Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...89101112131415161718...LastNext
Current Page: 13 of 223
Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 11, 2013 05:50

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
GasLightStreet
Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
I wonder how many people have stopped coming to this message board because of JumpinJackOLantern's insane and annoying ramblings.

I'm going to guess it's not a mystery.

You both realize that I didn't start this thread, right? And, long after I am gone (and I will be gone very soon) this subject will rise again and again. You guys really need to accept the fact that if you are going to hang around here for years this subject is going to come up on a regular basis.

You both think I am full of BS but I tell you exactly like I see it. Do you want me to tell you that I am kidding about the Sons of the Beatles? I would be lying if I told you that. I firmly believe it can happen. It should happen! And, I will do everything in my power to make it happen! It would bring joy to millions. Why would any decent person be opposed to something that would bring joy to millions? Just because you can't see something doesn't mean that others can't see it. So stop with your petty attacks.

OK I agree that Skippy & Stompin' Tom need to settle down (Gumboot, where is your trademark Canadian tolerance?), but for the love of all that is sweet and good will you please stop it with the sons of beatles nonsense?

I enjoy a lot of your posts but when you keep going there you do yourself a disservice. I can even handle your idolization of James McCartney (although I don't get it...a put on perhaps?) and the 'Stones have finally surpassed the Beatles at Glastonbury' but leave those poor sons of bitches beatles alone!

I can't guarantee anything except that my one year is up at the stroke of midnight on Halloween night.

we all know all that means is that you will shed the old cocoon (we'll never grow old and we'll never die) and that you'll rise like a phoenix from the ashes of burnt pumpkin and have evolved into a shiny and new stones fruit or vegetable.

I've got several suggestions if you have a few moments and are prepared to indulge me.

I give you:

Honky Tonk Watermelon,
She's So Cucumber,
Paint It, Aubergine
Wild Berries
She's a Rutabaga
Anybody Seen My Squash
Cherry Oh Baby (oh, wait...)
Tumbling Figs


Choose what you like but when you choose, make sure it is firm (squeeze it) and make sure it has a good vibrant colour (except if it's Paint It, Aubergine, then the darker the better).

Good luck and be sure to let us know what you choose!

Very good! But, I have no expectations to ever pass this way again.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 11, 2013 05:52

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
GasLightStreet
Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
I wonder how many people have stopped coming to this message board because of JumpinJackOLantern's insane and annoying ramblings.

I'm going to guess it's not a mystery.

You both realize that I didn't start this thread, right? And, long after I am gone (and I will be gone very soon) this subject will rise again and again. You guys really need to accept the fact that if you are going to hang around here for years this subject is going to come up on a regular basis.

You both think I am full of BS but I tell you exactly like I see it. Do you want me to tell you that I am kidding about the Sons of the Beatles? I would be lying if I told you that. I firmly believe it can happen. It should happen! And, I will do everything in my power to make it happen! It would bring joy to millions. Why would any decent person be opposed to something that would bring joy to millions? Just because you can't see something doesn't mean that others can't see it. So stop with your petty attacks.

OK I agree that Skippy & Stompin' Tom need to settle down (Gumboot, where is your trademark Canadian tolerance?), but for the love of all that is sweet and good will you please stop it with the sons of beatles nonsense?

I enjoy a lot of your posts but when you keep going there you do yourself a disservice. I can even handle your idolization of James McCartney (although I don't get it...a put on perhaps?) and the 'Stones have finally surpassed the Beatles at Glastonbury' but leave those poor sons of bitches beatles alone!

I can't guarantee anything except that my one year is up at the stroke of midnight on Halloween night.

we all know all that means is that you will shed the old cocoon (we'll never grow old and we'll never die) and that you'll rise like a phoenix from the ashes of burnt pumpkin and have evolved into a shiny and new stones fruit or vegetable.

I've got several suggestions if you have a few moments and are prepared to indulge me.

I give you:

Honky Tonk Watermelon,
She's So Cucumber,
Paint It, Aubergine
Wild Berries
She's a Rutabaga
Anybody Seen My Squash
Cherry Oh Baby (oh, wait...)
Tumbling Figs


Choose what you like but when you choose, make sure it is firm (squeeze it) and make sure it has a good vibrant colour (except if it's Paint It, Aubergine, then the darker the better).

Good luck and be sure to let us know what you choose!

Very good! But, I have no expectations to ever pass this way again.

well...time is on your side.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 11, 2013 05:59

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
GasLightStreet
Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
I wonder how many people have stopped coming to this message board because of JumpinJackOLantern's insane and annoying ramblings.

I'm going to guess it's not a mystery.

You both realize that I didn't start this thread, right? And, long after I am gone (and I will be gone very soon) this subject will rise again and again. You guys really need to accept the fact that if you are going to hang around here for years this subject is going to come up on a regular basis.

You both think I am full of BS but I tell you exactly like I see it. Do you want me to tell you that I am kidding about the Sons of the Beatles? I would be lying if I told you that. I firmly believe it can happen. It should happen! And, I will do everything in my power to make it happen! It would bring joy to millions. Why would any decent person be opposed to something that would bring joy to millions? Just because you can't see something doesn't mean that others can't see it. So stop with your petty attacks.

OK I agree that Skippy & Stompin' Tom need to settle down (Gumboot, where is your trademark Canadian tolerance?), but for the love of all that is sweet and good will you please stop it with the sons of beatles nonsense?

I enjoy a lot of your posts but when you keep going there you do yourself a disservice. I can even handle your idolization of James McCartney (although I don't get it...a put on perhaps?) and the 'Stones have finally surpassed the Beatles at Glastonbury' but leave those poor sons of bitches beatles alone!

I can't guarantee anything except that my one year is up at the stroke of midnight on Halloween night.

we all know all that means is that you will shed the old cocoon (we'll never grow old and we'll never die) and that you'll rise like a phoenix from the ashes of burnt pumpkin and have evolved into a shiny and new stones fruit or vegetable.

I've got several suggestions if you have a few moments and are prepared to indulge me.

I give you:

Honky Tonk Watermelon,
She's So Cucumber,
Paint It, Aubergine
Wild Berries
She's a Rutabaga
Anybody Seen My Squash
Cherry Oh Baby (oh, wait...)
Tumbling Figs


Choose what you like but when you choose, make sure it is firm (squeeze it) and make sure it has a good vibrant colour (except if it's Paint It, Aubergine, then the darker the better).

Good luck and be sure to let us know what you choose!

Very good! But, I have no expectations to ever pass this way again.

well...time is on your side.

Have you seen the Clint Eastwood movie Trouble With The Curve? That character he played in the movie is me to a T! Just a broken down old man rounding the final turn of his life. That's me. All my dreams have come true so there isn't much left but to walk straight toward the setting sun.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 11, 2013 08:40

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
GasLightStreet
Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
I wonder how many people have stopped coming to this message board because of JumpinJackOLantern's insane and annoying ramblings.

I'm going to guess it's not a mystery.

You both realize that I didn't start this thread, right? And, long after I am gone (and I will be gone very soon) this subject will rise again and again. You guys really need to accept the fact that if you are going to hang around here for years this subject is going to come up on a regular basis.

You both think I am full of BS but I tell you exactly like I see it. Do you want me to tell you that I am kidding about the Sons of the Beatles? I would be lying if I told you that. I firmly believe it can happen. It should happen! And, I will do everything in my power to make it happen! It would bring joy to millions. Why would any decent person be opposed to something that would bring joy to millions? Just because you can't see something doesn't mean that others can't see it. So stop with your petty attacks.

OK I agree that Skippy & Stompin' Tom need to settle down (Gumboot, where is your trademark Canadian tolerance?), but for the love of all that is sweet and good will you please stop it with the sons of beatles nonsense?

I enjoy a lot of your posts but when you keep going there you do yourself a disservice. I can even handle your idolization of James McCartney (although I don't get it...a put on perhaps?) and the 'Stones have finally surpassed the Beatles at Glastonbury' but leave those poor sons of bitches beatles alone!

I can't guarantee anything except that my one year is up at the stroke of midnight on Halloween night.

we all know all that means is that you will shed the old cocoon (we'll never grow old and we'll never die) and that you'll rise like a phoenix from the ashes of burnt pumpkin and have evolved into a shiny and new stones fruit or vegetable.

I've got several suggestions if you have a few moments and are prepared to indulge me.

I give you:

Honky Tonk Watermelon,
She's So Cucumber,
Paint It, Aubergine
Wild Berries
She's a Rutabaga
Anybody Seen My Squash
Cherry Oh Baby (oh, wait...)
Tumbling Figs


Choose what you like but when you choose, make sure it is firm (squeeze it) and make sure it has a good vibrant colour (except if it's Paint It, Aubergine, then the darker the better).

Good luck and be sure to let us know what you choose!

Very good! But, I have no expectations to ever pass this way again.

well...time is on your side.

Have you seen the Clint Eastwood movie Trouble With The Curve? That character he played in the movie is me to a T! Just a broken down old man rounding the final turn of his life. That's me. All my dreams have come true so there isn't much left but to walk straight toward the setting sun.

You seem more Dirty Harry (in the nicest way)...go ahead, make my day! smiling smiley

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Come On ()
Date: October 11, 2013 14:04

Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0
John vs Keith on Rhythm 1 - 1
Ringo vs Charlie on drums 1 - 1
George vs Brian on guitar 1 - 1
John vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
Paul vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
George vs Mick on vocal 1 - 2
George vs Keith on back-up vocal 1 - 3
John vs Brian on harp 1 - 3
Lennon/McCartney vs Jagger/Richards 2 - 3
Harrison vs Wyman 3 - 3
Beatles vs Stones for 7 superb albums in a row 4 -3 (Please Please me >> Revolver)

Well, that's the tough fact sorry to say....

smoking smileycool smileysmoking smileycool smiley
John Paul George Ringo

2 1 2 0

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: MKjan ()
Date: October 11, 2013 17:45

The Stones for me, and its not even close.....RIP Beatles.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: mtaylor ()
Date: October 11, 2013 18:18

Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0
John vs Keith on Rhythm 1 - 1
Ringo vs Charlie on drums 1 - 1
George vs Brian on guitar 1 - 1
John vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
Paul vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
George vs Mick on vocal 1 - 2
George vs Keith on back-up vocal 1 - 3
John vs Brian on harp 1 - 3
Lennon/McCartney vs Jagger/Richards 2 - 3
Harrison vs Wyman 3 - 3
Beatles vs Stones for 7 superb albums in a row 4 -3 (Please Please me >> Revolver)

Well, that's the tough fact sorry to say....

smoking smileycool smileysmoking smileycool smiley
John Paul George Ringo

Paul singing is like a 12-14 y.o. school boy changing to adult voice - so Mick wins with big numbers. John better than Keith on rythm is the biggest joke ever etc.

Conclusion - Beatles were a big joke, Macca as usual in his Goofy mind suggests that he invented all kind of music - he even was an inspiration to Mozart, Verdi etc.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-11 22:19 by mtaylor.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: jjo ()
Date: October 11, 2013 19:19

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
michaelsavage
Quote
jjo
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
michaelsavage
Yes, funny. How about Namath vs Lamonica?

Didn't they call Lamonica "The Mad Bomber"?

Lamonica was the Mad Bomber.

But I like Kenny The Snake" Stabler better !!!!

The Snake was one of the best.

Like Joe Willie, another Alabama QB.
Like Joe Willie A HARD PARTIER

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: landis ()
Date: October 17, 2013 01:16

I love the Stones but I remember reading Keith saying The Beatles opened the doors for them to make it in America.

The Beatles destroyed the basic 3 chord structure of blues-based rock bands

Their level of music influence is on another level. "Tomorrow Never Knows." is probably a sampled/break beat song years before anyone else.The drum part is a four-bar tape loop. "I Want You (She's so heavy)" had the essential use of the Doom/Sludge riff that you will see later in Black Sabbath without the level of distortion and the use of the Hammond that also is an influence for atmospheric/Drone bands. And that are just two opposite examples.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-17 01:17 by landis.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 17, 2013 01:22

Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0
John vs Keith on Rhythm 1 - 1
Ringo vs Charlie on drums 1 - 1
George vs Brian on guitar 1 - 1
John vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
Paul vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
George vs Mick on vocal 1 - 2
George vs Keith on back-up vocal 1 - 3
John vs Brian on harp 1 - 3
Lennon/McCartney vs Jagger/Richards 2 - 3
Harrison vs Wyman 3 - 3
Beatles vs Stones for 7 superb albums in a row 4 -3 (Please Please me >> Revolver)

Well, that's the tough fact sorry to say....

smoking smileycool smileysmoking smileycool smiley
John Paul George Ringo

I'll cut you a bit of slack on some of your picks, but 7 superb albums in a row...come on, ever heard of Beatles For Sale, even Help! was uneven.

I'll also agree with MTaylor that calling John vs. Keith on rhythm guitar 'a draw' is a joke.

On that basis, we have to go with the stones.

Although.....if we factor in number of units sold, divided by number of years as a band, the Beatles with this one hands down.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: whitem8 ()
Date: October 17, 2013 01:28

Quote
mtaylor
Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0
John vs Keith on Rhythm 1 - 1
Ringo vs Charlie on drums 1 - 1
George vs Brian on guitar 1 - 1
John vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
Paul vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
George vs Mick on vocal 1 - 2
George vs Keith on back-up vocal 1 - 3
John vs Brian on harp 1 - 3
Lennon/McCartney vs Jagger/Richards 2 - 3
Harrison vs Wyman 3 - 3
Beatles vs Stones for 7 superb albums in a row 4 -3 (Please Please me >> Revolver)

Well, that's the tough fact sorry to say....

smoking smileycool smileysmoking smileycool smiley
John Paul George Ringo

Paul singing is like a 12-14 y.o. school boy changing to adult voice - so Mick wins with big numbers. John better than Keith on rythm is the biggest joke ever etc.

Conclusion - Beatles were a big joke, Macca as usual in his Goofy mind suggests that he invented all kind of music - he even was an inspiration to Mozart, Verdi etc.

Seriously, how old are you?? Your Middle School is on your collar.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: landis ()
Date: October 17, 2013 01:55

The Beatles had better vocals, were more innovative, better songwriters, more versatile musically and basically more influential. The only thing The Rolling Stones were better than The Beatles were probably doing the Chuck Berry thing. If The Stones combined the funkiness, hard edge and blistering fast pace rock fusion of "Everybody Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey" then tell me because I can't find one.

I'm not knocking the Stones as they are one of my favorite bands but I don't see the comparison.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-17 01:57 by landis.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 17, 2013 01:57

Quote
landis
The Beatles had better vocals, were more innovative, better songwriters, more versatile musically and basically more influential. The only thing The Rolling Stones were better than The Beatles were probably doing the Chuck Berry thing. If The Stones combined the funkiness, hard edge and blistering fast pace rock fusion of "Everybody Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey" then tell me because I can't find one.

Have You Seen Your Mother Baby, Standing In The Shadow?
And while I like your example, I do prefer HYSYMBSITS...

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: landis ()
Date: October 17, 2013 02:03

That's a great one "Have You Seen Your Mother Baby, Standing In The Shadow? Every time I hear the horn section it makes me think if they were listening to "Got To Get You Into My Life". The nasty fuzz guitars are great which makes it different than The Beatles track though.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Come On ()
Date: October 17, 2013 08:07

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
landis
The Beatles had better vocals, were more innovative, better songwriters, more versatile musically and basically more influential. The only thing The Rolling Stones were better than The Beatles were probably doing the Chuck Berry thing. If The Stones combined the funkiness, hard edge and blistering fast pace rock fusion of "Everybody Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey" then tell me because I can't find one.

Have You Seen Your Mother Baby, Standing In The Shadow?
And while I like your example, I do prefer HYSYMBSITS...

What about TUAWCPM ?

2 1 2 0

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: October 17, 2013 09:59

Quote
landis

Tomorrow Never Knows... The drum part is a four-bar tape loop.

It isn't.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Come On ()
Date: October 17, 2013 10:08

Quote
His Majesty
Quote
landis

Tomorrow Never Knows... The drum part is a four-bar tape loop.

It isn't.

..it hasn't, it even ain't....
Frank Zappa

2 1 2 0

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: RoughJusticeOnYa ()
Date: October 17, 2013 10:19

Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0

...I stopped reading after that (couldn't help it; was shakin' from laughter too much...)

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Come On ()
Date: October 17, 2013 10:46

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa
Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0

...I stopped reading after that (couldn't help it; was shakin' from laughter too much...)

smiling smiley I had very hard time writing it, I have to admit....such an obvious fact

2 1 2 0

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: RoughJusticeOnYa ()
Date: October 17, 2013 11:04

Quote
Come On
Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa
Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0

...I stopped reading after that (couldn't help it; was shakin' from laughter too much...)

smiling smiley I had very hard time writing it, I have to admit....such an obvious fact

You really do your knickname justice. spinning smiley sticking its tongue out

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Come On ()
Date: October 17, 2013 11:56

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa
Quote
Come On
Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa
Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0

...I stopped reading after that (couldn't help it; was shakin' from laughter too much...)

smiling smiley I had very hard time writing it, I have to admit....such an obvious fact

You really do your knickname justice. spinning smiley sticking its tongue out
Thanks the same...that was roughjustice indeed...drinking smiley

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: October 17, 2013 12:07

George Harrison makes a curry dinner vs. Keith Richards makes an egg breakfast 1-0






Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: mtaylor ()
Date: October 17, 2013 17:45

Quote
whitem8
Quote
mtaylor
Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0
John vs Keith on Rhythm 1 - 1
Ringo vs Charlie on drums 1 - 1
George vs Brian on guitar 1 - 1
John vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
Paul vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
George vs Mick on vocal 1 - 2
George vs Keith on back-up vocal 1 - 3
John vs Brian on harp 1 - 3
Lennon/McCartney vs Jagger/Richards 2 - 3
Harrison vs Wyman 3 - 3
Beatles vs Stones for 7 superb albums in a row 4 -3 (Please Please me >> Revolver)

Well, that's the tough fact sorry to say....

smoking smileycool smileysmoking smileycool smiley
John Paul George Ringo

Paul singing is like a 12-14 y.o. school boy changing to adult voice - so Mick wins with big numbers. John better than Keith on rythm is the biggest joke ever etc.

Conclusion - Beatles were a big joke, Macca as usual in his Goofy mind suggests that he invented all kind of music - he even was an inspiration to Mozart, Verdi etc.

Seriously, how old are you?? Your Middle School is on your collar.

Just pure fact - Beatles were a big joke. Macca singing good? Absolutely nonsens, the most overrated singer ever. The only good thig Macca is good at is: talking bullshit and taking advantage of everybody elses hard Work, even the other Beatles members couldn't stand him.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Aquamarine ()
Date: October 17, 2013 17:54

Quote
mtaylor

Just pure fact - Beatles were a big joke.

This shows an almost breathtaking lack of knowledge/understanding of the history of popular music. It's not even necessary to be a Beatles fan to see why.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 17, 2013 21:09

Quote
Aquamarine
Quote
mtaylor

Just pure fact - Beatles were a big joke.

This shows an almost breathtaking lack of knowledge/understanding of the history of popular music. It's not even necessary to be a Beatles fan to see why.

mtaylor is just baiting now, looking for a reaction.

Clearly no one can be that stupid.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 17, 2013 22:21

I'm going to exercise some willpower & not get started down this road again.


Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: landis ()
Date: October 18, 2013 01:59

Quote
mtaylor
Quote
whitem8
Quote
mtaylor
Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0
John vs Keith on Rhythm 1 - 1
Ringo vs Charlie on drums 1 - 1
George vs Brian on guitar 1 - 1
John vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
Paul vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
George vs Mick on vocal 1 - 2
George vs Keith on back-up vocal 1 - 3
John vs Brian on harp 1 - 3
Lennon/McCartney vs Jagger/Richards 2 - 3
Harrison vs Wyman 3 - 3
Beatles vs Stones for 7 superb albums in a row 4 -3 (Please Please me >> Revolver)

Well, that's the tough fact sorry to say....

smoking smileycool smileysmoking smileycool smiley
John Paul George Ringo

Paul singing is like a 12-14 y.o. school boy changing to adult voice - so Mick wins with big numbers. John better than Keith on rythm is the biggest joke ever etc.

Conclusion - Beatles were a big joke, Macca as usual in his Goofy mind suggests that he invented all kind of music - he even was an inspiration to Mozart, Verdi etc.

Seriously, how old are you?? Your Middle School is on your collar.

Just pure fact - Beatles were a big joke. Macca singing good? Absolutely nonsens, the most overrated singer ever. The only good thig Macca is good at is: talking bullshit and taking advantage of everybody elses hard Work, even the other Beatles members couldn't stand him.

The Beatles musical impact was direct and immediate from Roger McGuinn picking up a 12 string electric because George Harrison played one, to partially inspiring Dylan to go electric, to spawning hundreds of sound-alike bands in garages across America, to changing the way rock music was made in terms of using the studio as an instrument of composition, to expanding the harmonic sophistication of rock, to,

I think most importantly, showing the world a new way to arrange rock music for two guitars, bass and drums. Before the Beatles, rock had two basic models for arranging -- the Muddy Waters Band Chicago blues model (a la Chuck Berry) where a band just sort of wailed away with substantial improv on a boogie riff, and the Western Swing-descended rockabilly model. The Beatles had a whole different approach with increasingly intricate two guitar parts, musical bass lines, drum beats that were compositional, immediately identifiable as an almost sing able musical element. All of a sudden there was a third way. And it took most of the decade for bands to catch up with all of that.

Macca is a great vocalist a lot better than Mic to be honest.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: October 18, 2013 02:08

Quote
landis
Quote
mtaylor

The Beatles musical impact was direct and immediate from Roger McGuinn picking up a 12 string electric because George Harrison played one, to partially inspiring Dylan to go electric, to spawning hundreds of sound-alike bands in garages across America, to changing the way rock music was made in terms of using the studio as an instrument of composition, to expanding the harmonic sophistication of rock, to,

I think most importantly, showing the world a new way to arrange rock music for two guitars, bass and drums. Before the Beatles, rock had two basic models for arranging -- the Muddy Waters Band Chicago blues model (a la Chuck Berry) where a band just sort of wailed away with substantial improv on a boogie riff, and the Western Swing-descended rockabilly model. The Beatles had a whole different approach with increasingly intricate two guitar parts, musical bass lines, drum beats that were compositional, immediately identifiable as an almost sing able musical element. All of a sudden there was a third way. And it took most of the decade for bands to catch up with all of that.

Macca is a great vocalist a lot better than Mic to be honest.

It's a waste of time trying to explain the facts of life to that particular poster, or any of the other "usual suspects" who routinely crash into Beatles-related threads with such compulsive predictability, because all he sees is visions of Walt Disney character cartoons when you speak.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Come On ()
Date: October 18, 2013 08:03

Quote
landis
The Beatles musical impact was direct and immediate from Roger McGuinn picking up a 12 string electric because George Harrison played one, to partially inspiring Dylan to go electric, to spawning hundreds of sound-alike bands in garages across America, to changing the way rock music was made in terms of using the studio as an instrument of composition, to expanding the harmonic sophistication of rock, to,

I think most importantly, showing the world a new way to arrange rock music for two guitars, bass and drums. Before the Beatles, rock had two basic models for arranging -- the Muddy Waters Band Chicago blues model (a la Chuck Berry) where a band just sort of wailed away with substantial improv on a boogie riff, and the Western Swing-descended rockabilly model. The Beatles had a whole different approach with increasingly intricate two guitar parts, musical bass lines, drum beats that were compositional, immediately identifiable as an almost sing able musical element. All of a sudden there was a third way. And it took most of the decade for bands to catch up with all of that.

Macca is a great vocalist a lot better than Mic to be honest.

Good summary, especially with George's 12th to Dylan and rock music.I think both Mick and Paul is a brilliant singer so therefore it became a draw between them

2 1 2 0



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-18 08:04 by Come On.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 18, 2013 08:08

Quote
landis
Quote
mtaylor
Quote
whitem8
Quote
mtaylor
Quote
Come On
Paul vs Bill on bass 1 - 0
John vs Keith on Rhythm 1 - 1
Ringo vs Charlie on drums 1 - 1
George vs Brian on guitar 1 - 1
John vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
Paul vs Mick on vocal 1 - 1
George vs Mick on vocal 1 - 2
George vs Keith on back-up vocal 1 - 3
John vs Brian on harp 1 - 3
Lennon/McCartney vs Jagger/Richards 2 - 3
Harrison vs Wyman 3 - 3
Beatles vs Stones for 7 superb albums in a row 4 -3 (Please Please me >> Revolver)

Well, that's the tough fact sorry to say....

smoking smileycool smileysmoking smileycool smiley
John Paul George Ringo

Paul singing is like a 12-14 y.o. school boy changing to adult voice - so Mick wins with big numbers. John better than Keith on rythm is the biggest joke ever etc.

Conclusion - Beatles were a big joke, Macca as usual in his Goofy mind suggests that he invented all kind of music - he even was an inspiration to Mozart, Verdi etc.

Seriously, how old are you?? Your Middle School is on your collar.

Just pure fact - Beatles were a big joke. Macca singing good? Absolutely nonsens, the most overrated singer ever. The only good thig Macca is good at is: talking bullshit and taking advantage of everybody elses hard Work, even the other Beatles members couldn't stand him.

The Beatles musical impact was direct and immediate from Roger McGuinn picking up a 12 string electric because George Harrison played one, to partially inspiring Dylan to go electric, to spawning hundreds of sound-alike bands in garages across America, to changing the way rock music was made in terms of using the studio as an instrument of composition, to expanding the harmonic sophistication of rock, to,

I think most importantly, showing the world a new way to arrange rock music for two guitars, bass and drums. Before the Beatles, rock had two basic models for arranging -- the Muddy Waters Band Chicago blues model (a la Chuck Berry) where a band just sort of wailed away with substantial improv on a boogie riff, and the Western Swing-descended rockabilly model. The Beatles had a whole different approach with increasingly intricate two guitar parts, musical bass lines, drum beats that were compositional, immediately identifiable as an almost sing able musical element. All of a sudden there was a third way. And it took most of the decade for bands to catch up with all of that.

Macca is a great vocalist a lot better than Mic to be honest.

Macca is a better singer, but not a better vocalist.

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...89101112131415161718...LastNext
Current Page: 13 of 223


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1215
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home