10 Reasons Why The Rolling Stones Were Better Than The Beatles

Unknown Soldier · 05-05-2012, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

Will you two shut up about the bloody Who & Led Zeppelin.

Ok boss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Howard the Duck

never could get into solo George

Have you heard All Things Must Pass a triple album and great listen if you've got the time.

Howard the Duck · 05-05-2012, 06:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

Have you heard All Things Must Pass a triple album and great listen if you've got the time.

yes, i have it

the only side i like is "Apple Jams"

blastingas10 · 05-05-2012, 06:54 AM

Im not a huge fan of his solo career but he had some songs that were as good as some John or Paul songs

Zefer · 06-28-2012, 02:31 PM

Half of these are just your opinions, not valid reasons.

1) Not even close - Harrison tops him on that, and even then, he's far from the coolest himself. Ever heard of Hendrix by any chance?

2) John and Paul are more iconic though. The Beatles had the two best frontmen of all time, The Rolling Stones had one lesser frontman... you work it out!

3) Other: Pattie Boyd is the answer.

4) Your comparing The Beatles early catalogue to The Rolling Stones later catalogue. Guess what? The Beatles matured too. In fact, The Beatles wrote I Wanna Be Your Man for The Rolling Stones... what does that tell ya?

5) The Beatles' songs sold the albums, not the covers.

6) That wasn't The Beatles though, was it? Also John Lennon had some awesome solo work and most of George and Paul's were good too.

7) They didn't stop touring for that reason actually - it was cause the gigs were simply too chaotic and it limited artistic direction a lot, having to write things that would work in a live situation.

8) How is this relevant?

9) See above.

10) The Beatles were a much better looking and stylistic group... no one's gonna argue that!

Urban Hat€monger ? · 06-28-2012, 02:33 PM

Urban Hatemonger

Annoying Beatles fanboys since 2005

Burning Down · 06-28-2012, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

Urban Hatemonger

Annoying Beatles fanboys since 2005

Good job.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 06-28-2012, 03:06 PM

I love how this thread seems to get bumped every 3 months or so and It's always by people who never amass any more than 2 or 3 posts.

Unknown Soldier · 06-28-2012, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zefer

Half of these are just your opinions, not valid reasons.

1) Not even close - Harrison tops him on that, and even then, he's far from the coolest himself. Ever heard of Hendrix by any chance?

2) John and Paul are more iconic though. The Beatles had the two best frontmen of all time, The Rolling Stones had one lesser frontman... you work it out!

3) Other: Pattie Boyd is the answer.

4) Your comparing The Beatles early catalogue to The Rolling Stones later catalogue. Guess what? The Beatles matured too. In fact, The Beatles wrote I Wanna Be Your Man for The Rolling Stones... what does that tell ya?

5) The Beatles' songs sold the albums, not the covers.

6) That wasn't The Beatles though, was it? Also John Lennon had some awesome solo work and most of George and Paul's were good too.

7) They didn't stop touring for that reason actually - it was cause the gigs were simply too chaotic and it limited artistic direction a lot, having to write things that would work in a live situation.

8) How is this relevant?

9) See above.

10) The Beatles were a much better looking and stylistic group... no one's gonna argue that!

Its just a thread the provoke heated debate and not to be taken seriously, everybody on here really knows the Beatles were superior.

Urban Hat€monger ? · 06-28-2012, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier

everybody on here really knows the Beatles were superior.

You're funny

Unknown Soldier · 06-28-2012, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

You're funny

So are you, but that's a given on here.

06-28-2012, 02:33 PM	#435 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	Urban Hatemonger Annoying Beatles fanboys since 2005 __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.

06-28-2012, 03:06 PM	#437 (permalink)
Urban Hat€monger ? The Sexual Intellectual Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere cooler than you Posts: 18,605	I love how this thread seems to get bumped every 3 months or so and It's always by people who never amass any more than 2 or 3 posts. __________________ Urb's RYM Stuff Most people sell their soul to the devil, but the devil sells his soul to Nick Cave.

05-05-2012, 06:54 AM	#433 (permalink)
blastingas10 Music Addict Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,126	Im not a huge fan of his solo career but he had some songs that were as good as some John or Paul songs

06-28-2012, 02:31 PM	#434 (permalink)
Zefer Groupie Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Liverpool Posts: 7	Half of these are just your opinions, not valid reasons. 1) Not even close - Harrison tops him on that, and even then, he's far from the coolest himself. Ever heard of Hendrix by any chance? 2) John and Paul are more iconic though. The Beatles had the two best frontmen of all time, The Rolling Stones had one lesser frontman... you work it out! 3) Other: Pattie Boyd is the answer. 4) Your comparing The Beatles early catalogue to The Rolling Stones later catalogue. Guess what? The Beatles matured too. In fact, The Beatles wrote I Wanna Be Your Man for The Rolling Stones... what does that tell ya? 5) The Beatles' songs sold the albums, not the covers. 6) That wasn't The Beatles though, was it? Also John Lennon had some awesome solo work and most of George and Paul's were good too. 7) They didn't stop touring for that reason actually - it was cause the gigs were simply too chaotic and it limited artistic direction a lot, having to write things that would work in a live situation. 8) How is this relevant? 9) See above. 10) The Beatles were a much better looking and stylistic group... no one's gonna argue that!