Next up...12 x 5 for the Stones and With the Beatles for the Beatles!!

I'm going with With the Beatles as the overall better album.







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-12-22 22:52 by JordyLicks96.

Again the stones take this one for me. A tighter race than the first 2 albums, but the stones come out ahead. Taking these albums side by side comes down to which has the energy. The Beatles may be superior in their writing on with the Beatles, but they’re not lightning in a bottle like some of the stones tracks are.

Again, this is a dumb comparison.Lennon and Mac had been writing together for 7or 8 years.And had George Martin.Keith and Mick less than a year.And had Andrew Loog Oldham. Beatles and Stones can’t fairly be compared until like 1966. Compare Aftemath to Sticky Fingers vs Revolver vs Let it Be, maybe.

Closer call than the first round, but Beatles win again due to their superior advanced songwriting - even George shines brightly with Don't Bother Me.

Kudos to the Stones for writing and releasing Good Times, Bad Times though - one of their greatest blues originals.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

12x5 in this camp .....


The utter R&B rush of those opening
tracks ... nobody could touch em ....
the soul pull back with Time and Good Times
then the glorious ponding from Its All Over Now ....

2120 cracked open that second side ....

Lot of tough guys always requested Congratulations

12x5 spun so many times at parties ... use ta see it there
in the morning wrecked on the turntable from the continual playing ...

Boardwalk was a massive hit down here ..
It played from every jukebox ya walked by ...
Sound of that song was in the air everywhere you went ....



ROCKMAN

12x5 was at every mad party in town .....

Ya just never heard a Beatles record .... no groove



ROCKMAN

Quote
Paddy
Taking these albums side by side comes down to which has the energy. The Beatles may be superior in their writing on with the Beatles, but they’re not lightning in a bottle like some of the stones tracks are.

With The Beatles certainly has energetic songs...

comparing The Beatles and Stones for me is very difficult especially if the records released with a year different ...a year is not much but in the sixty's it was music wise a lot

__________________________

Quote
Rockman
12x5 was at every mad party in town .....

Ya just never heard a Beatles record .... no groove

That's just what happens if you attend mad parties... I once went to one where some intellectuals continuously had Frank Zappa records playing - almost everyone was bored to death, until the host's young sister saved us from Orchestral Favourites by throwing YaYa's on the turntable, Side 2, starting with Sympathy. Within a few seconds, all the girls were on the dancefloor, 3 or 4 of them even with naked breasts!

Well yeah ... on or two girls had
a Beatles record but everyone in the
gang had Stones albums ...

12x5 was a party fave .... it ruled ..
Ya just never heard anyone play a Beatles record .... never



ROCKMAN

With The Beatles absolutely smokes 12 X 5 in my opinion.

Quote
Taylor1
Again, this is a dumb comparison.Lennon and Mac had been writing together for 7or 8 years.And had George Martin.Keith and Mick less than a year.And had Andrew Loog Oldham. Beatles and Stones can’t fairly be compared until like 1966. Compare Aftemath to Sticky Fingers vs Revolver vs Let it Be, maybe.

If you think is a dumb comparison, why are you posting on the thread? Nobody is forcing you to like this discussion.

Quote
JordyLicks96

Quote
Taylor1
Again, this is a dumb comparison.Lennon and Mac had been writing together for 7or 8 years.And had George Martin.Keith and Mick less than a year.And had Andrew Loog Oldham. Beatles and Stones can’t fairly be compared until like 1966. Compare Aftemath to Sticky Fingers vs Revolver vs Let it Be, maybe.

If you think is a dumb comparison, why are you posting on the thread? Nobody is forcing you to like this discussion.

Its not a question of liking the thread.It’s a stupid comparison. Both McCartney and Richards have said it takes awhile to write good songs. And you cannot compare a band that’s been writing songs and playing live for seven or 8 years to one which has only been around for a year.The Beatles also had songs and music ideas stored up for several years.The Stones started as an r&b cover bandThey were mostly that in 1964.And then oldham got Mick and Keith to write songs.

Quote
Taylor1

Quote
JordyLicks96

Quote
Taylor1
Again, this is a dumb comparison.Lennon and Mac had been writing together for 7or 8 years.And had George Martin.Keith and Mick less than a year.And had Andrew Loog Oldham. Beatles and Stones can’t fairly be compared until like 1966. Compare Aftemath to Sticky Fingers vs Revolver vs Let it Be, maybe.

If you think is a dumb comparison, why are you posting on the thread? Nobody is forcing you to like this discussion.

Its not a question of liking the thread.It’s a stupid comparison. Both McCartney and Richards have said it takes awhile to write good songs. And you cannot compare a band that’s been writing songs and playing live for seven or 8 years to one which has only been around for a year.The Beatles also had songs and music ideas stored up for several years.The Stones started as an r&b cover bandThey were mostly that in 1964.And then oldham got Mick and Keith to write songs.

an exceptionally good point...I would agree with this.

As well the beatles played together for years, and for the Stones to actually be a 'better' live band says a lot.

You can have fun with these comparisons but they make little real sense.

Quote
Taylor1

Quote
JordyLicks96

Quote
Taylor1
Again, this is a dumb comparison.Lennon and Mac had been writing together for 7or 8 years.And had George Martin.Keith and Mick less than a year.And had Andrew Loog Oldham. Beatles and Stones can’t fairly be compared until like 1966. Compare Aftemath to Sticky Fingers vs Revolver vs Let it Be, maybe.

If you think is a dumb comparison, why are you posting on the thread? Nobody is forcing you to like this discussion.

Its not a question of liking the thread.It’s a stupid comparison. Both McCartney and Richards have said it takes awhile to write good songs. And you cannot compare a band that’s been writing songs and playing live for seven or 8 years to one which has only been around for a year.The Beatles also had songs and music ideas stored up for several years.The Stones started as an r&b cover bandThey were mostly that in 1964.And then oldham got Mick and Keith to write songs.

Oh well, sorry you think it's a stupid comparison. I'm just doing this to get a friendly discussion going about two beloved groups and their albums. I really don't care if you think it's dumb or stupid, that's just your childish opinion. I'm going to keep the discussion going whether you like it or not.

only like that Strawberry and
Walrus track so what chance have i got ...



ROCKMAN

With The Beatles

12x5 was a bit of a disappointment upon first listen, admittedly. Weak originals, and a lesser-version of Time is on My Side. The album is, essentially, an extended version of the 5x5 EP.

I’ll keep playing this game, but The Stones don’t come close until ‘68 and Beggars Banquet.

Quote
Rockman
only like that Strawberry and
Walrus track so what chance have i got ...

I like a lot of Beatles tracks, and you happened to have picked a couple of stellar ones.

Quote
Boognish

Quote
Paddy
Taking these albums side by side comes down to which has the energy. The Beatles may be superior in their writing on with the Beatles, but they’re not lightning in a bottle like some of the stones tracks are.

With The Beatles certainly has energetic songs...

But it wasn’t played at parties apparently.
12x5 is one of those albums I play it through twice once it’s on the turntable.
It’s all over now and flip for 2120 South Michigan Ave... Heaven.

The Beatles cover of money is ok, but The Sonics nailed that tune for me.

I don't see how anyone can pick With The Beatles ... consider the songs on it that the Stones have also done:

Rollover Beethoven
I Wanna Be Your Man
Money

All Stones versions destroy these Beatle versions (yes, even the one the Beatles wrote) by a country mile.

Similar to the first album vs. ... Some really good tracks by the Beatles: It Won't Be Long, All My Loving, Hold Me Tight, and the fantastic You Really Got A Hold On Me

But 12x5 has the wow factor: Around & Around, Confessin', Empty Heart, Good Times, It's All Over. The only dud is Under the Boardwalk.

Stones 2, Beatles 0

Neither album is outstanding, overall.

Gonna have to go with the album with the more familiar tunes on it:

WITH THE BEATLES.

Interesting trivial factoids regarding With the Beatles:

"The (With the Beatles) LP had advance orders of a half million and sold another half million by September 1965, making it the second album to sell a million copies in the United Kingdom, after the soundtrack to the 1958 film South Pacific. With the Beatles remained at the top of the charts for 21 weeks, displacing Please Please Me, so that the Beatles occupied the top spot for 51 consecutive weeks. It even reached number 11 in the "singles charts" (because at the time UK charts counted all records sold, regardless of format). No other group or singer has achieved 51 consecutive weeks at number 1 in the album charts".

Number One

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-12-20 09:06 by Hairball.

Yeah thats it girls and
grannies loved em .. even the queen ...



ROCKMAN

Comparing Beatles and Stones is useless....but fun.

I find the entire output of the Beatles until Sergeant Pepper to be superior to that of the Stones, except for the UK Aftermath. Pepper's is a turning point for me where they went overindulgent, and when they lost it as a band due to Lennon and McCartney stopping writing together.

From Beggar's on the Stones took over from the Beatles as best band in the world.

Mathijs

The problem of comparing The Beatles and Stones in this fashion rears it’s unkempt head again.
Playing very different styles of music and at completely different stages of development, it’s really gonna come down to which you prefer. If you like the Everlys, Arthur Alexnader and girl groups you’ll probably love the Fab4’s 2nd LP and if Chuck is the man then it’ll be the Stoners for you.

With The Beatles was released the same day as the American coup and was the first British LP by a pop group to sell a million copies. Please Please Me had been number 1 for 30 weeks and was replaced by the 2nd album which was no. 1 for 21 weeks. The Stones replaced the Fab 4 at number 1 with their UK debut and the next three number LP’s were A Hard Days Night and Beatles For Sale and Rolling Stones No. 2.
For nearly two years, the no.1 LP spot was held only by The Beatles and The Stones. Quite an achievement.
By the time With The Beatles was issued, Beatlemania had swept the nation. The Times music critic compared the fade out of one of their songs (Not A Second Time) to Mahler’s Song Of The Earth. I expect that was news to John who’d probably envisaged it as more of an Arthur Alexander type number in line with his equally excellent All I’ve Got To Do.
The major classic on the LP (like it or not) is All My Loving which was covered by many of the great artists of the day including The Chipmunks, Val Doonican, Jimmy Tarbuck and Pinky and Perky. Oh and Mary Wells. As with I Saw Her Standing There, this one still gets an airing at Paul’s concerts. Not sure if anything from 12x5 has been played in recent years by the Stones.

Even as a Beatles fan, I’m not sure the LP has aged as well as some of the others although at the time it was seen as a big step forward from PPM with massive use of double tracking and some major improvement in the group’s songwriting skills.
George makes his composing debut and gets 4 lead vocals (one joint with John). Unfortunately for George, John and Paul then really became John and Paul and he didn’t get this much of a look in again vocally. As ever, the group’s vocals are top notch, even on the weaker songs.
Ringo’s number (gifted to the Stones) is ok but imagine a version consisting of intro and verses from the Stones 45 and chorus taken from the Beatles version - best of both worlds right there.
However, there are in retrospect some issues. Hold Me Tight (first recorded but rejected for the first LP) is not one of their finest, Little Child is very weak and the first 5 songs on the LP are all in E. The covers are a mixture of styles but only Please Mr. Postman and Money really hit the heights. Great solo from George on Till There Was You.

Vocally there’s no-one to touch the group in the UK. Lennon in particular is outstanding but the backing vocals are all top notch too - McCartney wails on Money and provides his usual immaculate harmonies elsewhere. In their own songs there are augmented chords, diminished chords…the group demonstrate a real understanding of composition and arrangement and they learned that without George Martin’s help. They were well-versed in a variety of styles.
This LP (with a great arty sleeve photo) is the 2nd of The Beatles “girl group with knobs on” trilogy.

Let’s move on to the boy band.
In some ways 12x5 is a massive improvement on the first album. The group are now firmly focused on songs.
I will offer some criticisms about the recording and song selection first.
It seems that originally (at least for a fortnight or so) the plan was to issue an LP drawn entirely from the 14 or 15 songs recorded at Chess. This really should have been done. Regent Sound was just a demo studio and Chess was the home of the Stones influences. The recording quality is a massive step up and some of the group’s performances are outstanding.
A short while after returning to the UK, the group recorded some more songs at Regent Sound, including covers of recent American hits rather than songs they had already got to grips with in the clubs and on the road. Under The Boardwalk is a travesty, Time Is On My Side has some very very poor out of tune backing vocals, out of time tambourine and the original Congratulations demonstrates the band’s inability to tune a 12 string guitar. In fact there are timing issues on a few tracks - coming out of the solo on It’s All Over Now is another (minor) example, usually when a tambourine is involved and Oldham really should have been over-ruled from making Empty Heart’s tambourine so prominent.
Some of the backing vocal arrangements are really weak and can’t really be described as arrangements - but I say that as a Beatles fan used to well thought out and well sung backing vocals, something the Fab4 had a handle on well before they’d met George Martin.

Even though ABKCO and the band have never bothered to provide proper session data, we know better songs were available from the Chess sessions alone. How did Down The Road Apiece not get selected for this LP ?? Ditto I Can’t Be Satisfied, Look What You’ve Done, Down In The Bottom, Hi-Heel Sneakers and even Stewed and Keefed. While I am firmly in the Beatles Fan Club, an LP consisting of the best 12 Chess recordings from June would have been a total classic on it’s own terms - not comparable to what the Beatles had just released (the 13 track all original pop masterpiece A Hard Days Night) but still a classic in it’s own right.
Around and Around is outstanding. That one goes on every compilation of my favourite Stones performances. If one were to put together an LP of classic British covers of American material you could straight away select Twist and Shout by the haircut scousers and Around and Around by the Dartford renegades.
The group’s originals are not much to write home about but at least they’re trying. I like Grown Up Wrong even though it doesn’t amount to much. Empty Heart is ok despite the messy aspects mentioned earlier.
I love their version of Susie Q - a distorted high octane mess and fantastic for it. That one usually gets short shrift from Stones fans. Admittedly it sounds like a throw-back to the first LP but would have been a good one on that.

OK, so of course I pick With The Beatles but side 1 of 12x5 is mostly pretty decent to brilliant stuff.
Comparing the two is still very difficult. The earliest Stones LP that really stands true comparison with the Beatles contemporaneous output in a meaningful way is the UK Aftermath. Before that, their LP’s are a mish mash of covers, singles and early writing attempts recorded on the run at different times in different studios and even different countries. The cohesiveness provided the Beatles by recording consistently at Abbey Road certainly helps their cause. The US Stones (and Beatles) Lps are totally haphazard.

When will ABKCO and the Stones get it together to give the Stones 60’s catalogue the treatment it deserves. The Beatles have run away in terms of history but the Stones fully deserve to have their early career re-presented in a thoughtful, properly documented way. While the Beatles get an 8 hour film of their worst period (brilliant though the film is), Stones fans still can’t buy legal versions of Hi Heel Sneakers, Stewed and Keefed or hear Panama Powder Room, Godzi etc…to quote a song title from the next album under discussion, What A Shame.

"Under The Boardwalk is a travesty..."

Probably the Stones' worst cover ever, similar in a way to the misguided/ridiculous Dancing in the Streets recorded by Bowie and Mick years later.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-12-20 19:40 by Hairball.

Lol.

The horrors

Can’t be objective here - 12 x 5 was my first love. This album would be at the top of any Desert Island list for me, be it a list of 10 or 5 or likely 1. Around And Around, first cut on the first side, is in my DNA and when they played it in Newark in ‘12 I nearly cried. If they ever play Confessin’ The Blues live, I definitely will. Sorry Beatles, it isn’t personal!

12 x 5 isn't even an album, It's a cobbled together mess, made for the American market made by butchering EPs and stray tracks. I know Steve Van Zandt would hate me for saying that
The UK series of albums (No1, No 2, Out of Our heads, Aftermath) is far superior,
and London even botched Aftermath and Between the Buttons too!

Seems like 2-0 the stones thus far...