The Stones could be seen and heard, where as the Beatles were pretty much for listening only. But both were great, only which one does it for you? Or if you could only see one, which would it be?

Both equally as cool.

"The wonder of Jimi Hendrix was that he could stand up at all he was so pumped full of drugs." Patsy, Patsy Stone

I would say The Beatles. That was filmed January 30th, 1969. The Stones did their thing on May 1st. I would think the weather was much cooler in London during January, then New York in May.

Interesting topic Sicilian. I could probably go 50/50 either way. 2 great publicity stunts from 2 of the greatest bands ever. But if push came to shove,I would probably prefer the Beatles because live performances from them late in their era were rare and it makes you kind of wonder what if?...But the Stones rolling down fifth Ave is still classic as well.

"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"

I love the part where the reporter interviews the girl in line for tickets to the Stones show and she says that "this is the last time for her because she hates big tours, she's retiring."

Thirty years later, a lot of us are still saying the same things. Some things never change.

Quote
The Sicilian
I love the part where the reporter interviews the girl in line for tickets to the Stones show and she says that "this is the last time for her because she hates big tours, she's retiring."

Thirty years later, a lot of us are still saying the same things. Some things never change.

Exactly LOL.

"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"

yoko appears i the beatles clip. therefore: no chance for them.....

Stones cooler by far, IMO, because they were right there in everybody's face.
Beatles would have been much better if it had been more organized, allowing them to play longer, perhaps even for a full-length film.

By nature, Beatles are not cool at all - so the question is not relevant to ask.

How can a boy band be cool?

"How can a boy band be cool?"

Not that old chestnut?

Boy bands don't create Helter Skelter, The White Album, introduce world music (sitar), concept albums that blew open music forever etc. etc.

The Beatles - except for Paul - wore women's clothing on the roof of Apple. That was pretty cool for 69.

X



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-09-08 21:29 by UrbanSteel.

from the perspective of the people on the st, I would say the Stones since nobody could see the Beatles except ones of rooftops.

When one compares the two, I would say The Beatles hands down.

On the rooftop (whether you could see them or not) The Beatles were playing current songs from a current album. It was their first public appearance playing LIVE since 1966.

The day The Stones played on 5th Ave (only between 11th and 12th Street) they played 1 song (Brown Sugar). Personally, I think it would have been better had they played IORR, since it was a more current song at the time.

While The Stones were doing their bit as a publicity stunt to promote TOTA,I believe The Beatles were giving the public one last LIVE listen before they called it quits officially.

Quote
UrbanSteel
The Beatles did everything first, except a live album.

The Beatles did that first, too. Only they decided not to release it (Hollywood Bowl, August 23, 1964).

Don't know about cooler but beyond doubt the Beatles 'rooftop' gig is iconic. A poignant sign-off for a great band underscored brilliantly by Lennon's 'audition' quip. Doesn't undermine the 5th Avenue bash by The Stones in the least however.

Why these continuous Beatles Vs. Stones Deathmatches?

"I'll be in my basement room with a needle and a spoon."

Except for Ono I go for the Beatles but the Stones are close second

__________________________

The Stones on 5th Ave.,
but not because I like the Stones more that the Beatles. I think the Stones on 5th Ave. was cooler because they brought the music to the PPl in the biggest city on Earth. They were right in the face of their fans.

Quote
ablett
"How can a boy band be cool?"

Not that old chestnut?

Boy bands don't create Helter Skelter, The White Album, introduce world music (sitar), concept albums that blew open music forever etc. etc.

Stones used Sitar early on - BJ did play quite some exotic intruments, it was not only Beatles and BJ did it before Beatles in some occations. The use of classical instruments in Beatles era was because of George Martin, not because of Lennon / Macca. But because of Beatles being more famous being a boys band, they did get more recognition than Stones.

Betales tried to sound rough, but listen to Macca singing - the same stupid hillbilly boy sound like the later CD's he made: Silly Love songs, Band on the run, Ebony and Ivory etc. That's nothing comapred to SFTD, GS, JJF, HTW.

Stones made Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Exile, Sticky Fingers - music not from a boys band. When has Batles music created anything similar to those albums - where is Beatles even close to SFTD, GS, HTW, JJF etc.

Stones was less famous because they played black, blues, raw music that Beatles never played - that's the big issue that many people never realise.

Maybe the coolest one was the one at both events, Billy Preston.

Quote
The Sicilian
Maybe the coolest one was the one at both events, Billy Preston.

No shit, huh? What a lucky bastard!

The Beatles rooftop gig gets my vote. It's like, they spent most of January 1969 screwing around and sounding like crap before finally pulling up their bootstraps for those fourty odd minutes on the Apple roof. It was clearly the end of the band, and they knew it. The rooftop concert simply wasn't the blatant publicity stunt the Stones' flatbed truck was. I know, they were promoting their tour, but they went out and played ONE song they probably could have played in their sleep (and probably have...). I'm an equal opportunity fan: I like the Stones and the Beatles pretty much equally.

I must say, seeing some of the very anti-Beatles responses on here...may I remind you: if it wasn't for the Beatles, the Rolling Stones never would have gotten further than the Crawdaddy Club. I may be overstating things a bit there, but some people seem to have this "Stones or nothing" attitude. The Stones might indeed have been "The World's Greatest Rock And Roll Band" at one time, but they don't crap roses. They're not gods. It's a bit disturbing seeing people taking their fandom so seriously.

Quote
bumbum

Quote
ablett
"How can a boy band be cool?"

Not that old chestnut?

Boy bands don't create Helter Skelter, The White Album, introduce world music (sitar), concept albums that blew open music forever etc. etc.

Stones used Sitar early on - BJ did play quite some exotic intruments, it was not only Beatles and BJ did it before Beatles in some occations.

Can you provide some examples of this? As for sitar, George Harrison was turned onto it by Indian musicians (not by George Martin) on the set of the film Help, in Feb. 1965. He played one on Norwegian Wood, recorded in Oct. 1965, predating Paint It Black by several months.

stones were more of a spectacal, but the beatles did it first, so it kind of evens things out

Quote
bumbum
Where is Beatles even close to SFTD, GS, HTW, JJF etc.

Strawberry Fields Forever, Hey Jude, Yesterday, I Am The Walrus, Let It Be, The Long And Winding Road, In My Life and so on. There's simply no denying that The Beatles were the leaders of the music business in the 60s. When The Rolling Stones started dishing out their classics it was already 1968, except for (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction. The Beatles had been making classics for years on end at that point. The Rolling Stones and The Beatles were pretty much even in '68. When The Beatles started to decline (After The White Album), The Rolling Stones took over. But for the first six years (1962 - 1968), The Beatles were on top of The Stones. Even though I prefer The Stones there's no denying that. Deny it, and you're kidding yourself.

JumpingKentFlash

Say what? Satisfaction was the only pre 1968 classic by The Stones? Huh? Did I imagine Ruby Tuesday, Paint It Black, Get Off My Cloud etc.? Perhaps I dreamed these songs and should record and release them. Then I can be rich and famous like Mick Jagger.

"Lyin' awake in a cold, cold sweat. Am I overdrawn, am I going in debt?
It gets worse, the older that you get. No escape from the state of confusion I'm in.

God!! , of course , the stones was better.
They just came into the street , people couldnt believe it , no one saw the beatles , they didnt have style.
no old men got mad against the beatles!

The Beatles. The Stones had police blessing for the 5th Avenue stunt, while the cops shut down the rooftop concert.

For me the Stones on that flatbed truck.
N.Y.C premier rock station at that time, WNEW,announced that the Stones would be playing live on the streets,I was working close by,told my boss l was taking my break and ran to 5th Ave and saw them...Incredible...

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

I agree with whoever said the Beatles were playing a half hour of new music, and they caused a scene that had to be shut down by the cops. That's cooler than the Stones playing one song on a truck.