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...678910111213141516...LastNext
Current Page: 11 of 155
Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: NICOS ()
Date: October 6, 2013 02:00

IMO there is no versus the Beatles they outdid them all

__________________________

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: ash ()
Date: October 6, 2013 02:10

The Yardbirds may have used a sitar a few months before the beatles but the attempt went unreleased till the 80s so they may not have heard it. Jeff Beck does a pretty good impression on his guitar.
However, does Heartful Of Soul pre-date See My Friends by the Kinks...that's a storming record with the slide and drone-y acoustic guitar which sort of mimics a tamboura..it was written after the Kinks stopped off in India on the way back from another country. Trippy stuff and very Indian apart from the weak middle 8.
The Beatles may have been the first beat group to utilise a fuzz pedal as they apparently tried one out in september 1963 during a With The Beatles session...their attempts went unreleased but there is photographic evidence. I assume George Martin said something like "i say John, we appear to be getting a lot of distortion from your microphone, are you aware of any technical problems on the studio floor ? I'll get Ken to analyse it for you. Perhaps there's a dicky connection."
did anyone use one before sept 63 ? i don't know when they were first distributed offhand.
Would it be ok to start a Syd Barrett vs Roger Waters thread ?

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: NoCode0680 ()
Date: October 6, 2013 02:37

Quote
ash
Would it be ok to start a Syd Barrett vs Roger Waters thread ?

Sure, but there are ground rules.

If you're arguing for Roger, you have to submit each post as a 2 hour rock opera

If you're arguing for Syd, you must do so in the language of the Gnomes.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: October 6, 2013 04:08

Quote
ash
The Yardbirds may have used a sitar a few months before the beatles but the attempt went unreleased till the 80s so they may not have heard it.

Yes, the sitar version of Heart Full of Soul was recorded on April 20, but could not be played live to an audience that way so Jeff Beck recorded a second version employing a fuzz box with a tone blender. The sitar version was finally released on the 1978 compilation The Shapes of Things

Another example of The Yardbirds being ahead of The Beatles in terms of eastern influences was Still I'm Sad, which is also featured on their album Having a Rave Up with The Yardbirds, released 3 weeks before Rubber Soul.

That's Giorgio Gomelsky on the backing vocals doing the droning bass part.



It was issued in October as a B-side of their UK single Evil Hearted You (#3 UK) and in the U.S. as the B-side of I'm A Man (#17 US).





However, to settle the who was first with the sitar argument, it was actually The Beatles. Ken Thorne's soundtrack music for Help! featured sitar players on the U.S. Capitol issue (released August 13), making it the first officially released recording by a rock band to feature sitar.



Side one
No. Title Lead Vocals Length
1. "Help! (preceded by an uncredited instrumental intro based on The James Bond Theme)" John with Paul (counter melody) 2:39
2. "The Night Before" Paul 2:36
3. "From Me to You Fantasy (Lennon–McCartney; arranged by Thorne)" Instrumental 2:08
4. "You've Got to Hide Your Love Away" John
5. "I Need You (Harrison)" George 2:31
6. "In the Tyrol (Ken Thorne)" Instrumental 2:26
Side two
No. Title Lead Vocals Length
1. "Another Girl" Paul 2:08
2. "Another Hard Day's Night (Lennon–McCartney; arranged by Thorne)" Instrumental
3. "Ticket to Ride" John and Paul 3:07
4. "Medley: The Bitter End (Ken Thorne)/You Can't Do That (Lennon–McCartney; arranged by Thorne)" Instrumental 2:26
5. "You're Going to Lose That Girl" John with Paul and George 2:19
6. "The Chase (Ken Thorne)" Instrumental 2:31


The fact also remains that George Harrison is the first rock musician to have played sitar on an official recording.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Hairball ()
Date: October 6, 2013 05:38

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't The Beatles/George Harrison the first to record a lead guitar backwards?
On Tomorrow Never Knows? Or I'm Only Sleeping?

________________________________________________________________________

Edit: Just found up the asnwer to my own question:

[www.beatlesebooks.com]

The Beatles were the first at a lot of things, especially in regard to recording techniques. Becoming easily bored in the studio, they were eager to try new things. One of these was recording guitar backwards, which they did in 1966 with the song “I’m Only Sleeping.” The eerie drone that resulted became irresistible to recording artists the world over, everyone wanting to give it a try. Popular examples include “Are You Experienced?” by Jimi Hendrix, “Cosmic Dancer” by T. Rex, “Book Of Saturday” by King Crimson and even “Give It Away” by The Red Hot Chili Peppers, among many others.

________________
Keep on rolling.......



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-06 05:43 by Hairball.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 6, 2013 17:22

Quote
Stoneage
Didn't we agree on that this matter was settled? The Stones soared past the Beatles at Glastonbury. Let's move on to something else now...

Better seek Skippy's opinion before we move on!

Have no fear, the rock historians and experts will settle this in about ten years. In the meantime, the Stones have the opportunity to distance themselves from the Beatles even more by continuing to roll; provided they can continue playing at a high level. A new album wouldn't hurt their cause either.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 6, 2013 17:47

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
Stoneage
Didn't we agree on that this matter was settled? The Stones soared past the Beatles at Glastonbury. Let's move on to something else now...

Better seek Skippy's opinion before we move on!

Have no fear, the rock historians and experts will settle this in about ten years. In the meantime, the Stones have the opportunity to distance themselves from the Beatles even more by continuing to roll; provided they can continue playing at a high level. A new album wouldn't hurt their cause either.

That's not true at all. A new FANTASTIC album wouldn't hurt their cause. A new average or worse album would very much hurt their cause.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 6, 2013 18:35

Quote
NICOS
IMO there is no versus the Beatles they outdid them all
Stones are by far the greatest. It is not even close.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: NICOS ()
Date: October 6, 2013 18:40

Quote
michaelsavage
Quote
NICOS
IMO there is no versus the Beatles they outdid them all
Stones are by far the greatest. It is not even close.

Yes they are close and sometimes even better to my ears .....i can listen to them all the time ...as for the Beatles I have take a break sometimes

__________________________

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 6, 2013 19:09

Quote
NICOS
Quote
michaelsavage
Quote
NICOS
IMO there is no versus the Beatles they outdid them all
Stones are by far the greatest. It is not even close.

Yes they are close and sometimes even better to my ears .....i can listen to them all the time ...as for the Beatles I have take a break sometimes

I agree and wonder if that the Beatles 'get old' because they are locked into a 60's sound, whereas if we get sick of Have You Seen Your Mother Baby, Standing in the Shadow or Gimme Shelter we can always go to Miss You, Undercover Of The Night, Shattered, Saint Of Me, Tumbling Dice etc.

I think the fact that RS's continued and evolved the sound so successfully makes it easier not to get sick of them.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 6, 2013 19:27

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
Stoneage
Didn't we agree on that this matter was settled? The Stones soared past the Beatles at Glastonbury. Let's move on to something else now...

Better seek Skippy's opinion before we move on!

Have no fear, the rock historians and experts will settle this in about ten years. In the meantime, the Stones have the opportunity to distance themselves from the Beatles even more by continuing to roll; provided they can continue playing at a high level. A new album wouldn't hurt their cause either.

That's not true at all. A new FANTASTIC album wouldn't hurt their cause. A new average or worse album would very much hurt their cause.

Of course it would be fantastic! Every album they have ever done has either been very good, fantastic or a masterpiece. Believe it or not I think Dirty Work is fantastic and Satanic a masterpiece. ABB is very good and may move into the fantastic category in about ten years. They simply do not make bad albums.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 6, 2013 19:35

Quote
michaelsavage
Quote
NICOS
IMO there is no versus the Beatles they outdid them all
Stones are by far the greatest. It is not even close.

I agree that the Stones are the greatest, but it isn't a runaway. The Beatles were a tough nut to crack. Mick may not realize it, but when he walked off the stage at Glastonbury (and raised his index finger to the heavens) he was actually signaling the end of the Beatles reign! Reminded me of Joe Namath as he ran off the field after Super Bowl III. Long live the new kings of rock 'n roll!

Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 6, 2013 19:39

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
NICOS
Quote
michaelsavage
Quote
NICOS
IMO there is no versus the Beatles they outdid them all
Stones are by far the greatest. It is not even close.

Yes they are close and sometimes even better to my ears .....i can listen to them all the time ...as for the Beatles I have take a break sometimes

I agree and wonder if that the Beatles 'get old' because they are locked into a 60's sound, whereas if we get sick of Have You Seen Your Mother Baby, Standing in the Shadow or Gimme Shelter we can always go to Miss You, Undercover Of The Night, Shattered, Saint Of Me, Tumbling Dice etc.

I think the fact that RS's continued and evolved the sound so successfully makes it easier not to get sick of them.

And don't forget Doom And Gloom. It is a real gem live.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 6, 2013 19:42

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
Stoneage
Didn't we agree on that this matter was settled? The Stones soared past the Beatles at Glastonbury. Let's move on to something else now...

Better seek Skippy's opinion before we move on!

Have no fear, the rock historians and experts will settle this in about ten years. In the meantime, the Stones have the opportunity to distance themselves from the Beatles even more by continuing to roll; provided they can continue playing at a high level. A new album wouldn't hurt their cause either.

That's not true at all. A new FANTASTIC album wouldn't hurt their cause. A new average or worse album would very much hurt their cause.

Of course it would be fantastic! Every album they have ever done has either been very good, fantastic or a masterpiece. Believe it or not I think Dirty Work is fantastic and Satanic a masterpiece. ABB is very good and may move into the fantastic category in about ten years. They simply do not make bad albums.

Oh, I certainly do believe you think that.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 6, 2013 19:47

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
Stoneage
Didn't we agree on that this matter was settled? The Stones soared past the Beatles at Glastonbury. Let's move on to something else now...

Better seek Skippy's opinion before we move on!

Have no fear, the rock historians and experts will settle this in about ten years. In the meantime, the Stones have the opportunity to distance themselves from the Beatles even more by continuing to roll; provided they can continue playing at a high level. A new album wouldn't hurt their cause either.

That's not true at all. A new FANTASTIC album wouldn't hurt their cause. A new average or worse album would very much hurt their cause.

Of course it would be fantastic! Every album they have ever done has either been very good, fantastic or a masterpiece. Believe it or not I think Dirty Work is fantastic and Satanic a masterpiece. ABB is very good and may move into the fantastic category in about ten years. They simply do not make bad albums.

Oh, I certainly do believe you think that.

I am usually about five to ten years ahead of the rest of the world! In about five to ten years The Sons of the Beatles will be the most popular band in the world!

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 6, 2013 19:49

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
Stoneage
Didn't we agree on that this matter was settled? The Stones soared past the Beatles at Glastonbury. Let's move on to something else now...

Better seek Skippy's opinion before we move on!

Have no fear, the rock historians and experts will settle this in about ten years. In the meantime, the Stones have the opportunity to distance themselves from the Beatles even more by continuing to roll; provided they can continue playing at a high level. A new album wouldn't hurt their cause either.

That's not true at all. A new FANTASTIC album wouldn't hurt their cause. A new average or worse album would very much hurt their cause.

Of course it would be fantastic! Every album they have ever done has either been very good, fantastic or a masterpiece. Believe it or not I think Dirty Work is fantastic and Satanic a masterpiece. ABB is very good and may move into the fantastic category in about ten years. They simply do not make bad albums.

Oh, I certainly do believe you think that.

I am usually about five to ten years ahead of the rest of the world! In about five to ten years The Sons of the Beatles will be the most popular band in the world!

To take an amazingly clear expression from another thread that will remain unnamed, sometimes I think you're batsh*t crazy JJ'O'L!

Carry on!

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: mtaylor ()
Date: October 6, 2013 21:23

And Macca's "New" is the best song of all decades since 1900 - Goofy Little Boy Strikes Again...

Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 7, 2013 02:07

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
Stoneage
Didn't we agree on that this matter was settled? The Stones soared past the Beatles at Glastonbury. Let's move on to something else now...

Better seek Skippy's opinion before we move on!

Have no fear, the rock historians and experts will settle this in about ten years. In the meantime, the Stones have the opportunity to distance themselves from the Beatles even more by continuing to roll; provided they can continue playing at a high level. A new album wouldn't hurt their cause either.

That's not true at all. A new FANTASTIC album wouldn't hurt their cause. A new average or worse album would very much hurt their cause.

Of course it would be fantastic! Every album they have ever done has either been very good, fantastic or a masterpiece. Believe it or not I think Dirty Work is fantastic and Satanic a masterpiece. ABB is very good and may move into the fantastic category in about ten years. They simply do not make bad albums.

Oh, I certainly do believe you think that.

I am usually about five to ten years ahead of the rest of the world! In about five to ten years The Sons of the Beatles will be the most popular band in the world!

To take an amazingly clear expression from another thread that will remain unnamed, sometimes I think you're batsh*t crazy JJ'O'L!

Carry on!

Well, I intend to carry on, at least through the announcement on the night of the full moon (the 18th) and possibly as long as up to midnight on Halloween. Beyond that, all bets are off.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: October 7, 2013 06:33

Blah blah blah.

Microwave popcorn is better than potholes.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Happy Jack ()
Date: October 7, 2013 06:48

Quote
stonehearted
Quote
ash
The Yardbirds may have used a sitar a few months before the beatles but the attempt went unreleased till the 80s so they may not have heard it.

Yes, the sitar version of Heart Full of Soul was recorded on April 20, but could not be played live to an audience that way so Jeff Beck recorded a second version employing a fuzz box with a tone blender. The sitar version was finally released on the 1978 compilation The Shapes of Things

Another example of The Yardbirds being ahead of The Beatles in terms of eastern influences was Still I'm Sad, which is also featured on their album Having a Rave Up with The Yardbirds, released 3 weeks before Rubber Soul.

That's Giorgio Gomelsky on the backing vocals doing the droning bass part.]



Actually the Kinks are credited with having the first Eastern influenced song in rock, with See My Friends released in July 1965.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: October 7, 2013 06:54

Quote
Happy Jack
Actually the Kinks are credited with having the first Eastern influenced song in rock, with See My Friends released in July 1965.

The first Eastern influenced song, but not the first sitar on a rock record.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: ab ()
Date: October 7, 2013 09:46

It was a hard fought match that went on for 50 years and left them all bloodied and battered. Then Keef pulled out the blade and in a few deft swipes scared the Beatles into submission.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: stonehearted ()
Date: October 7, 2013 12:42

Quote
ash
The Beatles may have been the first beat group to utilise a fuzz pedal as they apparently tried one out in september 1963 during a With The Beatles session...their attempts went unreleased but there is photographic evidence.

The photographic evidence comes from the book Recording The Beatles, by Kevin Ryan and Brian Kehew,

[www.recordingthebeatles.com]

and on pages 173 and 178 Lennon is photographed strumming his Rick with a Maestro Fuzz-Tone pedal beside his right foot. The photograph below of Lennon was taken on September 21, 1963, and the sessions for that day included Hold Me Tight and Don't Bother Me. A photo of George Harrison from the She Loves You session on July 1, 1963, shows that he, too, was in possession of a Maestro Fuzz-Tone. The Beatles had purchased them a few months earlier at Selmer's music shop in London's Charing Cross Road.

Maestro Fuzz-Tone pedals first became commercially available in 1962, after having been invented by a Nashville, Tennessee, recording session engineer, named Glen Snoddy, in 1960. During the recording session for Marty Robbins' Don't Worry, a defective pre-amp console causes the bass guitar solo to distort. Snoddy kept the console, and with a friend who was also a Nashville radio station engineer, named Revis V. Hobbs, after determing how the defect in the console was caused, managed to replicate the sound by creating a three-transistor circuit, thus creating the modern "fuzz box". The names of Snoddy and Hobbs are on the patent and in 1962 Gibson USA made the first commercially available fuzz tone, built into their bass guitars. Later that year they created and marketed a stand-alone pedal, the Maestro Fuzz-Tone FZ-1, for other instruments to be plugged in, and by 1963 and 1964 dozens of garage and surf band recordings were being made in Michigan, Texas, and California with the Maestro Fuzz-Tone.

Marty Robbins, with the 1962 number 1 U.S. country hit that inadvertently later gave such songs as Satisfaction their iconic guitar sound.








The vintage Gibson Maestro Fuzz-Tone FZ-1A






George Harrison at the She Loves You recording session on July 1, 1963, with the Maestro Fuzz-Tone.


Close-up of the Maestro Fuzz-Tone resting on George's amp.


John Lennon with a Maestro Fuzz-Tone to the right of his right foot, September 21, 1963.

Apparently The Beatles were going to use the Maestro Fuzz-Tone on Don't Bother Me, but George Martin decided against it after several experimental takes. Instead, a tremolo effect was used. The Maestro Fuzz-Tone was also tried out on several takes of She Loves You, but as with Don't Bother Me, the fuzz-tone does not appear on the final mix of either track.

A writer from the Melody Maker was present for the initial Don't Bother Me session at Abbey Road around 9:00 p.m. on September 21, where Lennon is using the Maestro Fuzz-Tone for several early takes of the basic rhythm track, and so the earliest documented use of a fuzz-tone by a rock band in the UK was recounted in the September 28th issue of the magazine:

“When they had rearranged the opening bars, John produced a fuzz box…John was knocked out with the result, but George Martin wasn’t too happy. ‘You’ll have to do something, John,’ said Martin. ‘It’s already distorting from the amplifier. Do you think it sounds OK? Are you sure about it?’”

George Harrison was still looking for a new and different sound for his first Beatles composition, so he asked engineer Norman Smith, “Can we have a compressor on this guitar? We might try to get a sort of organ sound.”

They made use of amplifier tremolo on John’s guitar (the egg-shaped Vox footswitch pedal just to the left of John's right foot, which activated the tremolo in John's AC30 amp), which produced a rhythmic fluctuation of volume. According to Andy Babiuk’s book, Beatles Gear, “This was the group’s first evident use in the studio of an electronic effect on the guitar sound, and thus marked the start of a search for unusual sounds and heralded the group’s role as studio experimenters in coming years.”

Takes 10 to 13 of Don't Bother Me








Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: October 7, 2013 16:14

Quote
stonehearted
Quote
ash
The Beatles may have been the first beat group to utilise a fuzz pedal as they apparently tried one out in september 1963 during a With The Beatles session...their attempts went unreleased but there is photographic evidence.

The photographic evidence comes from the book Recording The Beatles, by Kevin Ryan and Brian Kehew,

[www.recordingthebeatles.com]

and on pages 173 and 178 Lennon is photographed strumming his Rick with a Maestro Fuzz-Tone pedal beside his right foot. The photograph below of Lennon was taken on September 21, 1963, and the sessions for that day included Hold Me Tight and Don't Bother Me. A photo of George Harrison from the She Loves You session on July 1, 1963, shows that he, too, was in possession of a Maestro Fuzz-Tone. The Beatles had purchased them a few months earlier at Selmer's music shop in London's Charing Cross Road.

Maestro Fuzz-Tone pedals first became commercially available in 1962, after having been invented by a Nashville, Tennessee, recording session engineer, named Glen Snoddy, in 1960. During the recording session for Marty Robbins' Don't Worry, a defective pre-amp console causes the bass guitar solo to distort. Snoddy kept the console, and with a friend who was also a Nashville radio station engineer, named Revis V. Hobbs, after determing how the defect in the console was caused, managed to replicate the sound by creating a three-transistor circuit, thus creating the modern "fuzz box". The names of Snoddy and Hobbs are on the patent and in 1962 Gibson USA made the first commercially available fuzz tone, built into their bass guitars. Later that year they created and marketed a stand-alone pedal, the Maestro Fuzz-Tone FZ-1, for other instruments to be plugged in, and by 1963 and 1964 dozens of garage and surf band recordings were being made in Michigan, Texas, and California with the Maestro Fuzz-Tone.

Marty Robbins, with the 1962 number 1 U.S. country hit that inadvertently later gave such songs as Satisfaction their iconic guitar sound.








The vintage Gibson Maestro Fuzz-Tone FZ-1A






George Harrison at the She Loves You recording session on July 1, 1963, with the Maestro Fuzz-Tone.


Close-up of the Maestro Fuzz-Tone resting on George's amp.


John Lennon with a Maestro Fuzz-Tone to the right of his right foot, September 21, 1963.

Apparently The Beatles were going to use the Maestro Fuzz-Tone on Don't Bother Me, but George Martin decided against it after several experimental takes. Instead, a tremolo effect was used. The Maestro Fuzz-Tone was also tried out on several takes of She Loves You, but as with Don't Bother Me, the fuzz-tone does not appear on the final mix of either track.

A writer from the Melody Maker was present for the initial Don't Bother Me session at Abbey Road around 9:00 p.m. on September 21, where Lennon is using the Maestro Fuzz-Tone for several early takes of the basic rhythm track, and so the earliest documented use of a fuzz-tone by a rock band in the UK was recounted in the September 28th issue of the magazine:

“When they had rearranged the opening bars, John produced a fuzz box…John was knocked out with the result, but George Martin wasn’t too happy. ‘You’ll have to do something, John,’ said Martin. ‘It’s already distorting from the amplifier. Do you think it sounds OK? Are you sure about it?’”

George Harrison was still looking for a new and different sound for his first Beatles composition, so he asked engineer Norman Smith, “Can we have a compressor on this guitar? We might try to get a sort of organ sound.”

They made use of amplifier tremolo on John’s guitar (the egg-shaped Vox footswitch pedal just to the left of John's right foot, which activated the tremolo in John's AC30 amp), which produced a rhythmic fluctuation of volume. According to Andy Babiuk’s book, Beatles Gear, “This was the group’s first evident use in the studio of an electronic effect on the guitar sound, and thus marked the start of a search for unusual sounds and heralded the group’s role as studio experimenters in coming years.”

Takes 10 to 13 of Don't Bother Me







I love the Beatles.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: October 7, 2013 16:36

The FZ-1 is slightly different to the FZ-1A. The FZ-1A came after Satisafction hit big time and everyone wanted a fuzz-tone.

Here's demo's I did of a vintage first version circa 1962 Maestro FZ-1 fUzZ-ToNe and a modern day replica built by a guitarist in the band Built To Spill.












Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-07 16:39 by His Majesty.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: howled ()
Date: October 7, 2013 16:46

Quote
His Majesty
The FZ-1 is slightly different to the FZ-1A. The FZ-1A came after Satisafction hit big time and everyone wanted a fuzz-tone.

Here's demo's I did of a vintage first version circa 1962 Maestro FZ-1 fUzZ-ToNe and a modern day replica built by a guitarist in the band Built To Spill.








Man, I can see the Freaks dancing to that Groovy music spinning smiley sticking its tongue out

That Gibson fuzz sounds very Satisfaction like to me.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-10-07 16:50 by howled.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Date: October 7, 2013 16:48

They both sound great!

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: October 7, 2013 16:53

Quote
howled

Man, I can see the Freaks dancing to that Groovy music spinning smiley sticking its tongue out

Yeah baby! grinning smiley

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: Happy Jack ()
Date: October 7, 2013 18:49

Listening to the outtakes posted of Don't Bother Me it sounds like a surf rock song that belongs in a Terantino movie!
Was George influenced by surf rock at the time, because I have never read where he was.

Re: Beatles v Stones
Posted by: michaelsavage ()
Date: October 7, 2013 19:42

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
Quote
michaelsavage
Quote
NICOS
IMO there is no versus the Beatles they outdid them all
Stones are by far the greatest. It is not even close.

I agree that the Stones are the greatest, but it isn't a runaway. The Beatles were a tough nut to crack. Mick may not realize it, but when he walked off the stage at Glastonbury (and raised his index finger to the heavens) he was actually signaling the end of the Beatles reign! Reminded me of Joe Namath as he ran off the field after Super Bowl III. Long live the new kings of rock 'n roll!

Ironically joe Namath is one of the most overrated players ever. In fact he did not deserve the mvp of that game.he did nothing in that game.notice a trend? "Overrated"

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...678910111213141516...LastNext
Current Page: 11 of 155


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 466
Record Number of Users: 184 on May 17, 2018 22:46
Record Number of Guests: 3948 on December 7, 2015 15:07

Previous page Next page First page IORR home