Jump to content

Paul McCartney declares The Beatles are better than the Rolling Stones but says they 'admire each other'


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, macahoom said:

 

 

 

Yes, quite wrong!

 

To call the Beatles mods is hilarious. Nothing about them was remotely mod.

 

 

 

 

I rode a Triumph and liked the Beatles. In America though, so maybe I was a Mod. ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, sprq said:

Quite wrong. Neither the Beatles nor the Stones represented the mods or the rockers. They were both far above any such connections.

The Beatles and the Stones had no relation to the Mods and Rockers?

They certainly dressed and acted the parts in the early days.  Maybe it wasn't convincing enough for you and your mates.

His Satanic Majesty got a dose of reality at Altamont and things were never the same after that.

Incidentally, some of the posts on this thread sound like they come from brainwashed children whose cult leaders have been laughed at.

Edited by MisterTee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even my Thai wife 'quite likes' THe Beatles, but leaves the room when I play The Rolling Stones.

 

I love both of these bands, but I think the beatles have the edge on originality and pioneering sounds in their early days. There was nothing like it before, the Stones took inspiration from the great blues players when they started.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I saw that recently, enjoy!

 

We would like it not to stop at only 11 minutes ...
This is called a " boeuf " in France; a jam session;
the harmonica player is fantastic

 

I never met the beatles;
on the other hand had a nice discussion on a highway area with the Rolling Stones who were going down to the Cote d'Azur where they lived long enough;
they were on board several pink Rolls which initially overtook me at a fairly high speed while I was driving myself at the wheel of my Volvo F89 very above the speed authorized in France for this type of vehicle.

discussion in French, Mick Jeager speaking this language very well.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, JetsetBkk said:

" 'Keith [Richards] once said to me man you were lucky, you had four singers in your band. And he said we got one.' "

 

Ringo? A singer? ????

 

 

He has made several solo albums as well as singing on Beatles albums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, vogie said:

But surely that is purely subjective, Pete Townsend hits = 16

Paul McCartny = 119

Pete Townsend worth = £120 million.  Paul McCartney = 1.2 billion.

The Who were good, but in a different league to the Beatles, look at the evidence.

Commercial success is no indicator of the quality of music - you only have to look at the dross that's around today to see that. But I will agree that the Who were in a different league ????

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are looking at musical, vocal harmonies and individual vocal ability, then The Byrds were far better than the Beatles and Stones put together.

I saw Roger McGuinn in concert all by himself in a show in Glasgow. You could not pick any individual from the Beatles or Stones to perform alone like he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Phuketshrew said:

Commercial success is no indicator of the quality of music - you only have to look at the dross that's around today to see that. But I will agree that the Who were in a different league ????

"Commercial success" just means that more people liked their music, so maybe it should be used as an indicator. But I agree about the dross that's around today, just as my mother and father called our music rubbish and were totally absorbed in the likes of Dean Martin, Nat King Cole and the big bands that were around at the time. 

But at least we agree on the league connection, The Beatles were top of the Premier league and champions of Europe and even the world.........whilst The Who knew how to kick a ball.????????

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

When asked "Do you think Ringo is the best drummer in the world?" Lennon responded, NO. He's not even the best drummer in The Beatles. ????

No he didn't, that is a myth, but it would have been great if he had said it.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, giddyup said:

He has made several solo albums as well as singing on Beatles albums.

Yes, but that doesn't necessary make him a singer, I bet if you listened to Ringo singing by himself on stage with just guitars and his mike without the recording equipment, you might just get a shock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, possum1931 said:

Yes, but that doesn't necessary make him a singer, I bet if you listened to Ringo singing by himself on stage with just guitars and his mike without the recording equipment, you might just get a shock.

Are Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen "good singers"? They have their own styles, as does Ringo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, giddyup said:

Are Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen "good singers"? They have their own styles, as does Ringo.

No they are all bad, I went to see Dylan in Manchester when he toured, many people walked out because he was rubbish. He could pen a great song though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, vogie said:

No they are all bad, I went to see Dylan in Manchester when he toured, many people walked out because he was rubbish. He could pen a great song though.

They do the best with the voices they have and it's their musical compositions that stand out. I love them both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, giddyup said:

Are Bob Dylan or Leonard Cohen "good singers"? They have their own styles, as does Ringo.

True, but both Bob Dylan and Leonard Cohen were song writers first, never singers. In saying that, Lennon and McCartney were great songwriters, though they also wrote a lot of rubbish.

Great songs All My Loving, I'm a Loser, dreadful songs, Michelle, Get Back. Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, possum1931 said:

True, but both Bob Dylan and Leonard Cohen were song writers first, never singers. In saying that, Lennon and McCartney were great songwriters, though they also wrote a lot of rubbish.

Great songs All My Loving, I'm a Loser, dreadful songs, Michelle, Get Back. Just my opinion.

I will say that I doubt if Ringo would have ever sold one album but for his connection with the Beatles. However, I did have his first album many years ago, called "Photograph" from memory, and it wasn't too bad, but I think he had a "little help from his friends".

 

Edit: The album was just called "Ringo" and the song Photograph was the lead single.

Edited by giddyup
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








×
×
  • Create New...