Author Topic: Beatles or Stones?  (Read 2948 times)

Offline Brown Eyes

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,375
Beatles or Stones?
« on: September 12, 2007, 11:36:10 pm »


Hey Friends,

I thought this might be a fun poll.  I, myself, am a pretty devoted Stones fan.  I've seen them 3 times in concert and have a large portion of their large oeuvre in my CD collection, etc.  I admire the Beatles and recognize their contribution to music, etc.  But, honestly they're not really my taste by and large.

So, I voted for the Stones.   ;D
the world was asleep to our latent fuss - bowie

Offline dot-matrix

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 9,865
  • www.maleimagegallery.com ~Come Join Us~
Re: Beatles or Stones?
« Reply #1 on: September 13, 2007, 12:08:18 am »
I love them both but have just the tiniest preference for the Beatles  ::)  ;D  8)

Life is not a dress rehearsal

Offline David In Indy

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,447
  • You've Got Male
Re: Beatles or Stones?
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2007, 01:59:52 am »
I love them both too. Both are excellent musical groups and both bring back many childhood memories for me.  :D
Dogs have owners. Cats have staff.

moremojo

  • Guest
Re: Beatles or Stones?
« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2007, 02:34:50 am »
I love them both, and voted accordingly, but I do think the Beatles are more artistically accomplished overall and are historically more important. That said, the Stones have more songs that speak more deeply to my heart ("Fool to Cry", "Memory Motel") than the Beatles comparatively produced, but when they hit this nerve (e.g., "Blackbird"), they are among the most poignant emotional artists the rock genre has produced.

Offline serious crayons

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,985
Re: Beatles or Stones?
« Reply #4 on: September 18, 2007, 10:53:15 am »
Good idea for a poll, Bud! I really respect the Beatles for their influence and contribution to rock music. I'm not entirely sure even the Stones would be the same without the Beatles (at least, I think more this than the other way around). Every now and then -- I'm talking once in a decade or so -- I'll get in a Beatles mood and want to hear a bunch of their music.

But I've always been much more drawn to and interested in the Rolling Stones. I've been a huge Stones fan since high school. I can still get excited about old Stones songs.

Whereas the Beatles, aside from that once-a-decade-or-so thing, I can barely listen to now. Mostly because I've just heard all the songs way, way too often.

Another good question would be: Who's your favorite Stone? (Keith, for me.) Who's your favorite Beatle? (George.)






Offline ifyoucantfixit

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,049
Re: Beatles or Stones?
« Reply #5 on: September 18, 2007, 12:50:48 pm »



        Well I voted for both.  I find I am a mood music person..  Not to set a mood, but the music that I am in the mood to hear.. If I am in the mood for strong gutteral and soul raking music, I like to hear the Stones...If i am in the mood to be lightened up or feel silly, then I tend to listed to the Beatles.  So I think they make the right music for the right attitude, and combining the two makes the ability to grab exactly what you are searching for...



     Beautiful mind

Offline Brown Eyes

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,375
Re: Beatles or Stones?
« Reply #6 on: September 18, 2007, 07:53:17 pm »


Another good question would be: Who's your favorite Stone? (Keith, for me.) Who's your favorite Beatle? (George.)



Hey Bud!  I think these are great suggestions!  I think I'm going to start polls about both of these topics.  So, look for them here in Polling Place. And, of course I'll give you proper credit for the ideas!
8)

cheers!
Amanda
the world was asleep to our latent fuss - bowie

Offline Ellemeno

  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • ********
  • Posts: 15,367
Re: Beatles or Stones?
« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2007, 01:39:07 am »
To me (a Heathen), The Beatles are to Heath as The Stones are to Jake.  I mean, I keep up with Jake's career, but I don't go over every little interview for nuance, or have his wardrobe memorized.  :laugh:

Really, it's like there is a multi-leveled pantheon, and The Beatles are in the top (or maybe second tier).  The Rolling Stones are just one tier below, in a many-tiered pantheon.

BUT, as crayons just said, I have heard and heard and heard them Beatle songs, and rarely choose them to listen to (although this may largely be due to their music not being available on iTunes, since I don't own my LPs anymore).  I did download about 12 Stones songs from iTunes.  Which, you may ask?  :)


Offline serious crayons

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,985
Re: Beatles or Stones?
« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2007, 01:50:59 am »
Which, you may ask? 

Yes, I certainly do ask!

And after you reveal the answer, I'll see if I can list whatever my 12 favorite Stones songs would be. And my 12 favorite Beatles songs. And others can post theirs.

To me (a Heathen), The Beatles are to Heath as The Stones are to Jake.  I mean, I keep up with Jake's career, but I don't go over every little interview for nuance, or have his wardrobe memorized.  :laugh:

To me, and I know this isn't at all in the spirit of the analogy you were making (this is more about cultural archetypes than personal responses), the Beatles are to Tom Sawyer as the Stones are to Huck Finn. Or the Beatles are to Richie as the Stones are to Fonzie. (Or, to reeeaaally stretch it, the Beatles are to Mick as the Stones are to Keith; the Beatles are to Paul as the Stones are to John.). One is sort of the original basic form, without which the whole thing might not have existed. But the other is the cooler manifestation.



Offline Brown Eyes

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,375
Re: Beatles or Stones?
« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2007, 01:56:49 am »

To me, and I know this isn't at all in the spirit of the analogy you were making (this is more about cultural archetypes than personal responses), the Beatles are to Tom Sawyer as the Stones are to Huck Finn. Or the Beatles are to Richie as the Stones are to Fonzie. (Or, to reeeaaally stretch it, the Beatles are to Mick as the Stones are to Keith; the Beatles are to Paul as the Stones are to John.). One is sort of the original basic form, without which the whole thing might not have existed. But the other is the cooler manifestation.


 :o  Wow!  These are some serious and conceptual analogies.  8)

the world was asleep to our latent fuss - bowie