The Beatles or the Rolling Stones ? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

The Quiet One View Drop Down

Prog Reviewer

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745

Posted: May 25 2008 at 19:11

My faves of The Beatles: Let it Be

                         Abbey Road
                         Sgt. Pepper...
                         Rubber Soul
                         The White Album

Fave Rolling: ...none...cofcof...

tszirmay

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6673

Posted: May 25 2008 at 19:05

I am truly and humbly honoured, Sire

Especially coming from such a classy rebel, may I return some clappies to you.

I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth.

micky

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833

Posted: May 25 2008 at 18:50

hahahha... I'll be watching my pot stirring for awhile.. yesterday it took the admins . .2 of them. .30 minutes and like 60 hidden posts to clean up the troll-pot I kicked over.

I do hereby anoint you...

Prince of Smartass

have some clappies Clap

The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip

tszirmay

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6673

Posted: May 25 2008 at 18:41

Hey, Micky, you see what happens when you stir the pot ? You once said that you are the King of Smartass, do you think I earned at least some small Princedom? Even though I am considered a Gentle sort, I couldn't help myself, certainly attempting provocation but this is a Prog site after all and only a few decided to fall into my trap of insulting me, instead of my comments . One did , one didn't , sort a like yin and yang , no? This eternal quest for supreme stupidity is exactly why "the more I analyze the human race, the more I love my dog" (quote from JJ Rousseau, masterful French philosopher). He was right, it was only rock "n roll, back then.

I have a great story about Gene Simmons of Kiss back in the 80s, BTW . Let me know if you tongue is long enough

I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth.

tszirmay

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: August 17 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6673

Posted: May 25 2008 at 18:25

A B Negative wrote:

tszirmay wrote:

Talk of no contest. One of the main reasons I have loved prog is my profound 40 year distaste for the Stones , a group of thugs,

Despite his songsof love and peace, Lennon could be a nasty piece of work, and McCartney was accused of violence by his recent ex-wife.

tszirmay wrote:

profiteers

Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and the family of George Harrison are worth more than £1 billion, the Stones have a combined wealth of £570 million.

tszirmay wrote:

and non-musicians (I repeat NON-MUSICIANS)

Sounds like music to me (I repeat SOUNDS LIKE MUSIC TO ME).

tszirmay wrote:

that cater to ultra primitive innuendoes that aren't even clever.

I suppose all music should be about higher concerns (Please Please Me, I Want To Hold Your Hand etc)

tszirmay wrote:

Ape music and that is not even kind to monkeys (: They even had a song about themselves)

A lot of bands have autobiographical songs, some bands even have the same name as one of their songs (Bad Company, Iron Maiden, Motorhead etc). The Rolling Stones took their name from a song by Muddy Waters.

tszirmay wrote:

Their last decent album was with Brian Jones

You agree they have at least one decent album!

tszirmay wrote:

(but they drowned him!) .

You've got me there, I don't know any examples of Beatles committing murder.

tszirmay wrote:

Yuck , extremely overated , basic garbage . Even as a rock band , they suck stones. Gall bladder pain.I could go on for years with facts to back my disdain .

I'd like to hear some of these facts.

tszirmay wrote:

Oh well!

The Beatles on the other hand, exactly the polar opposite.

You are a clever guy, I must say (savvy and very cunning!)

. The oldest form of selective argumentation is to omit certain points to the benefit of critiquing others. Lawyers use this all the time, they teach it day 1 of law school. It's like going bound and gagged to face a judge.

I never said they always sucked, please remind yourself that I stated that AFTER "Let it Bleed" IMHO, they became quite soggy in terms of quality and have been profiteering ever since (AKA certain alliances with corporate powers) . I also mentioned rather clearly that Mick Taylor was the last real musician they had , when he left , it went deeper in the abyss. I don't like the Stones, I am allowed to express my thoughts. Yukorin , on the other hand , seems more weak in attacking me as opposed to my arguments. Language , you know.....You , Sir, have at least a modicum of class.

But read all I said, bile and all.

I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth.

micky

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46833

Posted: May 25 2008 at 18:17

God I love PA's...

The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip

tardis

Forum Senior Member

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Victoria, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 14378

Posted: May 25 2008 at 15:57

*covers my ears in horror*

I voted Beatles.

Yukorin

Forum Senior Member

Joined: November 21 2005
Location: Japan
Status: Offline
Points: 1589

Posted: May 25 2008 at 09:44

*edit. Was one over the eight last night...

Edited by Yukorin - May 26 2008 at 03:58

A B Negative View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: May 02 2006
Location: Methil Republic
Status: Offline
Points: 1594

Posted: May 25 2008 at 07:48

tszirmay wrote:

Talk of no contest. One of the main reasons I have loved prog is my profound 40 year distaste for the Stones , a group of thugs,

Despite his songsof love and peace, Lennon could be a nasty piece of work, and McCartney was accused of violence by his recent ex-wife.

tszirmay wrote:

profiteers

Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and the family of George Harrison are worth more than £1 billion, the Stones have a combined wealth of £570 million.

tszirmay wrote:

and non-musicians (I repeat NON-MUSICIANS)

Sounds like music to me (I repeat SOUNDS LIKE MUSIC TO ME).

tszirmay wrote:

that cater to ultra primitive innuendoes that aren't even clever.

I suppose all music should be about higher concerns (Please Please Me, I Want To Hold Your Hand etc)

tszirmay wrote:

Ape music and that is not even kind to monkeys (: They even had a song about themselves)

tszirmay wrote:

Their last decent album was with Brian Jones

You agree they have at least one decent album!

tszirmay wrote:

(but they drowned him!) .

You've got me there, I don't know any examples of Beatles committing murder.

tszirmay wrote:

Yuck , extremely overated , basic garbage . Even as a rock band , they suck stones. Gall bladder pain.I could go on for years with facts to back my disdain .

I'd like to hear some of these facts.

tszirmay wrote:

Oh well!

The Beatles on the other hand, exactly the polar opposite.

"The disgusting stink of a too-loud electric guitar.... Now, that's my idea of a good time."

NurseryCryme89 View Drop Down

Forum Groupie

Joined: February 07 2008
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 55

Posted: May 24 2008 at 22:33

tszirmay wrote:

Talk of no contest. One of the main reasons I have loved prog is my profound 40 year distaste for the Stones , a group of thugs, profiteers and non-musicians (I repeat NON-MUSICIANS) that cater to ultra primitive innuendoes that aren't even clever. Ape music and that is not even kind to monkeys (: They even had a song about themselves) Their last decent album was with Brian Jones (but they drowned him!) . Yuck , extremely overated , basic garbage . Even as a rock band , they suck stones. Gall bladder pain.I could go on for years with facts to back my disdain . Oh well!

The Beatles on the other hand, exactly the polar opposite.

haha~!

i dig what ye are sayin'

crimson87

Prog Reviewer

Joined: January 03 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 1818

Posted: May 24 2008 at 22:28

Both are amazing bands , I voted for the Stones because they are terribly underrated , OK they are not prog for sure , and the Beatles are WAY proggier.However nobody did rock and roll as pure as the Stones did

BroSpence

Forum Senior Member

Joined: March 05 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2614

Posted: May 24 2008 at 01:24

Sacred 22 wrote:

BroSpence wrote:

Sacred 22 wrote:

BroSpence wrote:

Sacred 22 wrote:

BroSpence wrote:

Sacred 22 wrote:

Here is a good read http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_committee300_04.htm

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. What a ridiculous, good read.

are you sure?

So very sure. Dr. John Coleman seems to be confused with his "information" in terms of it being factual, intelligent, and with its placement in time. It is also said that the Rolling Stones were also players in the little....whatever you want to call that rubbish.. Big%20smile

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident. -- Arthur Schopenhauer 1788-1860

Key word there being "truth".

That's it, you got it.

Indeed I do.

Prof.

Forum Senior Member

Joined: March 30 2008
Location: Canada, Eh
Status: Offline
Points: 183

Posted: May 23 2008 at 00:47

The Beatles only edge by a tiny bit.

Mainly because I am in love with The White Album(Clapton Is God).

Sacred 22

Forum Senior Member

Joined: March 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1509

Posted: May 22 2008 at 23:28

BroSpence wrote:

Sacred 22 wrote:

BroSpence wrote:

Sacred 22 wrote:

BroSpence wrote:

Sacred 22 wrote:

Here is a good read http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_committee300_04.htm

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. What a ridiculous, good read.

are you sure?

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident. -- Arthur Schopenhauer 1788-1860

Key word there being "truth".

That's it, you got it.

BroSpence

Forum Senior Member

Joined: March 05 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2614

Posted: May 22 2008 at 19:43

Sacred 22 wrote:

BroSpence wrote:

Sacred 22 wrote:

BroSpence wrote:

Sacred 22 wrote:

Here is a good read http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_committee300_04.htm

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. What a ridiculous, good read.

are you sure?

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident. -- Arthur Schopenhauer 1788-1860

Key word there being "truth".

Avantgardehead View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: December 29 2006
Location: Dublin, OH, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1170

Posted: May 22 2008 at 15:29

The Rolling Stones are way too inconsistent for me to enjoy. Their weird moments are so far apart and in little quantity compared to The Beatles.

Plus, The Beatles provide and all-around more pleasant experience.

http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian

The T

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493

Posted: May 22 2008 at 14:28

please... there's no contest here.. the boring, repetitive, one-lick-only Rolling Stones vs The Beatles, whose albums are so different and varied and who have some of the great songs ever?

laplace

Prog Reviewer

Joined: October 06 2005
Location: popupControl();
Status: Offline
Points: 7606

Posted: May 22 2008 at 12:54

Zargus wrote:

if you dont like RS you dont like rock n roll.

This I can attest to. Voted Beatles. o=)

Zargus

Forum Senior Member

Joined: May 08 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 3491

Posted: May 22 2008 at 10:43

Love em both of course, never understod why you have to shoose between em both made loades of great music. I culdent say you can ever get tierd of ither but the last year i been lisenting more to the stones so they get my vote, and anyone who slam the stones yust show the only thing that sucks is hes music tast. Or let me put it this way if you dont like RS you dont like rock n roll.

Edited by Zargus - May 22 2008 at 11:09

Atavachron View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65152

Posted: May 22 2008 at 03:07

Rocktopus wrote:

Mick Jagger's a fantastic vocalist and a frontman. Anyone seen him in Nic Roeg's Performance?

agreed, one of the best, his solo stuff is great too

Poll Question: B or RS
Poll Choice	Votes	Poll Statistics
Beatles	40	[78.43%]
Rolling Stones	11	[21.57%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted