Author Topic: Beatles or Rollingstones  (Read 6548 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

neatahwanta

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
  • Respect: +1
Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #45 on: September 14, 2003, 10:08:22 AM »
0
Quote from: mogwai
i think rolling stones is the most overrated band ever. they wouldn't even exist if they met lennon and mccartney.


peas eggsplane

SoNowThen

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +9
    • 24/30 Cinema
Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #46 on: September 14, 2003, 10:36:03 AM »
0
Quote from: neatahwanta
If you have to actually choose, deserted island and all that, you have to say Beatles.

But the only real answer is "both".

If you're comparing Oasis to The Beatles, please poke your eardrums out with a sharp metal object because you will no longer be needing them....and I should know, because I heard Oasis open up for the Crowes' 4 times, and that was 3 times too many.  Bland, no energy, songs that sound all the same, and blokes who can't play their guitars even as well as Rich Robinson can.  (Rich is an average to below average player, and even he blew them away when the 2 guitar players came out for the blues jam at the end.)

And its not a matter of hating the brothers Gallager (spelling?), because they were actually pretty cool to their fans.


I saw them play with (not open for) the Crowes in Vegas.  I was in front row, and loved every second. When the Crowes came on I stood there mute until Noel walked back out for the encore. Rich looked hella unimpressed. I like the Crowes, but c'mon, Oasis songs are 100% better. Whatever you think of the band, most people would kill to have an album as fucking rocking as What's The Story. I like Oasis much more than the Beatles. Ha. Bring on the hate.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

moonshiner

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 279
  • Respect: 0
Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #47 on: September 14, 2003, 11:36:24 PM »
0
Quote from: P
interesting..


indeed
the rumble of the train trails off to infinity, a place where no one goes anymore

JC, no not that one

neatahwanta

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 321
  • Respect: +1
Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #48 on: September 15, 2003, 09:47:57 AM »
0
Quote from: SoNowThen
I like the Crowes, but c'mon, Oasis songs are 100% better. Whatever you think of the band, most people would kill to have an album as fucking rocking as What's The Story. I like Oasis much more than the Beatles. Ha. Bring on the hate.


The fact that you say you "like Oasis much more than The Beatles" makes any rebuttal mute....er...moot.

phil marlowe

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1437
  • Respect: +1
Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #49 on: September 15, 2003, 09:51:30 AM »
0
yeah oasis is indeed a shitty band and i have two of their albums so i know what i'm talking about. liam galagher though, is a very very funny man.

moonshiner

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 279
  • Respect: 0
Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #50 on: September 15, 2003, 01:12:24 PM »
0
now, comparing Oasis and the Beatles, that's apples and oranges.....
the rumble of the train trails off to infinity, a place where no one goes anymore

JC, no not that one

SoNowThen

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +9
    • 24/30 Cinema
Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #51 on: September 15, 2003, 01:19:57 PM »
0
Be Here Now


fucking great rock record.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

SiliasRuby

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
  • Spits Hyperbole Like Nobody's Business
  • Respect: +2
Re: Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #52 on: August 20, 2011, 10:03:56 AM »
0
I've been on a rolling stones kick. The Beatles I think were a more haromonious band and the rolling stones were the hardcore rockers. I love both but for the last two weeks I've been addicted to listening to stones record. Couldn't find a thread anywher else on the rolling stones here. Maybe I missed it but I wrote a small piece on my second favorite record that the stones ever put out. Tattoo You.

Tattoo You: The Last Great Stones Album
Anyone who knows me knows I'm a huge fan of the Rolling Stones. Behind the doors, Led zeppelin, they're my fav. band overall with the beatles and Third Eye Blind bring up the rear as far as my top 5 overall favorite bands go... (This doesn't include of course singer songwriters which have their own catagory).

Sure, now they are known as dinosaurs and trying to see the sexuality of Mick jagger now you would need at least a poud of LSD and a box of chocolate to do such a thing but in the time that this album was put up you could still see Mick as a sex object. That would certainly help tour sales.

The stones in the late 70's early 80's were falling apart, keith with his addiction and mick with his ego which is still as big as montana now. They weren't getting along and after the dismal response of Emotional Rescue and the mountain of bills they needed to go on tour again but they needed a album to tour with, as with most bands had to do those days.

So, an engineer started digging, scrounging through the rolling stones archives looking for gems and my god, did he find them. He presented them to the group (I forgot his name) and they accepted. Although some dubs had to happen for mick to sing over and some lyrics needed to be written for some other songs, the majority of the songs were done.

To be honest this is to me, the last great stones album overall (cohesively). After this they stones didn't really feel completely like themselves. Although, theres at least one or two tracks on each album after 'Tattoo you' that I love to death this is the last solid aIbum overall by mick and the gang that mattered where it didn't feel like they were going through the motions. It really works, for what it is, a collection of b sides and scrapes of songs that feel right. All of side one is really rocking with tracks like 'Hang Fire'. Side two is relaxing, extremely relaxing. So mellow I believe you could die of cancer with side 2 of this album playing the background and be okay with it, as okay as you can be when it comes to having cancer. Put on 'Heaven' right before you smoke a joint of medical mariquana that your doctor perscribed for your 'back pain' and you'll know what I'm talking about...

Sure, 'start me up' has been over played but if you want to introduce your child to the rolling stones but you don't know where to start dig into  areas: 1964-1973 (they were out of world in the late 60's though) and 1978-1981. Look at the discography and pick and choose which ones again if you like but this is a strong recommended album and it really is slowly becoming fav. 'sticky fingers' always beating it out in the last second.

Another under-rated stones album is goats head soup because it came out after the epic 'exile on main street' so its not as well known but also worth a listen but I digress.
The Beatles know Jesus Christ has returned to Earth and is in Los Angeles.

When you are getting fucked by the big corporations remember to use a condom.

There was a FISH in the perkalater!!!

My Collection

Reelist

  • Shoutbox Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2599
  • Respect: +967
Re: Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #53 on: August 20, 2011, 10:52:37 PM »
0
whats your favorite stone's song?? mines as tears go by.
You can go to places in the world with pudding. That. Is. Funny.

SiliasRuby

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
  • Spits Hyperbole Like Nobody's Business
  • Respect: +2
Re: Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #54 on: August 21, 2011, 02:15:11 AM »
0
Its 'Can't you hear me knocking?' From Sticky Fingers
The Beatles know Jesus Christ has returned to Earth and is in Los Angeles.

When you are getting fucked by the big corporations remember to use a condom.

There was a FISH in the perkalater!!!

My Collection

mogwai

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
  • Respect: +67
Re: Beatles or Rollingstones
« Reply #55 on: August 21, 2011, 02:46:38 AM »
0
My favorite is "Waiting on a friend".


 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy