For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
CaptainCorellaQuote
slewan
well, at least the Beatles wrote their song while the Stones covered Chuck Berry
It's impossible to overemphasise how important the above point actually is.
Up until then it was 100% assumed that the artists would be the puppets of the A&R folk in the record company. The chance combination of Lennon/McCartney and the maverick George Martin (for all of his assumed posh appearance) was the key for this.
It's astonishing that a band's FIRST release was allowed to be their own composition. It's astonishing that they stood their ground and refused to properly record the next song that was offered, and went with "Please Please Me".
The vast importance of the fact of the breakthrough that The Beatles were central to far outweighs any subjective discussion of which was the better single. (And I write that as someone who has posted here before that Chuck Berry is the true GodFather of most of what we know as pop and rock music today).
Quote
jp.M
...yes,the Shedows and Clff records (1960 1964) are sadly constantly overlooked today......
Quote
CaptainCorellaQuote
slewan
well, at least the Beatles wrote their song while the Stones covered Chuck Berry
It's impossible to overemphasise how important the above point actually is.
Up until then it was 100% assumed that the artists would be the puppets of the A&R folk in the record company. The chance combination of Lennon/McCartney and the maverick George Martin (for all of his assumed posh appearance) was the key for this.
It's astonishing that a band's FIRST release was allowed to be their own composition. It's astonishing that they stood their ground and refused to properly record the next song that was offered, and went with "Please Please Me".
The vast importance of the fact of the breakthrough that The Beatles were central to far outweighs any subjective discussion of which was the better single. (And I write that as someone who has posted here before that Chuck Berry is the true GodFather of most of what we know as pop and rock music today).
Quote
treaclefingers
Even the Stones didn't want Come On as their first single.
Of all of Chuck's songs they could have covered, this was one of them.
Quote
CongratulationsQuote
treaclefingers
Even the Stones didn't want Come On as their first single.
Of all of Chuck's songs they could have covered, this was one of them.
It's a fabulous cover. The Stones album I grew up with (which my parents bought when I was 3) was the UK version of 'Big Hits (High Tide and Green Grass)', and 'Come On' fit on there perfectly.
It was still influencing cool American bands as late as 1967!
Quote
floodonthepage
Love Me Do
Stones are my #1, but it took them a minute to catch up and indeed surpass.
Quote
Congratulations
Dave Clark had (and still has) far more control over the band's music than the Beatles, the Stones, and just about everyone else. A real pioneer.
Quote
treaclefingers
Love Me Do, clearly.
Even the Stones didn't want Come On as their first single.
Of all of Chuck's songs they could have covered, this was one of them.
Quote
Hairball
Hank Marvin - LEGEND.
Quote
Congratulations
I was referring to him striking business deals that allowed him to produce the band's recordings and gave him complete control of the master recordings. No-one else was doing that in 1964.
Quote
Paddy
Love Me Do
Come On
Even the title of each song lays out where each group was coming from.
One was coming for your mothers and grandmothers and the other was coming for your daughters!
Quote
CongratulationsQuote
Paddy
Love Me Do
Come On
Even the title of each song lays out where each group was coming from.
One was coming for your mothers and grandmothers and the other was coming for your daughters!
Flip them over, and the difference is even more stark:
P.S. I Love You (ahhh, how sweet...)
I Want To Be Loved (yikes! these ragamuffins are seriously horny!)
Quote
Big AlQuote
HairballQuote
Big Al
When making comparisons, it is fair to note that their respective images were purely manufactured by management for marketing purposes. Epstein wanted his act to be well turned-out, smart, uniformed and respectable, whilst Oldham thought he’d create the complete antithesis: scruffy and unruly. It shouldn’t be forgotten that, only a short while before they recorded Love Me Do, they presented themselves as leather-clad rockers, whilst performing in Hamburg nightclubs to an audience consisting of drunken sailors and prostitutes. The Stones’ beginnings? They were performing in leafy, middle-class Surrey, to well-behaved teenagers, ‘rebelling’ against their parents. To summarise: the Beatles were rough and tough northerners; the Stones were from quite a different background; especially that of Mick and Brian.
Excerpt from the late, great Lemmy's memoir White Line Fever from 2002:
“The Beatles were hard men. Brian Epstein cleaned them up for mass consumption, but they were anything but sissies. They were from Liverpool, which is like Hamburg or Norfolk, Virginia – a hard, sea-farin’ town, all these dockers and sailors around all the time who would beat the piss out of you if you so much as winked at them. Ringo’s from the Dingle, which is like the @#$%& Bronx.”
“The Rolling Stones were the mummy’s boys – they were all college students from the outskirts of London. They went to starve in London, but it was by choice, to give themselves some sort of aura of disrespectability. I did like the Stones, but they were never anywhere near the Beatles – not for humor, not for originality, not for songs, not for presentation. All they had was Mick Jagger dancing about. Fair enough, the Stones made great records, but they were always shit on stage, whereas the Beatles were the gear.” - Lemmy (RIP)
Ah, The great Lemmy Kilmister, that wise, old sage. He was spot-on... as usual!
The