Quote
whitem8
It is also interesting that a discussion about the two different men and their vocals, and how some posters turned it more into an analysis of one man's character. Now if we were talking about the moral character traits of Mick and John that would be a whole different subject...but I thought we were more talking about their vocals. And again, I love them both, but Lennon's vocals for me are stronger. More power, more versatility, and more vocal range. Mick is great for the Stones, but again he too often relied on a satirical style which losses its appeal after numerous listens. And he does not have the technical range or prowess to match Lennon.

Quote
Boognish
For those that say John Lennon was a narcissist, have you never seen Mick Jagger on stage before? He wears clothes with the Rolling Stones logo and name on them. If that isn't narcissism, I don't know what is. I can't think of another artist that does something lame like that. Oh wait, yes I can. Keith.

Quote
Boognish
For those that say John Lennon was a narcissist, have you never seen Mick Jagger on stage before? He wears clothes with the Rolling Stones logo and name on them. If that isn't narcissism, I don't know what is. I can't think of another artist that does something lame like that. Oh wait, yes I can. Keith.

Quote
Elmo Lewis
The great Robin Zander of Cheap Trick can do a pretty good Lennon (Woke Up With A Monster), McCartney (Baby loves To Rock), and Daltrey (Scent Of A Woman).

He could probably do a decent Jagger if he tried.

Back to the question - John Lennon (actually Roy Orbison had the better voice).

Quote
Come On
Listen to ' Give me some truth '! Where we talk about Rock n roll that has it all. Hate, blood, nerve, and most importantly, musicality and emotion.

Quote
Tonstone

Quote
Elmo Lewis
The great Robin Zander of Cheap Trick can do a pretty good Lennon (Woke Up With A Monster), McCartney (Baby loves To Rock), and Daltrey (Scent Of A Woman).

He could probably do a decent Jagger if he tried.

Back to the question - John Lennon (actually Roy Orbison had the better voice).

Elmo great post - I forgot about the big 'O' what a voice!!!, but as I am Scottish I still have a soft spot for Dan McCaffertey of Nazareth, but I can't disagree with you.

Quote
stanlove

Quote
Boognish
For those that say John Lennon was a narcissist, have you never seen Mick Jagger on stage before? He wears clothes with the Rolling Stones logo and name on them. If that isn't narcissism, I don't know what is. I can't think of another artist that does something lame like that. Oh wait, yes I can. Keith.

Not sure if I would consider wearing your own cloths to be narcissistic?

Quote
EasterMan
I could with ease think of 30 better rock 'n roll singers than John Lennon, but I could think of none better than Jagger.

Quote
Tonstone

Quote
2120Wolf

Quote
Tonstone
OK let's get this into prespective.

Seems like you are comparing Beatles _Lennon with - Stones - Jagger 1980's onwards.
Ok let's compare a similar time period, Did the Beatles make four better studio albums than, Beggars Banquet - Let It Bleed - Exile On Main Street - Sticky Fingers? - Did they make a better live album than - Get Yer Ya Ya's Out.? - I don't think so.

Better Rock 'n' Roll Vocalist - Jagger or Lennon.? well I know that Jaggers voice was more suited to the Stones than lennon's would ever have been, and that's all that matters on a Stones board. Since you are pressing on a Better Vocalist - well look no futher than Dan McCaffertey of Nazareth.












Would the Beatles be able to cut it in 2015 without technoligy - give me a break! , does Paul McCarntney dye his hair? how far do yo want to go. There is only one 'Greatest Rock'n' Roll Band in the World'- ladies and Gentlemen-'The Rolling Stones'

Thru-out Micks career up to this day he does not come close to Lennon 63-70
End of Story - Mick is the maestro master of the B Team.

Dan McCaffertey of Nazareth >>> C Team Non-Factor[/quot

AH we have resorted to a.b.c.. teams based on your opinion,could you please answer the question and let me me know of at least 4 better studio albums and a better live album from your B team.End of Story. And how does Dan McCaffertey become C league.? Intrigued.

Easy:
Please Please Me 63' - tops all 4 of those albums ...Without it there'd be no Stones or anyone else...American labels did not want the Brits...Do your research, Capitol Records(Dave Dexter)did everything in its power to keep Brit music out of the US...The Beatles changed the world, music and the record industry completely...Please do some reading and gather your facts before you lip off...I lived it, I saw it all happen...where were you in 62' ????
Revolver 66" Tops all of those Albums....Peppers tops em all....White Album
I'll even throw in Something New and Meet the Beatles for grins....
Without the Beatles the Stones would just now be retiring from their 9-5's...They would not have happened. The Beatles had 2000 stage hours before the Stones 1st gig at the Marque 6-12-62...The Stones would not have slogged and put in that kind of time...They would have given up and relented to regular jobs...Just like Richards said the Beatles kicked down the door and they zoomed in right behind. It was Harrison who encouraged Decca to sign the Stones...The Stones would be the first to tell you...They only became the Greatest Rock N' Roll band when the Beatles called it quits...After all the Beatles hold the title the Greatest Band Ever !!!...And I'll guarantee the Stone would be the first to admit it....



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-08 03:06 by 2120Wolf.

Quote
kish_stoned
stones are here and beatles left the building years ago,
STONES ARE WAY OF LIFE WITH BEST SINGER IN THE WORLD,his name is
MICK JAGGER.

Quote
2120Wolf

Quote
EasterMan
I could with ease think of 30 better rock 'n roll singers than John Lennon, but I could think of none better than Jagger.

That is funny...are you a clown ????

Quote
Happy24
Lennon had one of the most distinguished voices in rock'n'roll music ever. Mick does too. I can not get the animosity whenever The Beatles are mentioned here. I guess Celine Dion or Britney Spears are far more tolerable than Lennon for some on this board.

Quote
2120Wolf

Quote
stanlove

Quote
Boognish
For those that say John Lennon was a narcissist, have you never seen Mick Jagger on stage before? He wears clothes with the Rolling Stones logo and name on them. If that isn't narcissism, I don't know what is. I can't think of another artist that does something lame like that. Oh wait, yes I can. Keith.

Not sure if I would consider wearing your own cloths to be narcissistic?

Nobody in rock tops Jagger when it comes to being Narcistic...NOBODY

Quote
whitem8
Welcome to IORR Happy24. Some Stones fans are almost pathologically insecure about the band they love. And then some would argue the same about fans of The Beatles. It is a shame that people can't understand the fact there are a lot of fans of both bands. I like them both, and listen to them both avidly. A big difference for a fan like me is that the Stones are still Rolling, so admittedly I there is more history there and more current activity to get excited about. I do love both bands and depending on the mood I will like one over the other. Yet, I also can say that my tastes are that Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison had probably the best harmonizing partnership in rock history, and particularly Lennon and McCartney, and I am sure their constant use of two part harmony greatly influenced all the other Brit bands that came after. Keith and Mick take a very similar approach to their harmonies. Even Pete Townshend, not a big Beatles fan, said their harmonies inspired The Who to try and create intricate harmonies. And in an interview the OX said listening to the early Who harmonies was a bit embarrassing.

Quote
stanlove
Where does anyone deny that some people don't like the Beatles and Stones? I have never seen anyone deny that.

Some people just love the Stones and hate the Beatles for different reasons. That's OK. People can dislike music that you like and if they do hate the Beatles there is nothing wrong with saying it. Unless of course you think its ok to only say you love a band but can't say anything if you don't like them.

I personally don't hate the Beatles. I like things they did in 1967-68. I loved them at the time but now hate everything they did before 1967. Overrated boring pop as far as I can tell. It would be torture for me to try to listen to Rubber Soul or Revolver today, its just boring as hell.

I do consider the Beatles the greatest band ever because of all they achieved.

Quote
Happy24

Quote
stanlove
Where does anyone deny that some people don't like the Beatles and Stones? I have never seen anyone deny that.

Some people just love the Stones and hate the Beatles for different reasons. That's OK. People can dislike music that you like and if they do hate the Beatles there is nothing wrong with saying it. Unless of course you think its ok to only say you love a band but can't say anything if you don't like them.

I personally don't hate the Beatles. I like things they did in 1967-68. I loved them at the time but now hate everything they did before 1967. Overrated boring pop as far as I can tell. It would be torture for me to try to listen to Rubber Soul or Revolver today, its just boring as hell.

I do consider the Beatles the greatest band ever because of all they achieved.

Wow, your post makes zero sence to me. Literaly zero

1. Writing in on sentence that you "hate everything they did before 1967" and 3 sentences later: "I do consider the Beatles the greatest band ever" Wow, that is a flexible thinking!

2. Your defence of the right to "hate music." I just don't get it. But that is probably just me. I fully understand that somebody doesn't like some music. But to hate it? If you don't like it, don't listen to it. Isn't it a rather simple solution? Why hate it? Get life.

3. And even if somebody doesn't like some music - let's say The Beatles - why do those peole always have the urge to inform everyone that Lennon (or anyone else) was crap. I think that forcing subjective personal opinions to other people as given facts can be quite dangerous. To be honest, I really hate THAT.

Quote
stanlove
I am not sure why you think its only ok to say what music you like? I have never understood people like that.

Quote
EasterMan
I could with ease think of 30 better rock 'n roll singers than John Lennon, but I could think of none better than Jagger.

Quote
2000 LYFH

Quote
EasterMan
I could with ease think of 30 better rock 'n roll singers than John Lennon, but I could think of none better than Jagger.

OK I'll bite, who are they!

Quote
EasterMan

Quote
2000 LYFH

Quote
EasterMan
I could with ease think of 30 better rock 'n roll singers than John Lennon, but I could think of none better than Jagger.

OK I'll bite, who are they!

1. Mick Jagger
2. Chuck Berry
3. Paul Rodgers
4. Brian Howe
5. Paul Stanley
6. Gene Simmons
7. Charlie Starr
8. Ronnie Van Zant
9. Ian Gillan
10. Steven Tyler
11. Gary Brooker
12. Graham Bonnet
13. Jerry Garcia
14. Roger Daltrey
15. Rod Stewart
16. John Brim
17. Eric Clapton
18. Zac Brown
19. George Thorogood
20. Paul McCartney
21. Robert Hart
22. David Lee Roth
23. Jerry Lee Lewis
24. James Labrie
25. Elvis Presley
26. David Coverdale
27. John Fogerty
28. David Mustaine
29. Ronnie James Dio
30. Doug Gray

That list took me about 5 minutes to do, all I had to was to open one of my youtube playlists...