Tell me it aint so

I hope one of the managers/agents got to smash the non-blonde non-bulldog... now she deserved a damn good portion but was pretty much as 'nobody' as the rest of them.

taipan wrote:

Jontyh wrote:I'd say The Beatles were more influential in terms of songwriting in a broader pop idiom and the Stones more influential in the r+b genre, which the Beatles pretty much left behind in '64, but the Stones remain with to this day.
Whichever you prefer the music we hear now wouldn't exist as it does without either band: they're both massive.

Fair comment Jon, but I might go further and say that the Stones would not have existed if it hadn't been for the Beatles.

Both the Beatles & the Stones deserve their own place in music evolution. The Stones came from a Blues background while the Beatles evolved from the Skiffle bands that eventually became the Mersey Sound.
Both these bands will be remembered long after the iPad generation bands are long gone.

Big Dog wrote:

taipan wrote:

Jontyh wrote:I'd say The Beatles were more influential in terms of songwriting in a broader pop idiom and the Stones more influential in the r+b genre, which the Beatles pretty much left behind in '64, but the Stones remain with to this day.
Whichever you prefer the music we hear now wouldn't exist as it does without either band: they're both massive.

Fair comment Jon, but I might go further and say that the Stones would not have existed if it hadn't been for the Beatles.

Both the Beatles & the Stones deserve their own place in music evolution. The Stones came from a Blues background while the Beatles evolved from the Skiffle bands that eventually became the Mersey Sound.
Both these bands will be remembered long after the iPad generation bands are long gone.

I wasn't talking about the musical evolution, more about the Beatles getting a recording contract which started Mersey Sound which led to promotors looking for a different "sound" from other cities. And then again the Beatles led the British Invasion.

It is still astonishing to think of the ongoing influence of the Beatles (and continued pulling power of Sir Paul - eg Diamond Jubilee) given they were only together for less than a decade and broke up 40 years ago.

JGK wrote:It is still astonishing to think of the ongoing influence of the Beatles (and continued pulling power of Sir Paul - eg Diamond Jubilee) given they were only together for less than a decade and broke up 40 years ago.

The Quarrymen started in 1956

Wrong thread.

It's true what you say, Taips - the Stones have acknowledged the Beatles as an inspiration, I think. My point was more about how they evolved and matured in different ways whilst both being hugely influential in songwriting, recording and performance. From a muzo's point of view both bands had a collective ability and quality that has become the Holy Grail ever since!

Jontyh wrote:It's true what you say, Taips - the Stones have acknowledged the Beatles as an inspiration, I think. My point was more about how they evolved and matured in different ways whilst both being hugely influential in songwriting, recording and performance. From a muzo's point of view both bands had a collective ability and quality that has become the Holy Grail ever since!

Fully agree. My only point is that without the Beatles initial breakthough I don"t think the Stones would have made it. They were viewed as the opposite of the Beatles. The bad boys band. Of course the Beatles had their dark side but it was hushed up.

Aye - a clever marketing ploy that was echoed in the '90s with the Blur/Oasis farce.
And probably on other occasions, though I can't bring any more to mind at the moment. Too early in the day - this should be a boozy conversation!

Jontyh wrote:Aye - a clever marketing ploy that was echoed in the '90s with the Blur/Oasis farce.
And probably on other occasions, though I can't bring any more to mind at the moment. Too early in the day - this should be a boozy conversation!

Would make for a good evening

This is next year's Glastonbury right? Are they actually playing Glastonbury then? Do you have a link? I've not seen anything in our press.

The Stones and Dylan - I could never get into them.

So, now you know.

Dello wrote:The Stones and Dylan - I could never get into them.

So, now you know.

F*cking rights!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Totally the same with me... I've tried and tried but my ears just say: "SHITMUNCHER!!!! F*CKING COCKMUNCHER!!!!".

Dello wrote:The Stones and Dylan - I could never get into them.

Me neither, until I hit 30 and they started to make sense.
Now I think The Stones are the greatest ever band, but that's middle age for you.

How could you not get into "Sympathy for the Devil"?

JGK wrote:How could you not get into "Sympathy for the Devil"?

I'm not very sympathetic.

I like the Stones, I used to like the Beatles when I was younger (they are basically the first boy band really, 3 minute throwaway pop songs for the most part (I do realise that's not all they did though)), but I will never get Bob Dylan. He is alright at writing songs as I like a few covers of his songs but his voice is atrocious. But we've had that discussion.

vilkrang wrote:I like the Stones, I used to like the Beatles when I was younger (they are basically the first boy band really, 3 minute throwaway pop songs for the most part (I do realise that's not all they did though)), but I will never get Bob Dylan. He is alright at writing songs as I like a few covers of his songs but his voice is atrocious. But we've had that discussion.

The Shadows?

I'm racking my brains to think of Stones and Beatles songs I like. Still racking... maybe Jumping Jack Flash, maybe Strawberry Fields.. meh.

The Kinks - wellll 25-30 tunes

JGK wrote:How could you not get into "Sympathy for the Devil"?

Or Sister Morphine, Start Me Up, Wild Horses, Brown Sugar, Tumbling Dice, Angie, Dead Flowers, Under My Thumb, Gimme Shelter..?
I'd give my left testicle to have written any of those.

Jontyh wrote:

JGK wrote:How could you not get into "Sympathy for the Devil"?

Or Sister Morphine, Start Me Up, Wild Horses, Brown Sugar, Tumbling Dice, Angie, Dead Flowers, Under My Thumb, Gimme Shelter..?
I'd give my left testicle to have written any of those.

It's like someone's continually smashing my knees with a lump hammer and I'm just not feeling it.

vilkrang wrote:I like the Stones, I used to like the Beatles when I was younger (they are basically the first boy band really, 3 minute throwaway pop songs for the most part (I do realise that's not all they did though)), but I will never get Bob Dylan. He is alright at writing songs as I like a few covers of his songs but his voice is atrocious. But we've had that discussion.

Dylan's greatness is obviously his songwriting with the collateral advantage of being the first to record and perform his greatest songs. Let's face it, he has spawned some of the great cover versions of all time.

Also, I used to find Dylan unlistenable but in the last year or two I have started listening to his early stuff which I have to say can be freaking amazing.

Brass Monkey wrote: maybe Strawberry Fields...

Candy Flip destroyed any possible future enjoyment of that song.

Gimme Shelter and Paint it Black are my favourite two Stones songs, f*cking epic.

vilkrang wrote:Gimme Shelter and Paint it Black are my favourite two Stones songs, f*cking epic.

Aye.