This is a bit OT. But Michael Jackson has sold back his 50% share of the Beatles back catalogue. Sony reports today.

Diddling little boys costs a lot of bucks these days....

I'd cash the catalogue in too...........it's malignant.....

Rip This, your spelling is off - Magnificent is the proper way....

MicksBrain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hehehehe What the BEATLES achieved
> between 1963 and 1969 (6 short years) is just a
> total mind f*cker !!! They have MAYBE 5 throw away
> songs....


Oh come on, Mick'sThinkingOrgan, 5 throwaway songs? You're feeling generous today aren't you? I honestly can't think of a single one throw away song.

And Reptile, if that's your real name, if you had hatched back in the 60's I bet you'd like the Beatles now. They were innovative to say the least.

Lukester, my friend, I must remind you of

Honey Pie
Within You Without You
Rev # 9
Yellow Sub
ObLaDi
Walrus (yellow matter custard dripping from a dead dog's eye?)

Mostly good, not always, even Jagger/Richards

MB....are you kidding me????.2 popy......yes the beatles had allot of fame and success in the early 60's ok....most certainly helped Rock n Roll grow......but FIVE bad songs ....lol....at the time sgt peppers was cool and new...so was LSD.....they did not tour after 66............they where OVERATED..............OVERSTATED ........... well thats all i got to say about that....

Elmo...I'm still not thinking clearly...I've been eating Percocets like Tic Tacs. You are right, Revolution #9, Honey Pie and the one about a Submarine were tedious. I'm still holding on to Obla Di and the yellow matter custard dripping from a dead dog's eye song, goo goo gajoo.

I can see why the Beatles are held as the world's most succesfull group. But they never did it for me. I went for the harder line offered by the Stones. But Lennon's stuff did do it for me. One of my friends is the solicitor that allowed the world's first F word on a recording. Working Class Hero. He also oversaw the signing of the Stones to EMI. Now that is OT.

I like 'em both. But I like the Stones slightly more then the Beatles. And Yellow Submarine is a damn fine song IMO!

Halup Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> 2) It seems that many Stones fans are pretty
> narrow minded about the music they enjoy. The
> Stones themselves have explored and personally
> enjoy so many different musical genres, while many
> of their hard core fans seem to respond mainly to
> the harder sounding, riff heavy songs to the
> exclusion of anything they consider "wimpy". A
> band like AC/DC, while being a good, but a far
> from creative, band gets overly praised by many
> people on this board, while acts that really are
> as creative and diverse a band as the Stones, such
> as U2, get ripped on.


You make some great points, especially re. the AC/DC highschool mentality, but I also think the opposite of this is true-- Stones fans are often expected to like Beatles and any other overblown, guitar-solo-ladden "classic rock" band (which the Stones are nothing like really), along with the Beatles, just because all of this classifies as "old" rock that you are supposed to enjoy, while dissing anything new or current as "not like it used to be." I myself don't see why I have to be a Zeppelin or Beatles fan just because I like the Stones, who just happen to be as 'ancient' in the history of music, when their music is really nothing alike.

So to answer the original question, to me, Beatles and Stones are different-- and I tend to not enjoy the music Beatles make. I don't hate them, I enjoy some of their work, but most of it doesn't do much for me. Just because they are chronologically close doesn't mean one has to appreciate them both, nor does it mean one has a narrow taste in music.


As for Macca, he is an easy target. Like Mick is for many people.

Well said, Some Girl.

Lukester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well said, Some Girl.


Agreed Lukester. Some Girl is really some girl! Damn I love highly intelligent women!

One could just as easily say: "Why all the love for the Beatles?"
Not on this board per se, but in the world at large.

HIGHLY overrated.

Bear in mind, Dylan had already changed the game and "disappeared" by 1966 - before the Beatles allegedly rewrote the rules.

From 1967-70, the most compelling, forward-thinking, progressive band in the world was the Velvet Underground not the Beatles.

I guess what I'm trying to say here is the same thing I've always said when this topic comes up (every 3 weeks or so): I don't hate the Beatles, I just don't think they're remotely worthy of all the accolades they receive. I wouldn't put them in my top 100.

And again, let me reiterate: The Beatles are sissy. Super sissy.

Lukester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And Reptile, if that's your real name, if you had
> hatched back in the 60's I bet you'd like the
> Beatles now. They were innovative to say the
> least.

Innovative? Why would I give a @#$%& about innovative? Like I said, the Beatles are alright, but Paul McCartney is such a shithead the whole band's @#$%& up. And Paul McCartney was, musically, not all that innovative in my modest opinion..

Wow Reptile, are you feeling macho today? Did you find a hair under your arms or something?

CindyC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow Reptile, are you feeling macho today? Did
> you find a hair under your arms or something?

No, but I did find some under yours.

HAHAHAHAHA Good one!

hair today............gone tomorrow...just like them Beatles

Rip This Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hair today............gone tomorrow...just like
> them Beatles


What hair?

The Beatles were a fantastic band.

Nuff said.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-04-14 23:59 by LOGIE.

Stones89 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Agreed Lukester. Some Girl is really some girl!
Damn I love highly intelligent women!



I do, too, Stones89. I do too.

So how's life treating you up in Canada?

Peaceful, I bet.

Good Lukester. Weather's not bad up here and it's almost time for the NHL playoffs. Don't know who I'll be rootin' for if Toronto doesn't make it in. Maybe the Detroit Red Wings. Thanks for askin'. How's things with you?

Can't complain. The snow has melted. I'm kind of stoked about the Stones coming back to North America. I saw Jerry Seinfeld last Friday at a small theater. I'll be seeing Bob Dylan next month. No suicide bombers in my neighborhood. Hell, life couldn't be better. Good luck with Toronto getting into the playoffs.

OK, The long nap is over. Let me think of 5 throwaway beatle songs:

1 WILD HONEY PIE (WHITE ALBUM)

2 WHAT A SHAME, MARY JANE HAD A PAIN AT THE PARTY (ANTHOLOGY)

3 FLYING (Instrumental on MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR)

4 MAGGIE MAY (on LET IT BE)

5 GOODNIGHT (Last song, WHITE ALBUM)


Five weak ones in my book (IMHO);

1 DON"T PASS ME BY

2 YOU KNOW MY NAME (look up the number)

3 MAXWELLS SILVER HAMMER

4 BECAUSE

5 REVOLUTION #9


Five over looked GREAT ONES:

1 THE INNER LIGHT

2 BABY, YOU"RE A RICH MAN

3 AND YOUR BIRD CAN SING

4 JULIA

5 EVERYBODY'S GOT SOMETHING TO HIDE EXCEPT FOR ME AND MY MONKEY

MicksBrain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK, The long nap is over. Let me think of 5
> throwaway beatle songs:
>
> 1 WILD HONEY PIE (WHITE ALBUM)
>
> 2 WHAT A SHAME, MARY JANE HAD A PAIN AT THE PARTY
> (ANTHOLOGY)
>
> 3 FLYING (Instrumental on MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR)
>
> 4 MAGGIE MAY (on LET IT BE)
>
> 5 GOODNIGHT (Last song, WHITE ALBUM)
>
>
> Five weak ones in my book (IMHO);
>
> 1 DON"T PASS ME BY
>
> 2 YOU KNOW MY NAME (look up the number)
>
> 3 MAXWELLS SILVER HAMMER
>
> 4 BECAUSE
>
> 5 REVOLUTION #9
>
>
> Five over looked GREAT ONES:
>
> 1 THE INNER LIGHT
>
> 2 BABY, YOU"RE A RICH MAN
>
> 3 AND YOUR BIRD CAN SING
>
> 4 JULIA
>
> 5 EVERYBODY'S GOT SOMETHING TO HIDE EXCEPT FOR ME
> AND MY MONKEY


Hey MB, I agree with you on just about every one of those songs being not so hot although I do like Good Night. It puts me to sleep rather easily (I guess it's supposed to, hence the title). That What A Shame Mary Jane one was absolute garbage IMO. As for the 5 overlooked ones, 3 of them really stand out for me - Baby, You're A Rich Man, And Your Bird Can Sing and EGSTHEFMAMM.

Yeah, GOODNIGHTS a bit too good to be #5..Maybe HER MAJESTY at the very end of ABBEY ROAD but that's kinda cute. I'll think of something. Notice how all those overlooked ones are LENNON songs (except INNER LIGHT). Wish he was around to do them live...we should go rip apart Chapman body part by body part that "waste of space - should have been an abortion - pathetic piece of garbage"...

how can you not like the beatles, you have to be a real narrow minded
dumbass to say the beatles are not the most significant band of all time,
sorry elvis and the stones but thats just the way it is, and yes the stones are my all time favorite by far, but the above statements are very true

melillo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> how can you not like the beatles, you have to be a
> real narrow minded
> dumbass to say the beatles are not the most
> significant band of all time,
> sorry elvis and the stones but thats just the way
> it is, and yes the stones are my all time favorite
> by far, but the above statements are very true

Since when does significance make a band good?

so what are you saying, the beatles are not good, please man, just because
the stones have been around longer does not make them bette



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2006-04-15 15:21 by melillo.