Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Tom Ozric
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2005
Location: Olympus Mons
Status: Offline
Points: 15926
|
Posted: January 18 2014 at 00:56 |
I'll give my vote to the Stones. I enjoy more of their output than Beatles'. I'll admit though, that the Beatles were mainly just the 4 of them, Stones best material (67-76 - IMHO) relied on lots of outside help. I still have more Stones LP's than Beatles, and listen to Jagger & his mates, more than Macca and his mates.
|
 |
Man With Hat
Collaborator
Jazz-Rock/Fusion/Canterbury Team
Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 166183
|
Posted: January 18 2014 at 00:28 |
I see two of the same.
The Beatles.
|
Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
|
 |
Triceratopsoil
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016
|
Posted: January 17 2014 at 23:52 |
Never been a Stones fan
|
 |
uduwudu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 17 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2603
|
Posted: January 17 2014 at 22:50 |
Stones. Plenty of good songs the best were usually the singles. Bit more simple than the Beatles but highly effective. Both are actually quite good C and W bands (first Ringo's lot pre -Rubber Soul, then Keith's outfit around Beggar's Banquet.
Still don't see the relationship between Pepper and Satanic Majesties. A Day In The Life is the best number off both though. Courageous effort though from The Stones and a very accomplished one with a little help from their friend George Martin. Probably prefer Pepper overall but like The Beatles the best efforts were the contemporary but non LP singles (We Love You and Strawberry Fields).
Still around Abbey Road time there was Let It Bleed and both are fine albums. Shame The Beatles couldn't have continued performing - the concert stage return was the stimulus The Stones needed along with a bunch of top albums. Still some of the the solo Beatles records (Imagine, All Things and Band On The Run) give the Strolling Bones a run for their money. But The Stones played, wrote songs, recorded and kept going in a musical world (rock and pop) that does not require progression (change).
That game was all over around 1973 - '74 really.
|
 |
smartpatrol
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 15 2012
Location: My Bedroom
Status: Offline
Points: 14169
|
Posted: January 17 2014 at 22:32 |
The Beatles, easily; everything they did was gold. The Rolling Stones are beyond overrated; a decent band at their best.
|
 |
Lynx33
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 28 2008
Location: Hungary
Status: Offline
Points: 500
|
Posted: January 17 2014 at 22:21 |
Bands listed and not listed in the PA database but often regarded, cross-referenced and linked together. Which one do you prefer?
|
Mindez elmúlt. Ma már tudom köszönteni a szépséget.
|
 |
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.