- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Beatles or Stones?
Posted on 5/8/24 at 11:40 am
Posted on 5/8/24 at 11:40 am
Someone told me once (he grew up in the 60’s and 70’s) that when it came to the Beatles and Rolling Stones, you were into one or the other. There were Beatles fans and there were Stones fans. The Beatles were clean cut with pop friendly music and the Stones were the bad boys with bluesy rock n roll.
Do you consider yourself a fan of both or do you consider yourself strictly a fan of one over the other?
Do you consider yourself a fan of both or do you consider yourself strictly a fan of one over the other?
50
Posted on 5/8/24 at 11:45 am to SaintlyTiger88
Stones
Posted on 5/8/24 at 11:51 am to SaintlyTiger88
The Stones
Posted on 5/8/24 at 12:10 pm to SaintlyTiger88
Grew up in the 70’s and was a fan of both, but for me the Beatles were on a whole new stratosphere.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 12:16 pm to SaintlyTiger88
I'm a big fan of both, but the Beatles influence on pop music is undeniably more important.
Before The Beatles pop music was doo-wop, Elvis, late 50s sha na na type stuff, what was left of the Buddy Holly legacy, and I guess we had surfer music.
The Beatles changed all that. Everything after them was different and their influence is still recognizable in everything you hear today.
Before The Beatles pop music was doo-wop, Elvis, late 50s sha na na type stuff, what was left of the Buddy Holly legacy, and I guess we had surfer music.
The Beatles changed all that. Everything after them was different and their influence is still recognizable in everything you hear today.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 12:21 pm to SaintlyTiger88
I love both of them.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 12:34 pm to SaintlyTiger88
I respect both. Beatles were a game changer. Stones have longevity (My only Stones show was in 2021- MJ was like a 30 yr old out there).
But I love the Stones more. Esp the Mick Taylor years.
Hell I even love Emotional Rescue.
But I love the Stones more. Esp the Mick Taylor years.
Hell I even love Emotional Rescue.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 12:45 pm to SaintlyTiger88
This is where the “play on the home stereo preference” applies.
I’ll go to my record collection with a complete discography of both the Stones and the Beatles to choose an album to play…90% of the time I’ll choose a Rolling Stones album, mainly from the Mick Taylor era.
I’ll go to my record collection with a complete discography of both the Stones and the Beatles to choose an album to play…90% of the time I’ll choose a Rolling Stones album, mainly from the Mick Taylor era.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 1:15 pm to SaintlyTiger88
One is a dance band, one was a musical revolution that changed the world. I can't pick between the two.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 1:19 pm to SaintlyTiger88
The notion you have to pick one or the other is ridiculous. Two great but different groups.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 1:40 pm to SaintlyTiger88
Love 'em both.
Nobody matches either catalog.
However, The Beatles set the table for everyone else. ... including the Stones.
Nobody matches either catalog.
However, The Beatles set the table for everyone else. ... including the Stones.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 1:49 pm to SaintlyTiger88
The Rolling Stones
Posted on 5/8/24 at 2:35 pm to SaintlyTiger88
Beatles.. And it's not really close
Posted on 5/8/24 at 2:49 pm to SaintlyTiger88
Beatles
Posted on 5/8/24 at 2:53 pm to SaintlyTiger88
quote:Having to pick one is silly, but it's not even close: The Beatles.
Beatles or Stones?
I like the Stones and think the top decile of their portfolio is extremely high quality - with 5-7 all-timers.
But the Beatles' hit rate is just insane. Probably 90% of their songs are in the overall top quartile of pop/rock. And there are more like 30+ all-timers.
quote:Meh. The Beatles certainly didn't stay "clean cut". And their "pop friendliness" seems perhaps accurate in retrospect, but at the time, they WERE the leading edge. And many people just didn't get it.
The Beatles were clean cut with pop friendly music and the Stones were the bad boys with bluesy rock n roll.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 2:55 pm to Marciano1
quote:
Love 'em both.
However, The Beatles set the table for everyone else. ... including the Stones.
Exactly. Plus, the Stones have credited the Beatles with encouraging them to write their own songs after the Beatles gave them their song "I Wanna Be Your Man" which became one of the Stones' first singles.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 3:01 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
The Beatles certainly didn't stay "clean cut". And their "pop friendliness" seems perhaps accurate in retrospect, but at the time, they WERE the leading edge. And many people just didn't get it.
Good points. Plus, No one else has ever had such an evolution of their sound over a relatively short career as a band. From 1963-1970 they evolved from an early rock'n'roll/pop sound to more introspective pop rock to psychedelic rock to more eclectic stuff. And along the way with George Martin their music set the bar for studio production.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 3:19 pm to SaintlyTiger88
Beatles. I like the Stones attitude, but their songwriting just isn’t on par with The Beatles.
Posted on 5/8/24 at 3:40 pm to SaintlyTiger88
Stones all the way!!!
Posted on 5/8/24 at 3:46 pm to redneck hippie
quote:killed it.
. . . we had surfer music.
The Beatles. . .
Beach boys and Dick Dale hung on but everything was going to change. All music is sort of that by nature with reinterpretation, borrowing, and out right stealing. This was the Stones. Those other four guys tapped into the consciousness of the day. And the choice was almost binary between (the new) and most everything else (the old). If for no other reason than the choices were fewer pre-web. . .
They were innovators.
Page 1 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News