Beatles/Rolling Stones...Early Years... - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > General Music
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-04-2012, 05:02 PM   #21 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,711
Default

Where do I get in line to berate a new member some more for his ignorant remark?
midnight rain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 05:32 PM   #22 (permalink)
Live by the Sword
 
Howard the Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,075
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ki View Post
Um...

short lived? What would you consider long lived and still relevant?
i think he means bands like The Who and Yes

(sarcasm ahoy!)
__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Virgin View Post
what? i don't understand you. farming is for vegetables, not for meat. if ou disagree with a farming practice, you disagree on a vegetable. unless you have a different definition of farming.
Howard the Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 06:34 PM   #23 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 15
Default

The stones lasting popularity can be attributed to the music that play. Although they were influenced by what was popular at a particular time, they primarily stuck to their roots of blues and rock and roll.

Although I'm a big fan of the Beatles, its primarily because they were great musicians. At one point they themselves realized that they drifted too far from their roots into pop ballads and such prompting them to "Get Back" where they belonged.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard the Duck View Post
i think he means bands like The Who and Yes

(sarcasm ahoy!)
No not hardly, I'm a big fan of the who but they don't compare to the stones. I did listen to Yes years ago, now that just history.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ki View Post
Um...

short lived? What would you consider long lived and still relevant?
Rolling Stones - years active - 1962–present

"Genres: Rock, blues, blues rock, rhythm and blues, rock and roll"

"On 23 May 2010, the re-issue of Exile on Main St. stormed at No. 1 in the UK charts, almost 38 years to the week after it first occupied that position"

In comparison
The Beatles - Years active 1960–1970

"Genres: Rock, pop"

Love, a remix album of music recorded by The Beatles, released in November 2006. "Love placed at #3 in the UK Albums Chart during its first week of release. It was also successful in the United States, debuting at #4 in the Billboard 200"

I did see Cirque du Soleil's "Love" in Las Vegas, an awesome performance.
RLLC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2012, 11:23 PM   #24 (permalink)
Your Ad Here
 
Electrophonic Tonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Twilight Zone
Posts: 876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RLLC View Post
Rolling Stones - years active - 1962–present

"Genres: Rock, blues, blues rock, rhythm and blues, rock and roll"

"On 23 May 2010, the re-issue of Exile on Main St. stormed at No. 1 in the UK charts, almost 38 years to the week after it first occupied that position"

In comparison
The Beatles - Years active 1960–1970

"Genres: Rock, pop"

Love, a remix album of music recorded by The Beatles, released in November 2006. "Love placed at #3 in the UK Albums Chart during its first week of release. It was also successful in the United States, debuting at #4 in the Billboard 200"

I did see Cirque du Soleil's "Love" in Las Vegas, an awesome performance.
I like how the Stones play so many sub-genres of rock, and the Beatles only play rock in general.

I'm not a fan of using record sales to show band greatness, but I'll give you home-thread advantage. If I remember correctly, the Beatles are the second highest selling artist of the 2000's (Eminem was #1). And they were the only non-active group in the top ten. What would you attribute that to?
Electrophonic Tonic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 12:05 AM   #25 (permalink)
carpe musicam
 
Neapolitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Les Barricades Mystérieuses
Posts: 7,710
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RLLC View Post
In comparison
The Beatles - Years active 1960–1970

"Genres: Rock, pop"
Wha...? The Beatles played plenty of sub-genres of Rock and other genres of music. If you only went on wikipedia you would know that they are responsible for things like Heavy Metal, Grunge and Space Rock among other things.

The Beatles played:
  • Avant Garde
  • Beat Music
  • Blues
  • Country
  • String Quartet
  • R&B/Motown
  • Rock and Roll
  • Rock
  • Hard Rock
  • Soft Rock
  • Blues Rock
  • Country Rock
  • Show Tunes Rock
  • Psychedelic Rock
  • Space Rock
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by mord View Post
Actually, I like you a lot, Nea. That's why I treat you like ****. It's the MB way.

"it counts in our hearts" ?ºº?
“I have nothing to offer anybody, except my own confusion.” Jack Kerouac.
“If one listens to the wrong kind of music, he will become the wrong kind of person.” Aristotle.
"If you tried to give Rock and Roll another name, you might call it 'Chuck Berry'." John Lennon
"I look for ambiguity when I'm writing because life is ambiguous." Keith Richards
Neapolitan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 12:17 AM   #26 (permalink)
Killed Laura Palmer
 
ThePhanastasio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ashland, KY
Posts: 1,679
Default

I personally prefer the Stones' output over their entire careers, but the later Beatles stuff eclipses pretty much any and all Stones stuff. In my eyes (ears?) anyway.
__________________

It's a hand-me-down, the thoughts are broken
Perhaps they're better left unsung
ThePhanastasio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 12:54 AM   #27 (permalink)
Key
.
 
Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 13,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan View Post
Wha...? The Beatles played plenty of sub-genres of Rock and other genres of music. If you only went on wikipedia you would know that they are responsible for things like Heavy Metal, Grunge and Space Rock among other things.

The Beatles played:
  • Avant Garde
  • Beat Music
  • Blues
  • Country
  • String Quartet
  • R&B/Motown
  • Rock and Roll
  • Rock
  • Hard Rock
  • Soft Rock
  • Blues Rock
  • Country Rock
  • Show Tunes Rock
  • Psychedelic Rock
  • Space Rock
To add to that, The Beatles were the pioneers of a large majority of the genres we listen to today. Evident from the genres you listed.

EDIT: I just read your post again and realized you had already stated that. My baaaaad.

Last edited by Key; 05-05-2012 at 01:02 AM.
Key is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 03:59 AM   #28 (permalink)
Horribly Creative
 
Unknown Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RLLC View Post
The stones lasting popularity can be attributed to the music that play. Although they were influenced by what was popular at a particular time, they primarily stuck to their roots of blues and rock and roll.

Although I'm a big fan of the Beatles, its primarily because they were great musicians. At one point they themselves realized that they drifted too far from their roots into pop ballads and such prompting them to "Get Back" where they belonged.
Just because a band sticks to its roots, again is no indicator of greatness.

The Rolling Stones actually got more accolades in the rock world as better musicians, the Beatles strength was with song writing and innovation.

As for that last bit that I've highlighted, you've really got all your facts wrong there. The Beatles greatness is largely due to their mid and later period creativity where they diversified into numerous styles. They could've never gone back to the basic pop sound that they were putting out earlier on in the 1960s, as by the end of the decade rock music had evolved SO MUCH. Bands like the Beatles, the Kinks and the Byrds had been highly influential in that evolution and 1967 was probably one of the most pivotal years in the history of rock, where diversity actually buried a lot of the more basic styles.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by eraser.time206 View Post
If you can't deal with the fact that there are 6+ billion people in the world and none of them think exactly the same that's not my problem. Just deal with it yourself or make actual conversation. This isn't a court and I'm not some poet or prophet that needs everything I say to be analytically critiqued.
Metal Wars

Power Metal

Pounding Decibels- A Hard and Heavy History
Unknown Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 04:36 AM   #29 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Rapping Community
Posts: 24,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ki View Post
To add to that, The Beatles were the pioneers of a large majority of the genres we listen to today. Evident from the genres you listed.

EDIT: I just read your post again and realized you had already stated that. My baaaaad.
I'm pretty sure his post was tongue-in-cheek.

They definitely were not "the pioneers of a large majority of the genres we listen to today". Jazz? Blues? Hip hop? Country? R&B? Reggae? Ska? Salsa? Classical? Show tunes? Opera? Bluegrass? Rockabilly? Electronica? Folk? Hardcore? Extreme metal? Avant-Garde? Sorry, but I don't see it. They drew influence from a few of those genres but they weren't the pioneers of them.
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 05:15 AM   #30 (permalink)
Key
.
 
Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 13,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon View Post
I'm pretty sure his post was tongue-in-cheek.

They definitely were not "the pioneers of a large majority of the genres we listen to today". Jazz? Blues? Hip hop? Country? R&B? Reggae? Ska? Salsa? Classical? Show tunes? Opera? Bluegrass? Rockabilly? Electronica? Folk? Hardcore? Extreme metal? Avant-Garde? Sorry, but I don't see it. They drew influence from a few of those genres but they weren't the pioneers of them.
Maybe pioneering wasn't the right phrasing, but The Beatles were responsible for taking genres to a whole new level.

There's a reason Sgt Pepper is one of the greatest albums of all time. They continued to bring their sound to new lengths, and that album alone was evidence of that.
Key is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.