Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Gazza

Quote
StonedInTokyo
Who's better, The Beatles or The Rolling Stones? It's an endless argument that has been going on for 50 years and may never be settled. ..

Only for people with a mental age of about 12 who still think its 1964.

Meanwhile, the rest of the planet have managed to get a life.

And WhackODong is about 12 years old in his little short bus head. It will never be settled because there's nothing to settle. It's music. It's art. What it isn't is who's won x-amount of championships, MVPs and scoring titles and set records for blah blah blah to be settled on as being The Best Ever. That kind of stuff belongs in sports only, not art.

Regardless of how corporate The Rolling Stones have made the art of playing live and selling whatever.

Music isn't a sport but to suggest that there isn't competition in the music business between artists is beyond naive. Ever watch American Idol? It's a competition. I suggest you google: Beatles vs Rolling Stones. I also suggest you read a recently released book by Jim Derogatis and Greg Kot called: The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones: Sound Opinions On The Great Rock 'N' Roll Rivalry.

Just about anything males get involved with turns into a competition. This is especially so in rock 'n roll. Have you ever been to a "Battle of the Bands" competition? Get your head out of the sand, man!

You said 'artists' and then ruined your argument in the next sentence by the words 'American idol'

I am assuming you are just taking a humorous little poke at the extremely talented artists that have come forth from AI.

And I'm assuming you're being sarcastic.

No doubt some of them have talent, but there's more 'artistry' in an orangutan's arsehole than there is in anything associated with Simon Cowell.

Simon Cowell is a genius.

MightyOLanternRanger certainly isn't.

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Stoneage
What's wrong with a little trolling?

What is trolling?

Look in the mirror and say JumpinJackOTripe.

Quote
Thrylan
Wow, hope it was a good show.

We had a great time. Both died of cancer. One died of brain cancer the other from breast cancer. It spooks me to this day. I remember having a weird feeling when Sympathy For The Devil was played that night. I felt uncomfortable for some reason.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Stoneage
What's wrong with a little trolling?

What is trolling?

Look in the mirror and say JumpinJackOTripe.

Stop being a stone throwing chicken shit and agree to have a decent discussion for once! I hear this word troll used a lot around here, but has it ever been clearly defined?

Quote
Thrylan
That's an ass-load. BTW, I agree with your Americana Stones phase, I touched on that on the 1st page, as a large part of their American appeal. They actualized what other groups imitated.

To me, the Kinks largest inroad to America was that double live And More For The Road. Served as a great "greatest hits" package, with some hot live stuff.

yeah lots of kinks songs in that short timespan and its hard to recommend anyone a starting place for the kinks other than maybe the live album you mentioned. they have so much material and its so diverse. the stones explored a lot of styles after 1968 but for a song or 2 not an entire album or string of albums. in 1968 the stones came into their own and captured what i call the "core sound" or "signature sound". every album after that would have a majority of the songs in that classic stones sound and then a reggae or funk or disco or new wave or whatever type song thrown in.

btw i think with beggars banquet the stones actually were copying what bob dylan and the band were doing at the time

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Gazza

Quote
StonedInTokyo
Who's better, The Beatles or The Rolling Stones? It's an endless argument that has been going on for 50 years and may never be settled. ..

Only for people with a mental age of about 12 who still think its 1964.

Meanwhile, the rest of the planet have managed to get a life.

And WhackODong is about 12 years old in his little short bus head. It will never be settled because there's nothing to settle. It's music. It's art. What it isn't is who's won x-amount of championships, MVPs and scoring titles and set records for blah blah blah to be settled on as being The Best Ever. That kind of stuff belongs in sports only, not art.

Regardless of how corporate The Rolling Stones have made the art of playing live and selling whatever.

Music isn't a sport but to suggest that there isn't competition in the music business between artists is beyond naive. Ever watch American Idol? It's a competition. I suggest you google: Beatles vs Rolling Stones. I also suggest you read a recently released book by Jim Derogatis and Greg Kot called: The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones: Sound Opinions On The Great Rock 'N' Roll Rivalry.

Just about anything males get involved with turns into a competition. This is especially so in rock 'n roll. Have you ever been to a "Battle of the Bands" competition? Get your head out of the sand, man!

You said 'artists' and then ruined your argument in the next sentence by the words 'American idol'

I am assuming you are just taking a humorous little poke at the extremely talented artists that have come forth from AI.

And I'm assuming you're being sarcastic.

No doubt some of them have talent, but there's more 'artistry' in an orangutan's arsehole than there is in anything associated with Simon Cowell.

Simon Cowell is a genius.

MightyOLanternRanger certainly isn't.

You remind me of Ernest T Bass. Any chance you look like him too?

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Gazza

Quote
StonedInTokyo
Who's better, The Beatles or The Rolling Stones? It's an endless argument that has been going on for 50 years and may never be settled. ..

Only for people with a mental age of about 12 who still think its 1964.

Meanwhile, the rest of the planet have managed to get a life.

And WhackODong is about 12 years old in his little short bus head. It will never be settled because there's nothing to settle. It's music. It's art. What it isn't is who's won x-amount of championships, MVPs and scoring titles and set records for blah blah blah to be settled on as being The Best Ever. That kind of stuff belongs in sports only, not art.

Regardless of how corporate The Rolling Stones have made the art of playing live and selling whatever.

Music isn't a sport but to suggest that there isn't competition in the music business between artists is beyond naive. Ever watch American Idol? It's a competition. I suggest you google: Beatles vs Rolling Stones. I also suggest you read a recently released book by Jim Derogatis and Greg Kot called: The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones: Sound Opinions On The Great Rock 'N' Roll Rivalry.

Just about anything males get involved with turns into a competition. This is especially so in rock 'n roll. Have you ever been to a "Battle of the Bands" competition? Get your head out of the sand, man!

You said 'artists' and then ruined your argument in the next sentence by the words 'American idol'

I am assuming you are just taking a humorous little poke at the extremely talented artists that have come forth from AI.

And I'm assuming you're being sarcastic.

No doubt some of them have talent, but there's more 'artistry' in an orangutan's arsehole than there is in anything associated with Simon Cowell.

Simon Cowell is a genius.

MightyOLanternRanger certainly isn't.

You remind me of Ernest T Bass. Any chance you look like him too?

Can I call you Ernest T Gass?

True. The Kinks get no love for what Pete Townsend might get too much love for...lol 68'-72'.....what a creative period for music on the whole.

Never thought of BB as such, but now that you mention it, it's quite possible. Oddly enough, I always thought Who's Been Sleeping Here? in the midst of all the Kinksish stuff was the closest Dylan rip. Brian's harp isn't Brian's style at all, pure Dylan. Micks lyrics are Dylanesqe, Keith's strumming style. Obviously an influence.

Quote
Thrylan
True. The Kinks get no love for what Pete Townsend might get too much love for...lol 68'-72'.....what a creative period for music on the whole.

Never thought of BB as such, but now that you mention it, it's quite possible. Oddly enough, I always thought Who's Been Sleeping Here? in the midst of all the Kinksish stuff was the closest Dylan rip. Brian's harp isn't Brian's style at all, pure Dylan. Micks lyrics are Dylanesqe, Keith's strumming style. Obviously an influence.

i don't think beggars banquet is a rip on anything just copying the band and dylans template of lets drop the silly crap and strip rock back to the basics which lets admit it was getting almost silly by 1968 with most bands doing a zillion overdubs of many non rock instruments and layers of vocals. lets get the guitars, bass, drums, harmonica and maybe a piano or organ and rock it. roots rock. by 1970 the grateful dead, the byrds and countless others had followed and stripped rock back to its essence

We see it alike. Bands fell in love with the studio from 66'-67'......too much. Stripping it down will always bring you closer to early Dylan. Like I said, what a time period! When the bands got out of the studio, and back to playing, it was a hot time.

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Gazza

Quote
StonedInTokyo
Who's better, The Beatles or The Rolling Stones? It's an endless argument that has been going on for 50 years and may never be settled. ..

Only for people with a mental age of about 12 who still think its 1964.

Meanwhile, the rest of the planet have managed to get a life.

And WhackODong is about 12 years old in his little short bus head. It will never be settled because there's nothing to settle. It's music. It's art. What it isn't is who's won x-amount of championships, MVPs and scoring titles and set records for blah blah blah to be settled on as being The Best Ever. That kind of stuff belongs in sports only, not art.

Regardless of how corporate The Rolling Stones have made the art of playing live and selling whatever.

Music isn't a sport but to suggest that there isn't competition in the music business between artists is beyond naive. Ever watch American Idol? It's a competition. I suggest you google: Beatles vs Rolling Stones. I also suggest you read a recently released book by Jim Derogatis and Greg Kot called: The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones: Sound Opinions On The Great Rock 'N' Roll Rivalry.

Just about anything males get involved with turns into a competition. This is especially so in rock 'n roll. Have you ever been to a "Battle of the Bands" competition? Get your head out of the sand, man!

You said 'artists' and then ruined your argument in the next sentence by the words 'American idol'

I am assuming you are just taking a humorous little poke at the extremely talented artists that have come forth from AI.

And I'm assuming you're being sarcastic.

No doubt some of them have talent, but there's more 'artistry' in an orangutan's arsehole than there is in anything associated with Simon Cowell.

Simon Cowell is a genius.

MightyOLanternRanger certainly isn't.

You remind me of Ernest T Bass. Any chance you look like him too?

Can I call you Ernest T Gass?

These posts are in violation of the new "quoting" rules set forth a few weeks ago.

Where's StonesTod when you need him?

He violated the new quoting rules....

Quote
71Tele

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Gazza

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Gazza

Quote
StonedInTokyo
Who's better, The Beatles or The Rolling Stones? It's an endless argument that has been going on for 50 years and may never be settled. ..

Only for people with a mental age of about 12 who still think its 1964.

Meanwhile, the rest of the planet have managed to get a life.

And WhackODong is about 12 years old in his little short bus head. It will never be settled because there's nothing to settle. It's music. It's art. What it isn't is who's won x-amount of championships, MVPs and scoring titles and set records for blah blah blah to be settled on as being The Best Ever. That kind of stuff belongs in sports only, not art.

Regardless of how corporate The Rolling Stones have made the art of playing live and selling whatever.

Music isn't a sport but to suggest that there isn't competition in the music business between artists is beyond naive. Ever watch American Idol? It's a competition. I suggest you google: Beatles vs Rolling Stones. I also suggest you read a recently released book by Jim Derogatis and Greg Kot called: The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones: Sound Opinions On The Great Rock 'N' Roll Rivalry.

Just about anything males get involved with turns into a competition. This is especially so in rock 'n roll. Have you ever been to a "Battle of the Bands" competition? Get your head out of the sand, man!

You said 'artists' and then ruined your argument in the next sentence by the words 'American idol'

I am assuming you are just taking a humorous little poke at the extremely talented artists that have come forth from AI.

And I'm assuming you're being sarcastic.

No doubt some of them have talent, but there's more 'artistry' in an orangutan's arsehole than there is in anything associated with Simon Cowell.

Simon Cowell is a genius.

MightyOLanternRanger certainly isn't.

You remind me of Ernest T Bass. Any chance you look like him too?

Can I call you Ernest T Gass?

These posts are in violation of the new "quoting" rules set forth a few weeks ago.

Where's StonesTod when you need him?

Oh, for crying out loud, Good Bye, and Good Luck.

Is it even possible for a show to be historic, before it becomes history?

Quote
Thrylan
True. The Kinks get no love for what Pete Townsend might get too much love for...lol 68'-72'.....what a creative period for music on the whole.

Never thought of BB as such, but now that you mention it, it's quite possible. Oddly enough, I always thought Who's Been Sleeping Here? in the midst of all the Kinksish stuff was the closest Dylan rip. Brian's harp isn't Brian's style at all, pure Dylan. Micks lyrics are Dylanesqe, Keith's strumming style. Obviously an influence.

Jigsaw puzzle is another homage to Dylan

Beggars banquet started out primarily (getting back to the topic) with the stones taking their musical direction again from the Beatles who made a sharp shift from psychedelia to acoustic guitar-based songs with the white album. But in the studio lightning struck and the stones defined a new sound for themselves. I suspect primary credit goes to KR and jimmy miller for that.

Starting with beggars banquet it stopping making sense to compare the stones and Beatles as they were exploring very different directions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-07-02 09:18 by sonomastone.

Well said......just was thinking the same about JP.....great tune.

You're right about the styles......the Stones created decadent 70's cock rock; I don't think, had they existed, that the Beatles could have bested that.....opinion.

Quote
sonomastone
But in the studio lightning struck and the stones defined a new sound for themselves. I suspect primary credit goes to KR and jimmy miller for that.

I like that description.

They did indeed find a unique voice.

And a sympathetic producer.

about the kinks again the have a singature sound in the guitar tone but there isn't a style or song you can throw on for someone not familiar with them and say "this here is what the kinks are about".

for the stones you could throw on jumpin jack flash or brown sugar or start me up or even satisfaction and people would get the general idea of what to somewhat expect on a stones album plus a ballad and usually 1 tune not like the rest like reggae, funk, etc.

These argumets are really funny. There's Da Vinci, Van Gogh, Raphael....Why compare and not just enjoy all is really far from my comprehension.

For me is about what you feel....No music can make me feel what the Stones music can but I'm still able to enjoy Pink Floyd or Led Zeppelin or Of Monsters and Men without a problem.

part of being a rock and roll fan is debating the beatles vs the stones. that's just how it is :-)

here's a song about it:

Quote
leteyer
These argumets are really funny. There's Da Vinci, Van Gogh, Raphael....Why compare and not just enjoy all is really far from my comprehension.

For me is about what you feel....No music can make me feel what the Stones music can but I'm still able to enjoy Pink Floyd or Led Zeppelin or Of Monsters and Men without a problem.

But the question is why. I enjoy most all music, but the Stones, "move" me, and that interests me. The argument is just fun, and also to search out why.

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Stoneage
What's wrong with a little trolling?

What is trolling?

Look in the mirror and say JumpinJackOTripe.

Stop being a stone throwing chicken shit and agree to have a decent discussion for once! I hear this word troll used a lot around here, but has it ever been clearly defined?

That's not being a stone throwing chicken shit, that's just telling the truth. I have decent discussions with people that are actual fans. In case you can't figure out what that means, there is no having a decent "discussion" with you.

Here is the definition of troll: YOU. ALL of you. MightyJackO etc. You announce you're going away... yet you don't. For perfect example, you post inane posts that are full of crap, like your Beatles Vs Stones malarkey or this one, some epic mythical soaring past the Beatles crap, which hilariously you decide to say after their last performance - before the next one. You're like colonies of termites: turn out the lights they go away? Nope. Turn the lights on and there they are.

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
71Tele
These posts are in violation of the new "quoting" rules set forth a few weeks ago.

Where's StonesTod when you need him?

Oh, for crying out loud, Good Bye, and Good Luck.

Heard that before.

Please go back on the meds. They help you.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TheLoneRangerRidesAgain

Quote
Stoneage
What's wrong with a little trolling?

What is trolling?

Look in the mirror and say JumpinJackOTripe.

Stop being a stone throwing chicken shit and agree to have a decent discussion for once! I hear this word troll used a lot around here, but has it ever been clearly defined?

That's not being a stone throwing chicken shit, that's just telling the truth. I have decent discussions with people that are actual fans. In case you can't figure out what that means, there is no having a decent "discussion" with you.

Here is the definition of troll: YOU. ALL of you. MightyJackO etc. You announce you're going away... yet you don't. For perfect example, you post inane posts that are full of crap, like your Beatles Vs Stones malarkey or this one, some epic mythical soaring past the Beatles crap, which hilariously you decide to say after their last performance - before the next one. You're like colonies of termites: turn out the lights they go away? Nope. Turn the lights on and there they are.

I think he just craves attention. He comes here and loves the fact that people are talking about him. In his head he is a celebrity. He's a major drama queen with his many goodbye threads and then he comes back under a different name because he knows it creates excitement (in his head). Notice how he mostly responds to threads that he creates. He's not a general user of this board. He only cares about things HE wants to talk about. Sometimes he'll respond to other people's threads but mostly it's his own. He loves the fact that people reply to his comments and he loves replying to his own. It's very strange behaviour. I've never seen anything like it before. But who knows, maybe there's one like him on every popular message board. I don't think he's playing a joke on us and "acting" because this has been going on for way too long.
Anyways, that's just my theory.

Come on! Both Mr Lantern and Mr Again are good sports. It's all tongue in cheek. A bit of humor does this nerd's nest good.

rabble rabble rabble

"...but we dont know what else to do..."

Quote
GRC
After Philly #2 and watching this....The Stones have cemented their place as the Worlds Greatest Rock and Roll Band. Unreal...there's no one close.....

One show? Need to be consistent!

Finally, 50 odd years down the line the Stones soar past the Beatles...quite an achievement!

They must be so pleased to get that monkey off their back. I wonder if they're a little embarrassed that it took them 43 years to win against a band that wasn't even in it to compete any more?

At least now JJOL can find something new to cheerlead about!

Quote
Stoneage
Come on! Both Mr Lantern and Mr Again are good sports. It's all tongue in cheek. A bit of humor does this nerd's nest good.

Yes.