Progarchives.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
  New Posts New Posts
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search Search  Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedThe Beatles or the Rolling Stones ?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Poll Question: B or RS
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
40 [78.43%]
11 [21.57%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Bookmark and Share
alanerc View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 20 2007
Location: Mexico
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 278
Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Beatles or the Rolling Stones ?
    Posted: May 19 2008 at 17:37
the "good guys" of rock vs the "bad guys" of rock

Vote: The BeatlesSmile
Back to Top
tszirmay View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2260
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 18:24
Talk of no contest. One of the main reasons I have loved prog is my profound 40 year distaste for the Stones , a group of thugs, profiteers and non-musicians (I repeat NON-MUSICIANS)  that cater to ultra primitive innuendoes that aren't even clever. Ape music and that is not even kind to monkeys (: They even had a song about themselves) Their last decent album was with Brian Jones (but they drowned him!) . Yuck , extremely overated , basic garbage . Even as a rock band , they suck stones. Gall bladder pain.I could go on for years with facts to back my disdain . Oh well!  SleepyCensoredPig
The Beatles on the other hand, exactly the polar opposite.
"Secret career in counter-espionage, covering his fear in clever camouflage" Robert Calvert .Pretentiousness is valid only if there is no talent!    Thomas
Back to Top
The Quiet One View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9313
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 18:29
I definitly agree with tszirmay! Every word! Yes Sir! Don't understand, why the heck are they even f**king popular!
Would have prefered if The Who had reached a such high status than The Rolling Drunk Stones. In my country there are guys called Rollingas that they have that Mick Jagger comb hair and they just suck! There are many alt rock bands here in Argentina that are "heavily" influenced by their music...that sucks!

The Beatles as well said before, is, mm, the contrary! Devil or God is this poll about..
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Orlando, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 11849
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 18:36
I don't much care for either, but The Beatles had talent and songwriting skill.  And influence.

What about the Stones?  Um...booze?  Did you catch Mick Jagger's halftime performance during the Super Bowl a few years back?
Back to Top
tszirmay View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2260
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 18:37
Originally posted by cacho

I definitly agree with tszirmay! Every word! Yes Sir! Don't understand, why the heck are they even f**king popular!
Would have prefered if The Who had reached a such high status than The Rolling Drunk Stones. In my country there are guys called Rollingas that they have that Mick Jagger comb hair and they just suck! There are many alt rock bands here in Argentina that are "heavily" influenced by their music...that sucks!

The Beatles as well said before, is, mm, the contrary! Devil or God is this poll about..
 
Sadly, very sadly, I understand fully why they are so popular: people's lowest common denominator is always primitive: McDonalds (honestly, is any of it good?), Coca-Cola (Coloured sugar, think about it!) and Rolling Stones (musical diarrhea) . Its all logical, as Supertramp  (A fave of yours, Cacho) , they did a song about it. LOL
"Secret career in counter-espionage, covering his fear in clever camouflage" Robert Calvert .Pretentiousness is valid only if there is no talent!    Thomas
Back to Top
The Quiet One View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9313
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 19:45
Originally posted by tszirmay

Originally posted by cacho

I definitly agree with tszirmay! Every word! Yes Sir! Don't understand, why the heck are they even f**king popular! Would have prefered if The Who had reached a such high status than The Rolling Drunk Stones. In my country there are guys called Rollingas that they have that Mick Jagger comb hair and they just suck! There are many alt rock bands here in Argentina that are "heavily" influenced by their music...that sucks! The Beatles as well said before, is, mm, the contrary! Devil or God is this poll about..


Sadly, very sadly, I understand fully why they are so popular: people's lowest common denominator is always primitive: McDonalds (honestly, is any of it good?), Coca-Cola (Coloured sugar, think about it!) and Rolling Stones (musical diarrhea) . Its all logical, as Supertramp (A fave of yours, Cacho) , they did a song about it. ileys/smiley36.gif" height="17" width="17" alt="LOL">


Yep I fully coincide with your hipotesis! hehe
Back to Top
LinusW View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Italian Prog Team

Joined: September 27 2007
Location: Svezia
Online Status: Online
Posts: 7693
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 19:58
Originally posted by tszirmay

Talk of no contest. One of the main reasons I have loved prog is my profound 40 year distaste for the Stones , a group of thugs, profiteers and non-musicians (I repeat NON-MUSICIANS)  that cater to ultra primitive innuendoes that aren't even clever. Ape music and that is not even kind to monkeys (: They even had a song about themselves) Their last decent album was with Brian Jones (but they drowned him!) . Yuck , extremely overated , basic garbage . Even as a rock band , they suck stones. Gall bladder pain.I could go on for years with facts to back my disdain . Oh well!  SleepyCensoredPig
The Beatles on the other hand, exactly the polar opposite.


Wow LOL


But yes, the famous Liverpudlians for me as well.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 20:01
the rolling stones are not as terrible as you all are saying. They have some good songs, but of course the beatles are 100000000000000 times better.
Back to Top
tszirmay View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2260
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 20:05
^^^ You are right, let me rephrase my opinion:

“Let it Bleed” was the last great song, saved by some fabulous backing vocals and a sizzling Mick Taylor solo. When Taylor left (he was the only musician there), lights out. Ron Wood, an accomplished guitarist? You got to be kidding!

Their unending rip-offs (“Time Waits for No One” and its plagiarized Santana solo).

Their disco pandering was laughable, mind you it was the only time Wyman’s bass was up-front, probably took 400 hours of practice –Entwhistle or JP Jones, he is not.

As for that gnome behind the drum kit, you must be drunk to appreciate his total lack of technique (To think he actually had the gall of calling himself a “jazz” purist! In your dreams Charlie!)

Keith Richards, a genius? A genius of what? Barely caressing his bourbon soaked guitar and eventually some kind of sound will emerge! Rock’s answer to the Mummy! A drunken disgrace only surpassed by that farcical pseudo bi-sexual affront to humanity that is Jagger! A prancing gigolo who uses feminine attributes to attract women. Dumb women (or transsexual?)! Can he sing? No but he can cavort! No Freddie Mercury and Tina can shake her booty fifty times better.   Hey, Linus, how da ya laika datta!LOL

"Secret career in counter-espionage, covering his fear in clever camouflage" Robert Calvert .Pretentiousness is valid only if there is no talent!    Thomas
Back to Top
The Quiet One View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9313
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 20:51
Originally posted by tszirmay

You are right, let me rephrase my opinion:

“Let it Bleed” was the last great song, saved by some fabulous backing vocals and a sizzling Mick Taylor solo. When Taylor left (he was the only musician there), lights out. Ron Wood, an accomplished guitarist? You got to be kidding!

Their unending rip-offs (“Time Waits for No One” and its plagiarized Santana solo).

Their disco pandering was laughable, mind you it was the only time Wyman’s bass was up-front, probably took 400 hours of practice –Entwhistle or JP Jones, he is not.

As for that gnome behind the drum kit, you must be drunk to appreciate his total lack of technique (To think he actually had the gall of calling himself a “jazz” purist! In your dreams Charlie!)

Keith Richards, a genius? A genius of what? Barely caressing his bourbon soaked guitar and eventually some kind of sound will emerge! Rock’s answer to the Mummy! A drunken disgrace only surpassed by that farcical pseudo bi-sexual affront to humanity that is Jagger! A prancing gigolo who uses feminine attributes to attract women. Dumb women (or transsexual?)! Can he sing? No but he can cavort! No Freddie Mercury and Tina can shake her booty fifty times better.   Hey, Linus, how da ya laika datta!


Oh yeah! That's what I like PA!!! Make suffer the so "popular bands", pff, popular of getting drunk each time they play...

Can you believe I fall for that, that Charlie Watts(he has no watts) played jazz!!!! Some years ago though..thx God for that.

Edited by cacho - May 19 2008 at 20:52
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Zeuhl, Avant & RIO and Canterbury Teams

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 19431
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 20:54
1.  This isn't in the right section.
2.  Please try to keep the flaming to a minimum.

Thanks.
Back to Top
tszirmay View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2260
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 21:12
Originally posted by NaturalScience

1.  This isn't in the right section.
2.  Please try to keep the flaming to a minimum.

Thanks.
 
With all due apologies, this is the correct section as we are asked to choose between the good boys and the bad boys.Confused  I was only underlining my opinion on why the Stones have absolutely no-prog credibility and I would add (perhaps a tad rudely) that even in rock terms they are dysfunctional. I have friends who like the stones and who agree that they are more cartoon characters than anything.
As far as the flaming goes, I was under the perhaps misguided impression that abusing opinions and opinion givers is forbidden. With a current 22-0 score , who may I ask am I offending.? I am known to be gentle, polite and diplomatic at all times, but the Rolling worship must be recognized.
That some (in fact most) people like the Stones is fine with me I just believe

"They are the EPITOME and the PARAGON of  ugly beast called Corporate rock but they cunningly suck people into believing they are genuine, what a masterful Con job! Marketing geniuses they are! Musicians they are not!"  . I now promise to retreat from further heaping of venom and bile. But it's only rock 'n roll ......LOL

"Secret career in counter-espionage, covering his fear in clever camouflage" Robert Calvert .Pretentiousness is valid only if there is no talent!    Thomas
Back to Top
The Quiet One View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9313
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 21:17
Originally posted by tszirmay

Originally posted by NaturalScience

1. This isn't in the right section.2. Please try to keep the flaming to a minimum.Thanks.


With all due apologies, this is the correct section as we are asked to choose between the good boys and the bad boys.Confused I was only underlining my opinion on why the Stones have absolutely no-prog credibility and I would add (perhaps a tad rudely) that even in rock terms they are dysfunctional. I have friends who like the stones and who agree that they are more cartoon characters than anything.

As far as the flaming goes, I was under the perhaps misguided impression that abusing opinions and opinion givers is forbidden. With a current 22-0 score , who may I ask am I offending.? I am known to be gentle, polite and diplomatic at all times, but the Rolling worship must be recognized.

That some (in fact most) people like the Stones is fine with me I just believe


<P =Msonormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>"They are the EPITOME and the PARAGON of <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>ugly beast called Corporate rock but they cunningly suck people into believing they are genuine, what a masterful Con job! Marketing geniuses they are! Musicians they are not!" . I now promise to retreat from further heaping of venom and bile. But it's only rock 'n roll ......LOL



But I Like It!!!

It's only prog rock...well we all love it!
Back to Top
febus View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar

Joined: January 23 2007
Location: Orlando-Usa
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4317
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 21:23

Hey Thomas what is going on with the STONES?LOL

If the Stones cannot compare with the BEATLES, there are for tonight    15 reasons i like the STONES at least until 1973/74
 
-GIMME SHELTER           -MIDNIGHT RAMBLER---         - LADY JANE        -STICKY FINGERS
-EXILE ON MAIN STREET     -SHE'S A RAINBOW        -SYMPATHY FOR THE DEVIL      -AS TEARS GO BY
- WE LOVE YOU       -JUMPIN JACK FLASH        -YOU CAN'T GET ALWAYS .........       -RUBY TUESDAY
-HONKY TONK WOMEN    -PAINT IT BLACK     -MOTHERS LITTLE HELPER
 
Tomorrow i might find a few reasons moreLOLWink
And M.JAGGER still got voice!!!
 
 
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Alexandria Va.
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 26580
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 21:25
Originally posted by tszirmay

Talk of no contest. One of the main reasons I have loved prog is my profound 40 year distaste for the Stones , a group of thugs, profiteers and non-musicians (I repeat NON-MUSICIANS)  that cater to ultra primitive innuendoes that aren't even clever.


disregard my earlier PM LOLLOLLOLWink
"The question is who are you to say you know what's best for the team, and you work 9 to 5 at Mcdonalds"

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4493889&categoryid=2850689

Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Alexandria Va.
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 26580
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 21:28
no talent  .. pfffff. hahhahahhaha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeuvdBMVdPg



all jokes aside... a frickin KILLER song....
"The question is who are you to say you know what's best for the team, and you work 9 to 5 at Mcdonalds"

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4493889&categoryid=2850689

Back to Top
tszirmay View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Symphonic Team

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2260
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 21:35
Originally posted by febus

Hey Thomas what is going on with the STONES?LOL

If the Stones cannot compare with the BEATLES, there are for tonight    15 reasons i like the STONES at least until 1973/74
 
-GIMME SHELTER           -MIDNIGHT RAMBLER---         - LADY JANE        -STICKY FINGERS
-EXILE ON MAIN STREET     -SHE'S A RAINBOW        -SYMPATHY FOR THE DEVIL      -AS TEARS GO BY
- WE LOVE YOU       -JUMPIN JACK FLASH        -YOU CAN'T GET ALWAYS .........       -RUBY TUESDAY
-HONKY TONK WOMEN    -PAINT IT BLACK     -MOTHERS LITTLE HELPER
 
Tomorrow i might find a few reasons moreLOLWink
And M.JAGGER still got voice!!!
 
 
They are my pet peeve I guess!  All of the above songs (save one I think)  are pre-Let it Bleed, no? If so, my point is well taken, they have been riding "Rolling Stone" wave of propaganda and have not made anything remotely cohesive since. They have sold out 35 years ago and still mega stars! Go figure.  I am sorry if I offended anyone but i have been waiting a while to get the.......Monkey.........off my back
"Secret career in counter-espionage, covering his fear in clever camouflage" Robert Calvert .Pretentiousness is valid only if there is no talent!    Thomas
Back to Top
Dominic View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 02 2008
Location: Liberation Land
Online Status: Online
Posts: 528
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 21:37
The Beatles by far...
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Alexandria Va.
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 26580
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 21:40
did someone say Monkey....LOL

ooooooohhhh yeah....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU5VQSdZoco

"The question is who are you to say you know what's best for the team, and you work 9 to 5 at Mcdonalds"

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4493889&categoryid=2850689

Back to Top
Sacred 22 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 24 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1434
Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 19 2008 at 22:58
Oh The Beatles, a band that was heavily groomed much like the Monkees were. I think much of what the Beatles allegedly wrote was way over their heads considering they started out as a basic blues band and then out of no where they started spinning out hit after hit. They did not even own the rights to 'their' music. The music was owned by a fellow by the name of Theodor Adorno who was incidentally a composer by the way. Paul McCartney had the chance to buy the music but Michael Jackson out bided him for it. I don't know about you, but if I was the composer of my music and someone else owned the rights to that music, I would do anything in my power to get it back unless of course I never wrote the music in the first place......Stern%20Smile
 
That leaves the Stones then.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.53
Copyright ©2001-2008 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.093 seconds.