Tell Me :
Talk
Oh wow. That was just brilliantly awful!
no way...i don't know where you get this stuff from, skippy, but i totally disagree....
sure, but were they better at being the beatles than the cricketts?
You mean to tell me The Beatles weren't...The Beatles? Or is it the other one? Maybe it's the other one. It's probably the other one. Yeah, it's the other one.
Well, good to know I nailed it.
and i suppose you're gonna try to tell us next that somehow led zeppelin was led zeppelin. yeah, right....
No, they were Led Zeppelin. Their fourth LP even said so. It's all it said. You know, self titled and all that.
so gullible
Nuh uhhhhh.
are the stones the apples or the oranges?
that's a gray area for me...
He nailed it, yes, yes, yes - your are already in depression state even if you should be so.
Must be devastating living so far away from humanity, that you get predepressed thinking Beatles were anything good.... you must have swallowed something wrong these last few days...
Who's the bananas?
Never heard that story. How could one song break up the Beatles? Bet they were in deep shit long before the long and winding road showed it's ugly face.
MccCartney's Naked was a real nice output me thinks.
Spector had lost what touch he had by then. And Lennon, well, he was just being himself, an @#$%&.
Yes
Nice to see somebody sharp enough to get it, posting here
You're in a minority, Stonesrule
And I allready regret starting this thread btw. People are simply too serious here
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: August 25, 2012 16:32
Quote
stonesnowQuote
No ExpectationsQuote
keefriffhard4life
the kinks, stones and the who are better than the beatles
Absolutely!
Some other bands claim to be as well:
Oh wow. That was just brilliantly awful!
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: August 25, 2012 16:35
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
The Beatles were The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, well, after all these years and releases, somehow they are still The Rolling Stones.
no way...i don't know where you get this stuff from, skippy, but i totally disagree....
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: August 25, 2012 16:36
Quote
Justin
The Beatles were better than the Rolling Stones at being The Beatles.
sure, but were they better at being the beatles than the cricketts?
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: August 25, 2012 16:38
Quote
StonesTodQuote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
The Beatles were The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, well, after all these years and releases, somehow they are still The Rolling Stones.
no way...i don't know where you get this stuff from, skippy, but i totally disagree....
You mean to tell me The Beatles weren't...The Beatles? Or is it the other one? Maybe it's the other one. It's probably the other one. Yeah, it's the other one.
Well, good to know I nailed it.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: August 25, 2012 16:39
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBluesQuote
StonesTodQuote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
The Beatles were The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, well, after all these years and releases, somehow they are still The Rolling Stones.
no way...i don't know where you get this stuff from, skippy, but i totally disagree....
You mean to tell me The Beatles weren't...The Beatles? Or is it the other one? Maybe it's the other one. It's probably the other one. Yeah, it's the other one.
Well, good to know I nailed it.
and i suppose you're gonna try to tell us next that somehow led zeppelin was led zeppelin. yeah, right....
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
ryanpow
()
Date: August 25, 2012 16:41
Erik, Could it just be that you've listened to the Stones so much more that at this point the Beatles sound better because its more fresh to your ears?
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: August 25, 2012 16:47
Quote
StonesTodQuote
WeLoveToPlayTheBluesQuote
StonesTodQuote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
The Beatles were The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, well, after all these years and releases, somehow they are still The Rolling Stones.
no way...i don't know where you get this stuff from, skippy, but i totally disagree....
You mean to tell me The Beatles weren't...The Beatles? Or is it the other one? Maybe it's the other one. It's probably the other one. Yeah, it's the other one.
Well, good to know I nailed it.
and i suppose you're gonna try to tell us next that somehow led zeppelin was led zeppelin. yeah, right....
No, they were Led Zeppelin. Their fourth LP even said so. It's all it said. You know, self titled and all that.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: August 25, 2012 16:51
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBluesQuote
StonesTodQuote
WeLoveToPlayTheBluesQuote
StonesTodQuote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
The Beatles were The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, well, after all these years and releases, somehow they are still The Rolling Stones.
no way...i don't know where you get this stuff from, skippy, but i totally disagree....
You mean to tell me The Beatles weren't...The Beatles? Or is it the other one? Maybe it's the other one. It's probably the other one. Yeah, it's the other one.
Well, good to know I nailed it.
and i suppose you're gonna try to tell us next that somehow led zeppelin was led zeppelin. yeah, right....
No, they were Led Zeppelin. Their fourth LP even said so. It's all it said. You know, self titled and all that.
so gullible
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: August 25, 2012 16:59
Quote
StonesTodQuote
WeLoveToPlayTheBluesQuote
StonesTodQuote
WeLoveToPlayTheBluesQuote
StonesTodQuote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
The Beatles were The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, well, after all these years and releases, somehow they are still The Rolling Stones.
no way...i don't know where you get this stuff from, skippy, but i totally disagree....
You mean to tell me The Beatles weren't...The Beatles? Or is it the other one? Maybe it's the other one. It's probably the other one. Yeah, it's the other one.
Well, good to know I nailed it.
and i suppose you're gonna try to tell us next that somehow led zeppelin was led zeppelin. yeah, right....
No, they were Led Zeppelin. Their fourth LP even said so. It's all it said. You know, self titled and all that.
so gullible
Nuh uhhhhh.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
The Sicilian
()
Date: August 25, 2012 17:27
I think he misses Dump Truck.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
Sighunt
()
Date: August 25, 2012 17:45
I don't know why these kinds of posts continue to re-appear (maybe it is just breaking the monotony until a possible Stones tour is announced), but this will always be an apples vs. oranges argument..
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: August 25, 2012 17:50
Quote
Sighunt
I don't know why these kinds of posts continue to re-appear (maybe it is just breaking the monotony until a possible Stones tour is announced), but this will always be an apples vs. oranges argument..
are the stones the apples or the oranges?
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: August 25, 2012 17:57
comparing the two is like choosing which side of your brain you like more...
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: August 25, 2012 17:59
Quote
Rip This
comparing the two is like choosing which side of your brain you like more...
that's a gray area for me...
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
mtaylor
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:07
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
mtaylorYou nailed it ...Quote
walkingthedogQuote
Erik_Snow
Listened through the Beatles albums today, on vinyl. Even the record that is considered a turkey; Let It Be, is far superior to anything RS wanted to do at the time. Nevermind Keith thinking he invented the open G thingy. The Beatles were geniuses, Rolling Stones were just a bunch of wuzzies back then. And they would have continued to be that, if not getting confidence through drugs in the 70s
It's getting dark in northern Norway these days and depression is already setting in.
Nailed what? You haven't even been here
Sun is up 20 hours a day here. Way brighter days than what you suckers down south has the cope with. So much for your nailings
Keep on raising toasts to yourself, Per Arne and "walking the dog"s great heads. You got yourself nailed for sure - nailed in your private parts
He nailed it, yes, yes, yes - your are already in depression state even if you should be so.
Must be devastating living so far away from humanity, that you get predepressed thinking Beatles were anything good.... you must have swallowed something wrong these last few days...
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:09
Quote
StonesTodQuote
Sighunt
I don't know why these kinds of posts continue to re-appear (maybe it is just breaking the monotony until a possible Stones tour is announced), but this will always be an apples vs. oranges argument..
are the stones the apples or the oranges?
Who's the bananas?
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:12
-
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-08-27 11:55 by Erik_Snow.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-08-27 11:55 by Erik_Snow.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
pmk251
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:16
Funny "The Long and Winding Road" is mentioned. Isn't that song one of the cited reasons the band broke up? McCartney redid the album with...Naked.
Speaking of MMT...I cannot find anything to confirm this, but I believe it was movie critic Pauline Kael that said something to the effect: The idea was for the band to travel around on a bus and film what happened. Unfortunately, nothing did.
Speaking of MMT...I cannot find anything to confirm this, but I believe it was movie critic Pauline Kael that said something to the effect: The idea was for the band to travel around on a bus and film what happened. Unfortunately, nothing did.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
Munichhilton
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:22
I like sand
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:23
Quote
pmk251
Funny "The Long and Winding Road" is mentioned. Isn't that song one of the cited reasons the band broke up? McCartney redid the album with...Naked.
Never heard that story. How could one song break up the Beatles? Bet they were in deep shit long before the long and winding road showed it's ugly face.
MccCartney's Naked was a real nice output me thinks.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
Munichhilton
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:25
Does this shirt make me look fat?
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
pmk251
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:29
I checked. That is what I read. McCartney specifically mentioned that song while the band was breaking up. Lennon brought in Spector to "finish" the album and what he did with the song pissed Paul off, big time. From what I read, Martin did not like it either.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
Munichhilton
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:33
Everybody....look what I can do...
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:34
Quote
pmk251
I checked. That is what I read. McCartney specifically mentioned that song while the band was breaking up. Lennon brought in Spector to "finish" the album and what he did with the song pissed Paul off, big time. From what I read, Martin did not like it either.
Spector had lost what touch he had by then. And Lennon, well, he was just being himself, an @#$%&.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
GumbootCloggeroo
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:36
Beatles lacked aggression and energy and various levels of sounds? Hmm... did you never listen to Yer Blues? That is a raunchy, dirty song. John singing about wanting to die. It's in his voice. Helter Skelter. heavy tune. They have plenty of levels. They played many styles of music. Even more so than The Stones. I've shown this video on here many times, but watch Ringo from 1:44 on. He is HEAVY. Heavier than Charlie ever was. Rock and roll not a @#$%& boy band:Quote
buttons67
i liked both beatles and stones, but while the beatles were catchy tunes and easy on the ear, with some wonderful songs, they lacked the energy, aggression, beat and variety that the stones had and for much longer.
when i listen to the stones i can go from something beautiful like as tears go by, to citadel, to something as infectious as jigsaw puzzle to aggression like rocks off, back to catchy sound like shes a rainbow, then on to blues like i got the blues.
i then go through various levels of sounds, speeds, beat, variety, melody, aggression, beauty in all those sounds.
when i listen to the beatles, i dont go through such a wide scope of experiences.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:39
Quote
Munichhilton
Does this shirt make me look fat?
Yes
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
stonesrule
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:41
Well, you woke 'em up today Erik! Good work.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
GumbootCloggeroo
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:42
Why do some Stones fans feel so personally threatened when someone says something is better than The Stones? It's like they have to defend the band to death.
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
2000 LYFH
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:43
Never heard a Beatles/Stones debate before but I think the real question is - who's better the Cowsills or the Partridge Family?
Re: The Beatles were better than the Rolling stones
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: August 25, 2012 18:51
Quote
stonesrule
Well, you woke 'em up today Erik! Good work.
Nice to see somebody sharp enough to get it, posting here
You're in a minority, Stonesrule
And I allready regret starting this thread btw. People are simply too serious here
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
bobo , ChrisL , Dan , DandelionPowderman , eduardoacdc , FoolToCry , niki , RaahenTiikeri , rover , sotob , tiffanyblu , waterrats , wiredallnight
Guests:
1607
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10