Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Lifelong question:

The Breeze

By The Breeze
in The Gibson Lounge


Recommended Posts

jaxson50

jaxson50

Posted
Posted
Depending on the mood.

If I want to look at most influential and meaningful' date=' Beatles is the obvious choice, but if I want to let my hair down and mindlessly rock out STONES!

 

This is like the deep guy vs the hot guy.

You marry deep, you straddle hot.[/quote']

 

 

Thank God I'm a deeply hot guy....;) Other wise I'd say-----Get a motorcycle>>

Link to comment
Share on other sites
therookie_123

therookie_123

Posted
Posted

What happened to Zeppelin??? Haha. Im kidding. I Love the Beatles. But in terms of pure inspiration on guitar technique, Led Zeppelin is the best (for me). Plus alot of the Beatles' songs are like "Wow... what the hell did I just listen too?" like When Im 64 or Hello Goodbye (Which I both LOVE) That's just me. Their music sounds very dated to me, no matter how much someone tells me that The Beatles are timeless. But No Hate against the fab four!!! You have to be into that era of music to like their music. RIP John and George!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cookieman15061

cookieman15061

Posted
Posted
What happened to Zeppelin??? Haha. Im kidding. I Love the Beatles. But in terms of pure inspiration on guitar technique' date=' Led Zeppelin is the best (for me). Plus alot of the Beatles' songs are like "Wow... what the hell did I just listen too?" like When Im 64 or Hello Goodbye (Which I both LOVE) That's just me. Their music sounds very dated to me, no matter how much someone tells me that The Beatles are timeless. But No Hate against the fab four!!! You have to be into that era of music to like their music. RIP John and George!!!! [/quote']

 

Not true. My kids are big time Beatles fans as well as many of their friends.

 

They also love Sinatra and Beethoven.

 

Music is timeless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cookieman15061

cookieman15061

Posted
Posted

Thought it was a good time to repost this.[biggrin]

 

Ten reasons why the Beatles are better than the Stones

 

10. Paul is dead while Keith only looks like it.

9. It took 5 guys to make that awful noise, The Beatles only needed 4.

8. They never had a broadway show called stonemania.

7. Lead singer looks like Don Knotts.

6. Stole their name from some overrated music magazine.

5. Let it Bleed had nothing to do with Keifs liver.

4. Zipper never really worked right on my copy of Sticky Fingers.

3. Left out important ingredients for Goat's Head Soup.

2. Mick can't sing.

and the #1 reason.......

1. Yoko never stalked any of them. (Cue Late Night Band)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
milod

milod

Posted
Posted

Gotta kick out of the girls' response to this.

 

Sheesh. They never wudda said anything like that in mixed company when I was a "kid" - although as an old guy with lady friends my age, I now realize such stuff was spoken in girls-only venues.

 

The Stones followed more the tradition I saw in the 80s in Memphis' old Blues Alley and summa the old Chicago blues bands I saw in the 60s.

 

The Beatles followed more the Brit "Music Hall" tradition combining many music styles. Both at points got a bit experimental; the Beatles broke up and the Stones went back to more of what made them the Stones.

 

In ways, after the first cupla albums I'm not sure the Beatles were Rock at all, but more "pop" in many ways. I pick summa that stuff in a classical guitar style. The Beatles were Rock/Blues and I pick them like... rock and blues.

 

So... I look at the bands in two totally different ways: When they came out of England and now as a retrospective.

 

Both had neat stuff for an older teen, but I was playing different stuff and wasn't into either band as such.

 

Now... Both offer advice from the past, the Beatles to be experimental and not get too tied to a specific style and sound, and the Stones that roots rock always has a place for the foreseeable future - even among creasy-faced pickers. <grin>

 

I agree that which I'm likely to listen to or play depends on mood.

 

m

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Riffster

Riffster

Posted
Posted

This has always been a bad band comparison that has been kept alive somehow after all these years.

 

I don't see similarities except some blues and early rock (i.e. Chuck Berry) influence which everybody in England had at the time.

 

My favorite band of all times is the Beatles but I also like selected work of the Stones.

 

So I say both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Riffster

Riffster

Posted
Posted

Mmmh, I find the guitar work by the Beatles to be quite fantastic, I always wonder how those guys came up with those chord progressions (and those chords altogether) at a time when 3-5 chords was the norm.

 

The Stones are great but I think you are confusing the fact that Rock is not necessarily more sofisticated than Pop guitar wise.

 

To me the Beatles have a lot of Rock songs, I Saw Her Standing There is just an example, they actually wrote more Pop-ish songs to brek into America at the time.

 

If you are surprised search a past thread of "Favorite Band" and see how many have the Stones as #1

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky4

Rocky4

Posted
Posted
Mmmh' date=' I find the guitar work by the Beatles to be quite fantastic, I always wonder how those guys came up with those chord progressions (and those chords altogether) at a time when 3-5 chords was the norm.

 

The Stones are great but I think you are confusing the fact that Rock is not necessarily more sofisticated than Pop guitar wise.

 

To me the Beatles have a lot of Rock songs, I Saw Her Standing There is just an example, they actually wrote more Pop-ish songs to brek into America at the time.

 

If you are surprised search a past thread of "Favorite Band" and see how many have the Stones as #1

 

[/quote']

 

There is also the having to tune to a G to play the Stones properly.

 

I don't think being sophisticated makes anything better, or that one band is more than the other. I guess it's my perception of the two. When I think of the Beatles, I think of catchy songs. With the Stones, it's more bluesy rock, which I'm more apt to like.

 

I'm not knocking the Beatles. I've got tons in my collection. I just prefer Sticky Fingers to Revolver, which I think was voted the best rock album in history in some poll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flyingarmadillo

flyingarmadillo

Posted
Posted

I went with Beatles, but the early Stones were pretty good too, but from completely different roots. The Beatles always had roots in rock and country, while the Stones were always a blues band first - 12X5 was even recorded at Chess Studios in Chicago with Bo Diddley and Muddy Waters watching. The Beatles also influenced the Stones, while I don't remember much being said about the Stones influencing the Beatles. If I want more roots music it's the early Stones - for everything else the Beatles are better. I have the complete Beatles catalog on vinyl and CD (including most of the bootleg CDs), but my Stones collection stops at "Hot Rocks" (also vinyl and CD) with the exception of a promotional CD from the "Steel Wheelchairs" tour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Riffster

Riffster

Posted
Posted
There is also the having to tune to a G to play the Stones properly.

 

I don't think being sophisticated makes anything better' date=' or that one band is more than the other. I guess it's my perception of the two. When I think of the Beatles, I think of catchy songs. With the Stones, it's more bluesy rock, which I'm more apt to like.

 

I'm not knocking the Beatles. I've got tons in my collection. I just prefer Sticky Fingers to Revolver, which I think was voted the best rock album in history in some poll.[/quote']

 

Sure, my comment on sophistication was aimed to answer your comment about "what does that say about us as a guitar forum", the Beatles guitar work is impressive regardless of whether it is compared to the Stones or not.

 

You would also be surprised how many people pick the Stones just because they don't like the Beatles and not necessarily because they actually like the Stones.

 

I only know two persons or have heard of one whose favorite # 1 band is the Stones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...