Post by PrinceCaspian on May 28, 2004 21:44:49 GMT -5
Both rock hard and paved the way for rockers-to-be, but the beatles were the first, and they were probably more important than we'll ever know. My dad can't see this post though. (he's been to 30+ stones shows)
Post by aquariumdrunk on May 29, 2004 1:55:36 GMT -5
(he's been to 30+ stones shows)
your dad is a god. ;D
i've yet to have the "beatles or stones" test fail on me for feeling out a person. the vast majority of my friends can pick one or the other, and each group is loved for different reasons...i find it a freakin' riot to sort out!
I have heard some pretty trippy live stones tunes, I have this 2000 light years from home->sympathy for the devil that blows my mind....but for songwriting, melodies, harmonies, overall omnipotence, I have to go with the Beatles every time. The Stones are the most successful bar band in history, and there is hardly a song I don't enjoy, but the fab 4 are on a different level altogether...
Post by paulgermain on May 30, 2004 17:09:20 GMT -5
stones = bite beatles = kiss
yeah the stones are definitly rawer and keith is probably the biggest bad as$ of all time. i don't you put the beatles three masterpieces of revolver, rubber soul, and the white album up against teh stones let it bleed, beggers and sticky fingers and you got a brawl. but for pure song writing i guess i have to side with the boys from liverpool.