for TWENTY FIVE CENTS, which I found really odd. Figured it was some one of a kind thing. Because I've never seen it anywhere since.

The Rolling Stones made the bigger mark on me 1964

2 1 2 0

STONES!

Stones, for sure.

Beatles: Pop
Stones: Rock

Beatles: Vivaldi
Stones: Beethoven

Beatles: Nursery Rhymes
Stones: Porn

Beatles: I want to hold your hand
Stones: C...sucker Blues

Anybody in for continuing?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-10-06 01:30 by Bob05.

The Beatles and the Stones dont have much influence at all on todays music. Todays musicians are far more influenced by Tupac Shakur or the Ramones!

"Stones, for sure.

Beatles: Pop
Stones: Rock

Beatles: Vivaldi
Stones: Beethoven

Beatles: Nursery Rhymes
Stones: Porn

Beatles: I want to hold your hand
Stones: C...sucker Blues

Anybody in for continuing?"

Not really as everything you've written is ridiculous.

Beatles: Lucy Ball
Stones: Brigitte Bardot

2 1 2 0

Beatles: A Hard Day's Night

Stones: Performance

The Stones did not make Performance and only Mick was involved with the film.
If you want compare do it accurately,

The Beatles Let it Be
The Stones, Sympathy for the Devil.

The Beatles A Hard Days Night
The Stones....nothing

The Beatles Help
The Stones....nothing

The Beatles Magical Mystery Tour
The Stones....nothing

The Beatles Yellow Submarine
The Stones....nothing