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: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: the stones and the who
Posted by: texas fan ()
Date: July 19, 2006 00:43

The Who is not, and never has been, a better band than the Rolling Stones, either live or in the studio. But, it's nice to have them around for people who like them. They're more entertaining and more important than most bands, and much better than any of the "new rock bands."

Re: the stones and the who
Posted by: Bluespeyer ()
Date: July 19, 2006 01:03

I agree with your post, Andrea. You hit the nail on the head, and did it diplomatically. A lot of people probably don't wanna hear that the Stones don't fire on all cylinders anymore, but it's definitely true. Yeah, of course they're a better band than the Who, but you wouldn't know it anymore.

Still, as much as I bemoan their current state, I'd absolutely hate to see 'em stop.

Re: the stones and the who
Posted by: ohnonotyouagain ()
Date: July 19, 2006 01:09

Half a Who is better than none (two members are dead) and a half measure of Stones guitar is better than none (two guitarists are half-dead).

Re: the stones and the who
Posted by: harlem shuffle ()
Date: July 19, 2006 01:16

the who?very boring band,and they never comes close to the stones

Re: the stones and the who
Posted by: schwabing rocks ()
Date: July 19, 2006 01:26

Compared to Punk-Rock bands-ranking the Who are in the laegue of "sharp" Buzzcocks/Undertones, while the Stones are more "sleazy" New York Dolls/Dead Boys. A matter of taste, both great, like all of them, Keep on smashing guitars!

Re: the stones and the who
Posted by: GuessWho ()
Date: July 19, 2006 11:24

For your benefit most gigs of the Who tour have 3 songs webcast live for free and then looped til the next show....(apart from certain gigs which cost 10 US Dollars for the whole show)

[thewholive.tv]

Check them out!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2006-07-19 11:27 by GuessWho.

Re: the stones and the who
Posted by: ablett ()
Date: July 19, 2006 11:26

better still go buy a ticket and go see them..... then comment!

Re: the stones and the who
Posted by: Tseverin ()
Date: July 19, 2006 13:08

steven said "The were better at the Rock and Roll Circus, Concert for NY, and today."
The Stones didn't play the Concert for NY, just Mick & Keith though I agree that on this occasion the Who just outshone them unlike the R & R Circus where they were good but nowhere near as good as the masters. They aren't always good either; I saw them at Wembley in 1979 and they were so dull I sat down and read my NME - they were outclassed by the Stranglers!

Re: the stones and the who
Posted by: Steven ()
Date: July 19, 2006 13:25

I'll grant you that the Stones are better because of their song writing and Mick. I will tell you that Pete is closer to his 70s form than the Stones.

To stir up some more shit, in 73 while the Stones were in peak form at Brussells, Alice Cooper was the world's biggest rock draw packing arenas and he is far better now than 73, and rocking harder than the Stones or the Who. Whether you like his material or shtick, the fact is his young guns play great and Alice performs almost every night and is working much harder.

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1314
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home