Tell Me :
Talk
Exactly. Wtf is wrong with "stll doing it when you are 40, that means you are stll 16 in your head" ??
How long did you stay together with PM & GH & RS? And why?
JL was 40 when saying this and sounded like an "80 year old in his head."
He probably was a bitter jealous an frustrated old man.
Yer blues John...yer blues John?
Oh I really like what he said!
Well said that man.
Tony, I think Keith has actually said that himself in as many words. I think it's an accurate explanation
See you at a gig in some far flung place,
Gregor
seriously-he was a joke then.what was his alternative? sitting home for five years and forcing his crazy,talentless wife on his fans.
lennon sucked live,that elephant band at msg was a mess.nah,sorry johnny boy i'll take the guys who cant grow up any day and the $1 billion worth of tickets sold says alot of people agree with me.
sad truth is the beatles in the 70's were thought of as a pop group from the past decade,it was music your older brothers and sisters listened to from the old days and that made lennon bitter.the rolling stones on the other hand were even more relevant than ever before ,decadent,glam,druggie,and playing their asses off.
the beatles could never pull any of that off-thats why lennon keeps talking about "fag dancing"[how enlightened of him] and "evil black eye makeup" being a "joke in the future"- since here in 2015 the rolling stones are pretty much universaly considered the best rock and roll band ever and every other rap or hip hop song you hear drops micks name i'd say the guy doing the "fag dancing" and the guitar player with the" evil black eye make-up" won out.so,no i wouldnt think words from a guy in a band that broke up in 1970 would have any relevance to mick and keith in 2015.
I'm a Beatles aficionado and I completely agree with you.
Regardless of Lennon's comments, I'd love to hear what he would be doing in 2015. I've got a feeling he would have grown musically, created a considerable body of recorded material since 1980, separated from Yoko, and probably guested with the Stones on their latest tour! His talent and songwriting skills are unimpeachable, he would have continued to be successful.
His comments on the Stones were probably shared by many people and seemed pretty spot on at the time. As much as I love the Stones I'm often surprised they get away with playing 30-40 year old music to sold out crowds who pay big bucks for the opportunity....until I see a concert.
peace
its fun to think of Lennon guesting with the Stones..
probably do a Berry tune.
or "Money"..
the stones were at their absolute peak, turning out #1 hit after ##1 hit and selling out concerts around the globe when mr ono made those comments so no,they werent "spot on" and his opinion wasnt shared by anyone except maybe people who still cared what john and yoko were into-in other words a few leftover beatle weirdos.
i swear i could write a book called "beatle fans say the funniest things"-
the guy who never toured solo was gonna tour,with the stones no less,evolve musically somehow from that god awful double fantasy record [that every other song was a yoko number ,for those who have forgotten]then leave yoko-the woman whos name he used in every other song,oh,yoko,the ballad of yoko,i love you yoko..
he was bono before there was a bono and he wouldve been been bono deluxe,a guy who thinks everything he does and says is twice as important as it really is,except he wpuld be fat, bald and twice as annoying-his opinions on the stones meant nothing then and they still dont.
Ouch. It seems, you are as opinionated as Mr. Lennon.
As far as #1 hits, I think Brown Sugar in 1971, Angie in 1973 and Miss You in 1978 were the only ones from the 70's.
peace
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-16 00:41 by Naturalust.
i was talking about albums,stones fans think in albums -and gate receipts
sticky fingers,exile,goats head,its only rock and roll,black and blue,some girls, emotional rescue and tattoo you
touring around the globe in 69,70,71,72,73 75 78,81-
yeah,lennon had a point alright...right on top of his odd looking little head.
his opinions on the stones meant nothing.
Yeah your right about the albums! An incredible run. ....but I'm not sure many fans think in term of gate receipts? Ticket prices and availability maybe.
peace
Whew. Thanks for tackling this stonehearted because I didn't want to touch it, lest I be told again how Stones fans think.
peace
Facts with a lot of truthiness!
However...JL is a complete as.hole talking about the Stones like that and that's why I like lem motlow's original input quite a lot.
Lennon indeed never toured solo so to suggest he was was gonna tour....(with the stones no less) and evolve musically after sitting on his a.s for years coming with "that god awful double fantasy record [that every other song was a yoko number ,for those who have forgotten]" is not eh...imaginable.
And to say "I've got a feeling he would be separated from Yoko" is not even funny anymore.
JL was being very stupid and indeed "was bono before there was a bono and he wouldve been been bono deluxe,a guy who thinks everything he does and says is twice as important as it really is,except he wpuld be fat, bald and twice as annoying-his opinions on the stones meant nothing then and they still dont."
And I'm a huge fan of the Beatles! And I really like some other parts of JL's personality a lot but he was also full of you know what.
Well, I think most people, here or anywhere, already know that.
That's hardly the point. The way to judge the Stones is not about how many #1 records they have had. I am sure Madonna had more #1 records than Captain Beefheart, but that's not to say that Captain Beefheart was wasting his time, was he?
I can partly understand Lennon's comments against "being in a gang when you're 40" (in my point of view, Keith (and Ron) is more guilty of that than Mick) but I do think his comments miss the point of what the Stones are about, and yeah, maybe he was a bit jealous of that "funkiness" of the Stones. What annoys me most about any Lennon bashing, is that for some reason, always Yoko Ono gets dragged into the discussion too. Personally, I always admired both Lennon and Yoko for facing the hostility of the rest of the world together. Still, despite his interesting personality and great songwriter talent (almost as good as McCartney), he never really managed to play rock n roll the way the Stones did, not in the early years, not with the Beatles and not in his solo years. It really isn't about record sales or being original or a great artist, it's about keeping the "funkiness" alive.
I don't. Someone came up with a Lennon quote about it but it was hardly interesting so it's just back to the original discussion.
No playground politics please. I'd say how did it take so long for this tedious discussion of Mick and Keith's relationship to start including more interesting topics.
I mean how much more can anyone who doesn't know these guys say about it? Let's summarize 12 long pages of discussion.
1. Yes they are friends
2. No they have grown apart and are no longer friends, never socialize together.
3. They are only business partners and appear to be friends on stage.
4. They are brothers who sometimes are close and sometimes not.
5. Their (perceived) relationship problems are good for business
In the end it is really none of our business and as long as they are still playing together I could care less whether they are thick as thieves.
peace
Hear, hear!
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
Dreamer
()
Date: January 15, 2015 03:44
Quote
dcbaQuote
jlowe
Possibly of some relevance:
JOHN LENNON PLAYBOY INTERVIEW SEPT 1980.
Lennon was a bitter jealous old man with questionable tastes in women, period.
Had he lived till the new millenium he'd be some sort of Ginger Baker with a Hummingbird guitar...
Exactly. Wtf is wrong with "stll doing it when you are 40, that means you are stll 16 in your head" ??
How long did you stay together with PM & GH & RS? And why?
JL was 40 when saying this and sounded like an "80 year old in his head."
He probably was a bitter jealous an frustrated old man.
Yer blues John...yer blues John?
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
nightskyman
()
Date: January 15, 2015 04:18
Well, maybe Lennon had a point (at least at the time).
I think he was mainly referring to "still doing 'She Loves You' when I'm 30." Saw it as juvenile, not breaking any ground or doing anything different. Even in the Jann Wenner interview Lennon (circa 1970-71) makes reference to the Stones, implying that they should break up and be liberated from doing the same limiting thing over and over (why not, a Jagger or Richards solo album at the time could've been interesting). Perhaps he misunderstood the Stones, as the Stones and Beatles were two different bands.
In retrospect, of course, (especially now with the Stones pulling off a great '50th' world tour), it seems ridiculous that Lennon would suggest a 'break up' of the Stones.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-15 04:20 by nightskyman.
I think he was mainly referring to "still doing 'She Loves You' when I'm 30." Saw it as juvenile, not breaking any ground or doing anything different. Even in the Jann Wenner interview Lennon (circa 1970-71) makes reference to the Stones, implying that they should break up and be liberated from doing the same limiting thing over and over (why not, a Jagger or Richards solo album at the time could've been interesting). Perhaps he misunderstood the Stones, as the Stones and Beatles were two different bands.
In retrospect, of course, (especially now with the Stones pulling off a great '50th' world tour), it seems ridiculous that Lennon would suggest a 'break up' of the Stones.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-15 04:20 by nightskyman.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
marlau
()
Date: January 15, 2015 13:45
Quote
jlowe
Possibly of some relevance:
JOHN LENNON PLAYBOY INTERVIEW SEPT 1980.
"You know they are congratulating the Stones on being together 112 years. Whooopee! At least Charlie and Bill still got their families. In the (19)80s they will be asking "Why are these guys still together? Cant they hang it on their own? Why do they have to be surrounded by a gang? Is the little leader scared someones gonna knife him in the back?" Thats gonna be the question! They are going to look back at the Beatles and the Stones and all those guys as relics. The days when all those guys were just men will be on the news reels, you know. They will show pictures of the guy with lipstick wriggling his ass and the four guys with the evil black make up trying to look raunchy. Thats gonna be the joke in the future, not a couple siging together or living and working together. Its alright when you are 16,17,18 to have male companions and idols. OK? Its tribal and its gang and its fine. But when it continues and you sre stll doing it when you are 40, that means you are stll 16 in your head."
Oh I really like what he said!
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
grzegorz67
()
Date: January 15, 2015 19:00
Quote
crawdaddy
Not having read through all the pages, I think Mick and Keith are more like brothers than friends .
Brothers can hate each other at times and love each other at other times.
Ronnie and Charlie are probably more easy going and get on with most people,including band mates.
Every person on this planet is different to everyone else, even including twins,triplets etc.
Well said that man.
Tony, I think Keith has actually said that himself in as many words. I think it's an accurate explanation
See you at a gig in some far flung place,
Gregor
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: January 15, 2015 22:19
Quote
dcbaQuote
jlowe
Possibly of some relevance:
JOHN LENNON PLAYBOY INTERVIEW SEPT 1980.
Lennon was a bitter jealous old man with questionable tastes in women, period.
Had he lived till the new millenium he'd be some sort of Ginger Baker with a Hummingbird guitar...
seriously-he was a joke then.what was his alternative? sitting home for five years and forcing his crazy,talentless wife on his fans.
lennon sucked live,that elephant band at msg was a mess.nah,sorry johnny boy i'll take the guys who cant grow up any day and the $1 billion worth of tickets sold says alot of people agree with me.
sad truth is the beatles in the 70's were thought of as a pop group from the past decade,it was music your older brothers and sisters listened to from the old days and that made lennon bitter.the rolling stones on the other hand were even more relevant than ever before ,decadent,glam,druggie,and playing their asses off.
the beatles could never pull any of that off-thats why lennon keeps talking about "fag dancing"[how enlightened of him] and "evil black eye makeup" being a "joke in the future"- since here in 2015 the rolling stones are pretty much universaly considered the best rock and roll band ever and every other rap or hip hop song you hear drops micks name i'd say the guy doing the "fag dancing" and the guitar player with the" evil black eye make-up" won out.so,no i wouldnt think words from a guy in a band that broke up in 1970 would have any relevance to mick and keith in 2015.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: January 15, 2015 22:21
Quote
lem motlowQuote
dcbaQuote
jlowe
Possibly of some relevance:
JOHN LENNON PLAYBOY INTERVIEW SEPT 1980.
Lennon was a bitter jealous old man with questionable tastes in women, period.
Had he lived till the new millenium he'd be some sort of Ginger Baker with a Hummingbird guitar...
seriously-he was a joke then.what was his alternative? sitting home for five years and forcing his crazy,talentless wife on his fans.
lennon sucked live,that elephant band at msg was a mess.nah,sorry johnny boy i'll take the guys who cant grow up any day and the $1 billion worth of tickets sold says alot of people agree with me.
sad truth is the beatles in the 70's were thought of as a pop group from the past decade,it was music your older brothers and sisters listened to from the old days and that made lennon bitter.the rolling stones on the other hand were even more relevant than ever before ,decadent,glam,druggie,and playing their asses off.
the beatles could never pull any of that off-thats why lennon keeps talking about "fag dancing"[how enlightened of him] and "evil black eye makeup" being a "joke in the future"- since here in 2015 the rolling stones are pretty much universaly considered the best rock and roll band ever and every other rap or hip hop song you hear drops micks name i'd say the guy doing the "fag dancing" and the guitar player with the" evil black eye make-up" won out.so,no i wouldnt think words from a guy in a band that broke up in 1970 would have any relevance to mick and keith in 2015.
I'm a Beatles aficionado and I completely agree with you.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: January 15, 2015 22:30
Where you been all your lives, at an orgy? Listening to Mick Jagger music and bad-mouthing your country, I'll bet.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: January 15, 2015 23:26
<<Where you been all your lives, at an orgy? Listening to Mick Jagger music and bad-mouthing your country, I'll bet.>>
A lot of people do seem to think it's Mick's band.
A lot of people do seem to think it's Mick's band.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: January 15, 2015 23:47
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
lem motlowQuote
dcbaQuote
jlowe
Possibly of some relevance:
JOHN LENNON PLAYBOY INTERVIEW SEPT 1980.
Lennon was a bitter jealous old man with questionable tastes in women, period.
Had he lived till the new millenium he'd be some sort of Ginger Baker with a Hummingbird guitar...
seriously-he was a joke then.what was his alternative? sitting home for five years and forcing his crazy,talentless wife on his fans.
lennon sucked live,that elephant band at msg was a mess.nah,sorry johnny boy i'll take the guys who cant grow up any day and the $1 billion worth of tickets sold says alot of people agree with me.
sad truth is the beatles in the 70's were thought of as a pop group from the past decade,it was music your older brothers and sisters listened to from the old days and that made lennon bitter.the rolling stones on the other hand were even more relevant than ever before ,decadent,glam,druggie,and playing their asses off.
the beatles could never pull any of that off-thats why lennon keeps talking about "fag dancing"[how enlightened of him] and "evil black eye makeup" being a "joke in the future"- since here in 2015 the rolling stones are pretty much universaly considered the best rock and roll band ever and every other rap or hip hop song you hear drops micks name i'd say the guy doing the "fag dancing" and the guitar player with the" evil black eye make-up" won out.so,no i wouldnt think words from a guy in a band that broke up in 1970 would have any relevance to mick and keith in 2015.
I'm a Beatles aficionado and I completely agree with you.
Regardless of Lennon's comments, I'd love to hear what he would be doing in 2015. I've got a feeling he would have grown musically, created a considerable body of recorded material since 1980, separated from Yoko, and probably guested with the Stones on their latest tour! His talent and songwriting skills are unimpeachable, he would have continued to be successful.
His comments on the Stones were probably shared by many people and seemed pretty spot on at the time. As much as I love the Stones I'm often surprised they get away with playing 30-40 year old music to sold out crowds who pay big bucks for the opportunity....until I see a concert.
peace
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
RipThisBone
()
Date: January 16, 2015 00:17
### Nightskyman: "In retrospect, of course, (especially now with the Stones pulling off a great '50th' world tour), it seems ridiculous that Lennon would suggest a 'break up' of the Stones".
What John Lennon said was ridiculous in 1980 also.
He was just frustrated, jealous about Mick and Keith and hoping The Rolling Stones would disband as soon as possible and then get The Beatles back together to earn more money.
### Dreamer: Exactly. Wtf is wrong with "stll doing it when you are 40, that means you are stll 16 in your head" ??
How long did you stay together with PM & GH & RS? And why?
JL was 40 when saying this and sounded like an "80 year old in his head."
He probably was a bitter jealous an frustrated old man.
Yer blues John...yer blues John?
I am 50 now and feel like it, but when I play Some Girls I'm 14 again (1978)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-16 00:19 by RipThisBone.
What John Lennon said was ridiculous in 1980 also.
He was just frustrated, jealous about Mick and Keith and hoping The Rolling Stones would disband as soon as possible and then get The Beatles back together to earn more money.
### Dreamer: Exactly. Wtf is wrong with "stll doing it when you are 40, that means you are stll 16 in your head" ??
How long did you stay together with PM & GH & RS? And why?
JL was 40 when saying this and sounded like an "80 year old in his head."
He probably was a bitter jealous an frustrated old man.
Yer blues John...yer blues John?
I am 50 now and feel like it, but when I play Some Girls I'm 14 again (1978)Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-16 00:19 by RipThisBone.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
duke richardson
()
Date: January 16, 2015 00:22
Quote
NaturalustQuote
treaclefingersQuote
lem motlowQuote
dcbaQuote
jlowe
Possibly of some relevance:
JOHN LENNON PLAYBOY INTERVIEW SEPT 1980.
Lennon was a bitter jealous old man with questionable tastes in women, period.
Had he lived till the new millenium he'd be some sort of Ginger Baker with a Hummingbird guitar...
seriously-he was a joke then.what was his alternative? sitting home for five years and forcing his crazy,talentless wife on his fans.
lennon sucked live,that elephant band at msg was a mess.nah,sorry johnny boy i'll take the guys who cant grow up any day and the $1 billion worth of tickets sold says alot of people agree with me.
sad truth is the beatles in the 70's were thought of as a pop group from the past decade,it was music your older brothers and sisters listened to from the old days and that made lennon bitter.the rolling stones on the other hand were even more relevant than ever before ,decadent,glam,druggie,and playing their asses off.
the beatles could never pull any of that off-thats why lennon keeps talking about "fag dancing"[how enlightened of him] and "evil black eye makeup" being a "joke in the future"- since here in 2015 the rolling stones are pretty much universaly considered the best rock and roll band ever and every other rap or hip hop song you hear drops micks name i'd say the guy doing the "fag dancing" and the guitar player with the" evil black eye make-up" won out.so,no i wouldnt think words from a guy in a band that broke up in 1970 would have any relevance to mick and keith in 2015.
I'm a Beatles aficionado and I completely agree with you.
Regardless of Lennon's comments, I'd love to hear what he would be doing in 2015. I've got a feeling he would have grown musically, created a considerable body of recorded material since 1980, separated from Yoko, and probably guested with the Stones on their latest tour! His talent and songwriting skills are unimpeachable, he would have continued to be successful.
His comments on the Stones were probably shared by many people and seemed pretty spot on at the time. As much as I love the Stones I'm often surprised they get away with playing 30-40 year old music to sold out crowds who pay big bucks for the opportunity....until I see a concert.
peace
its fun to think of Lennon guesting with the Stones..
probably do a Berry tune.
or "Money"..
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: January 16, 2015 00:30
Quote
Naturalust
His comments on the Stones were probably shared by many people and seemed pretty spot on at the time.peace
the stones were at their absolute peak, turning out #1 hit after ##1 hit and selling out concerts around the globe when mr ono made those comments so no,they werent "spot on" and his opinion wasnt shared by anyone except maybe people who still cared what john and yoko were into-in other words a few leftover beatle weirdos.
i swear i could write a book called "beatle fans say the funniest things"-
the guy who never toured solo was gonna tour,with the stones no less,evolve musically somehow from that god awful double fantasy record [that every other song was a yoko number ,for those who have forgotten]then leave yoko-the woman whos name he used in every other song,oh,yoko,the ballad of yoko,i love you yoko..
he was bono before there was a bono and he wouldve been been bono deluxe,a guy who thinks everything he does and says is twice as important as it really is,except he wpuld be fat, bald and twice as annoying-his opinions on the stones meant nothing then and they still dont.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: January 16, 2015 00:37
Quote
lem motlowQuote
Naturalust
His comments on the Stones were probably shared by many people and seemed pretty spot on at the time.peace
the stones were at their absolute peak, turning out #1 hit after ##1 hit and selling out concerts around the globe when mr ono made those comments so no,they werent "spot on" and his opinion wasnt shared by anyone except maybe people who still cared what john and yoko were into-in other words a few leftover beatle weirdos.
i swear i could write a book called "beatle fans say the funniest things"-
the guy who never toured solo was gonna tour,with the stones no less,evolve musically somehow from that god awful double fantasy record [that every other song was a yoko number ,for those who have forgotten]then leave yoko-the woman whos name he used in every other song,oh,yoko,the ballad of yoko,i love you yoko..
he was bono before there was a bono and he wouldve been been bono deluxe,a guy who thinks everything he does and says is twice as important as it really is,except he wpuld be fat, bald and twice as annoying-his opinions on the stones meant nothing then and they still dont.
Ouch. It seems, you are as opinionated as Mr. Lennon.
As far as #1 hits, I think Brown Sugar in 1971, Angie in 1973 and Miss You in 1978 were the only ones from the 70's.
peace
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-01-16 00:41 by Naturalust.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
duke richardson
()
Date: January 16, 2015 00:39
he was bono before there was bono...
now that's funny!
except bono stayed with his band..
now that's funny!
except bono stayed with his band..
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
RipThisBone
()
Date: January 16, 2015 00:58
Quote
duke richardson
he was bono before there was bono...
now that's funny!
except bono stayed with his band..
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: January 16, 2015 01:10
Quote
Naturalust
As far as #1 hits, I think Brown Sugar in 1971, Angie in 1973 and Miss You in 1978 were the only ones from the 70's.
peace
i was talking about albums,stones fans think in albums -and gate receipts
sticky fingers,exile,goats head,its only rock and roll,black and blue,some girls, emotional rescue and tattoo you
touring around the globe in 69,70,71,72,73 75 78,81-
yeah,lennon had a point alright...right on top of his odd looking little head.
his opinions on the stones meant nothing.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: January 16, 2015 01:20
Quote
lem motlowQuote
Naturalust
As far as #1 hits, I think Brown Sugar in 1971, Angie in 1973 and Miss You in 1978 were the only ones from the 70's.
peace
i was talking about albums,stones fans think in albums -and gate receipts
sticky fingers,exile,goats head,its only rock and roll,black and blue,some girls, emotional rescue and tattoo you
touring around the globe in 69,70,71,72,73 75 78,81-
yeah,lennon had a point alright...right on top of his odd looking little head.
his opinions on the stones meant nothing.
Yeah your right about the albums! An incredible run. ....but I'm not sure many fans think in term of gate receipts? Ticket prices and availability maybe.
peace
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
MKjan
()
Date: January 16, 2015 02:01
Lennon wished he could be in the Stones. His whining was the result of insecurities and jealousy.
His ego was too big for honesty ,and he certainly couldn't take it out on his boss, yoko oh-noooooooooooooo!
His ego was too big for honesty ,and he certainly couldn't take it out on his boss, yoko oh-noooooooooooooo!
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: January 16, 2015 02:08
<<his opinion wasnt shared by anyone>>
Oh, it was shared by a few, and in fact was aired years before Lennon stated his.
Oh, it was shared by a few, and in fact was aired years before Lennon stated his.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: January 16, 2015 05:17
As usual, another thread gets usurped by the rabid Beatle bashers whenever the name of their hated rival pops up. Since this thread is no longer about Mick and Keith, I would like to make a final post here by addressing the irate poster above who seems to express his superiority as a Stones fan by emphasizing number 1 albums, because he thinks in albums. Well, let's see now, since the poster seems to be from the U.S., let's have a look at the U.S. charts and see what they tell us....
From 1964 to 1970, the Beatles charted with 13 U.S. #1 studio albums, and in the same period the Stones had one U.S. #1 album.
From 1970 to 1982, the Stones charted with eight U.S. #1 albums, and in that same time frame there were 11 U.S. #1 Beatles albums--as solo artists.
And set down your coffee before you read this little fun fact:
Even the most successful solo album by the Beatles drummer--who can't sing and isn't even a songwriter--charted higher by far than the most successful solo outing by the lead singer of the Stones, who can sing and who is a songwriter.
The biggest selling album since 2000 is, again, of the Beatles, a compilation of #1 songs.
This tells us that, despite Lennon's "odd looking little head", the general public favors Beatles over Stones. Always has, always will.
Well, I'm outta here, ciao! Say, I wonder if Mick and Keith have become friends again....
From 1964 to 1970, the Beatles charted with 13 U.S. #1 studio albums, and in the same period the Stones had one U.S. #1 album.
From 1970 to 1982, the Stones charted with eight U.S. #1 albums, and in that same time frame there were 11 U.S. #1 Beatles albums--as solo artists.
And set down your coffee before you read this little fun fact:
Even the most successful solo album by the Beatles drummer--who can't sing and isn't even a songwriter--charted higher by far than the most successful solo outing by the lead singer of the Stones, who can sing and who is a songwriter.
The biggest selling album since 2000 is, again, of the Beatles, a compilation of #1 songs.
This tells us that, despite Lennon's "odd looking little head", the general public favors Beatles over Stones. Always has, always will.
Well, I'm outta here, ciao! Say, I wonder if Mick and Keith have become friends again....
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: January 16, 2015 08:49
Quote
stonehearted
As usual, another thread gets usurped by the rabid Beatle bashers whenever the name of their hated rival pops up. Since this thread is no longer about Mick and Keith, I would like to make a final post here by addressing the irate poster above who seems to express his superiority as a Stones fan by emphasizing number 1 albums, because he thinks in albums. Well, let's see now, since the poster seems to be from the U.S., let's have a look at the U.S. charts and see what they tell us....
From 1964 to 1970, the Beatles charted with 13 U.S. #1 studio albums, and in the same period the Stones had one U.S. #1 album.
From 1970 to 1982, the Stones charted with eight U.S. #1 albums, and in that same time frame there were 11 U.S. #1 Beatles albums--as solo artists.
And set down your coffee before you read this little fun fact:
Even the most successful solo album by the Beatles drummer--who can't sing and isn't even a songwriter--charted higher by far than the most successful solo outing by the lead singer of the Stones, who can sing and who is a songwriter.
The biggest selling album since 2000 is, again, of the Beatles, a compilation of #1 songs.
This tells us that, despite Lennon's "odd looking little head", the general public favors Beatles over Stones. Always has, always will.
Well, I'm outta here, ciao! Say, I wonder if Mick and Keith have become friends again....
Whew. Thanks for tackling this stonehearted because I didn't want to touch it, lest I be told again how Stones fans think.
peace
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
Dreamer
()
Date: January 16, 2015 12:11
Quote
stonehearted
As usual, another thread gets usurped by the rabid Beatle bashers whenever the name of their hated rival pops up. Since this thread is no longer about Mick and Keith, I would like to make a final post here by addressing the irate poster above who seems to express his superiority as a Stones fan by emphasizing number 1 albums, because he thinks in albums. Well, let's see now, since the poster seems to be from the U.S., let's have a look at the U.S. charts and see what they tell us....
From 1964 to 1970, the Beatles charted with 13 U.S. #1 studio albums, and in the same period the Stones had one U.S. #1 album.
From 1970 to 1982, the Stones charted with eight U.S. #1 albums, and in that same time frame there were 11 U.S. #1 Beatles albums--as solo artists.
And set down your coffee before you read this little fun fact:
Even the most successful solo album by the Beatles drummer--who can't sing and isn't even a songwriter--charted higher by far than the most successful solo outing by the lead singer of the Stones, who can sing and who is a songwriter.
The biggest selling album since 2000 is, again, of the Beatles, a compilation of #1 songs.
This tells us that, despite Lennon's "odd looking little head", the general public favors Beatles over Stones. Always has, always will.
Well, I'm outta here, ciao! Say, I wonder if Mick and Keith have become friends again....
Facts with a lot of truthiness!
However...JL is a complete as.hole talking about the Stones like that and that's why I like lem motlow's original input quite a lot.
Lennon indeed never toured solo so to suggest he was was gonna tour....(with the stones no less) and evolve musically after sitting on his a.s for years coming with "that god awful double fantasy record [that every other song was a yoko number ,for those who have forgotten]" is not eh...imaginable.
And to say "I've got a feeling he would be separated from Yoko" is not even funny anymore.
JL was being very stupid and indeed "was bono before there was a bono and he wouldve been been bono deluxe,a guy who thinks everything he does and says is twice as important as it really is,except he wpuld be fat, bald and twice as annoying-his opinions on the stones meant nothing then and they still dont."
And I'm a huge fan of the Beatles! And I really like some other parts of JL's personality a lot but he was also full of you know what.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: January 16, 2015 12:54
Quote
stonehearted
...
This tells us that, despite Lennon's "odd looking little head", the general public favors Beatles over Stones. Always has, always will.
...
Well, I think most people, here or anywhere, already know that.
That's hardly the point. The way to judge the Stones is not about how many #1 records they have had. I am sure Madonna had more #1 records than Captain Beefheart, but that's not to say that Captain Beefheart was wasting his time, was he?
I can partly understand Lennon's comments against "being in a gang when you're 40" (in my point of view, Keith (and Ron) is more guilty of that than Mick) but I do think his comments miss the point of what the Stones are about, and yeah, maybe he was a bit jealous of that "funkiness" of the Stones. What annoys me most about any Lennon bashing, is that for some reason, always Yoko Ono gets dragged into the discussion too. Personally, I always admired both Lennon and Yoko for facing the hostility of the rest of the world together. Still, despite his interesting personality and great songwriter talent (almost as good as McCartney), he never really managed to play rock n roll the way the Stones did, not in the early years, not with the Beatles and not in his solo years. It really isn't about record sales or being original or a great artist, it's about keeping the "funkiness" alive.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
Bliss
()
Date: January 16, 2015 14:28
How did this pertinent and interesting discussion about the status of Mick and Keith's current r'ship deteriorate into yet another tedious discussion about the Beatles?
I hope BV closes it.
I hope BV closes it.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
Dreamer
()
Date: January 16, 2015 14:42
Quote
Bliss
How did this pertinent and interesting discussion about the status of Mick and Keith's current r'ship deteriorate into yet another tedious discussion about the Beatles?
I hope BV closes it.
I don't. Someone came up with a Lennon quote about it but it was hardly interesting so it's just back to the original discussion.
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: January 16, 2015 17:57
Y'all need to chill out and go to the Turks And Caicos in the Atlantic Ocean...
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: January 16, 2015 19:36
the page was never "hijacked" by me or anyone else-while discussing whether mick and keith were still friends someone posted a qoute from lennon bashing the stones and saying they shouldnt be together anyway.
i simply pointed out that lennon sucked and wasnt qualified to judge the worlds greatest rock and roll band.the funniest thing he said wasnt "the guy wiggling his ass" or the "guy in the evil black eye makeup" being a "joke" in the future[$1 billion+in concert tickets sold says otherwise]but that "a couple working together will be whats happening"
click the link and have the happy couple show us the way of the future-
[www.youtube.com]
i think when she picks up steam at the 4:00 minute mark- that was gonna sell out stadiums. i think the guys in the make-up would've been shown the door had this been promoted in a proper way.when you're putting out this kind of next level stuff it gives you the clout needed to judge the rolling stones....
i simply pointed out that lennon sucked and wasnt qualified to judge the worlds greatest rock and roll band.the funniest thing he said wasnt "the guy wiggling his ass" or the "guy in the evil black eye makeup" being a "joke" in the future[$1 billion+in concert tickets sold says otherwise]but that "a couple working together will be whats happening"
click the link and have the happy couple show us the way of the future-
[www.youtube.com]
i think when she picks up steam at the 4:00 minute mark- that was gonna sell out stadiums. i think the guys in the make-up would've been shown the door had this been promoted in a proper way.when you're putting out this kind of next level stuff it gives you the clout needed to judge the rolling stones....
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: January 16, 2015 21:17
Quote
Bliss
How did this pertinent and interesting discussion about the status of Mick and Keith's current r'ship deteriorate into yet another tedious discussion about the Beatles?
I hope BV closes it.
No playground politics please. I'd say how did it take so long for this tedious discussion of Mick and Keith's relationship to start including more interesting topics.
I mean how much more can anyone who doesn't know these guys say about it? Let's summarize 12 long pages of discussion.
1. Yes they are friends
2. No they have grown apart and are no longer friends, never socialize together.
3. They are only business partners and appear to be friends on stage.
4. They are brothers who sometimes are close and sometimes not.
5. Their (perceived) relationship problems are good for business
In the end it is really none of our business and as long as they are still playing together I could care less whether they are thick as thieves.
peace
Re: Have Mick and Keith become friends again?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: January 16, 2015 21:44
Quote
NaturalustQuote
Bliss
How did this pertinent and interesting discussion about the status of Mick and Keith's current r'ship deteriorate into yet another tedious discussion about the Beatles?
I hope BV closes it.
No playground politics please. I'd say how did it take so long for this tedious discussion of Mick and Keith's relationship to start including more interesting topics.
I mean how much more can anyone who doesn't know these guys say about it? Let's summarize 12 long pages of discussion.
1. Yes they are friends
2. No they have grown apart and are no longer friends, never socialize together.
3. They are only business partners and appear to be friends on stage.
4. They are brothers who sometimes are close and sometimes not.
5. Their (perceived) relationship problems are good for business
In the end it is really none of our business and as long as they are still playing together I could care less whether they are thick as thieves.
peace
Hear, hear!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
alexander paul , DandelionPowderman , IsakSun , maumau , Mr.Soul , Nankstone , peoplewitheyes , spiderman , Steinschlag , wolundamo , wupperstein , yorkshirestone
Guests:
1921
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10