Q Magazine Presents: The Beatles vs. The Rolling Stones

[Leo]

fake news

 

[version]

Leo also messaged me. He's just embarrassed.

 

[line b]

 

[line b]

disgusted by the results of this poll btw

 

[Corpsey]

I watched the first episode of that Rick Rubin/Paul McCartney thing on Disney+ last night. It was a fun watch, plenty of cringey moments of course. But what emerges very strongly in that episode is how unschooled the Beatles were in music when they started (and to this day, in fact, given that McCartney can't name the chord he learned from a jazz guitarist back in 1960 something and incorporated into "Michelle") – and how this was obviously one of the things that led them to make original music that broke the rules. It also could be what led them to make quite a few twee, embarrassing tunes that haterz use as a stick to beat them with.

Also led me to fondly reminisce on that time Quincy Jones said they were the worst musicians he'd ever seen

Quincy Jones: 'The Beatles were the worst musicians in the world'

Record producer takes swipes at the Beatles, the ‘machiavellian’ Michael Jackson, U2 and more

www.theguardian.com

 

[line b]

I watched the first episode of that Rick Rubin/Paul McCartney thing on Disney+ last night. It was a fun watch, plenty of cringey moments of course. But what emerges very strongly in that episode is how unschooled the Beatles were in music when they started (and to this day, in fact, given that McCartney can't name the chord he learned from a jazz guitarist back in 1960 something and incorporated into "Michelle") – and how this was obviously one of the things that led them to make original music that broke the rules. It also could be what led them to make quite a few twee, embarrassing tunes that haterz use as a stick to beat them with.

Also led me to fondly reminisce on that time Quincy Jones said they were the worst musicians he'd ever seen

Quincy Jones: 'The Beatles were the worst musicians in the world'

Record producer takes swipes at the Beatles, the ‘machiavellian’ Michael Jackson, U2 and more

www.theguardian.com

thats interesting because usually music made by non musicians doesn't feel like a warm cup of milk before bed time

 

[Corpsey]

Rock on dude

 

[Corpsey]

Makes me think though that the Beatles are a much more English band than the Rolling Stones.

(tongue in) Cheeky, self-effacing, comical, provincial, modest, genital-less etc etc.

Are the Stones more popular than the Beatles in the states?

 

[Corpsey]

The Stones are strutting, passionate, excessive, thrusting, grunting, dark, murderous

All the traits you find in the average American

 

[line b]

Rock on dude

 

[Corpsey]

When Paul McCartney in particular tries to "rock out" it's hilarious

Helter Skelter being the only example of this I can actually summon to mind

Weird that it was the beatles that inspired Manson. You'd think The Stones were a shoe in for that.

 

[line b]

Makes me think though that the Beatles are a much more English band than the Rolling Stones.

(tongue in) Cheeky, self-effacing, comical, provincial, modest, genital-less etc etc.

Are the Stones more popular than the Beatles in the states?

I believe the Stones began as a cover band of american blues. I do like the cuts you get of 'english' music they attempt though

I feel like the stones are much more comic than the beatles, but to your point thats probably not entirely intentional like the beatles humor.

The beatles are much more popular here Id say

 

[Corpsey]

It's kind of sad (though probably healthy) when what was once considered cool and life affirming becomes utterly uncool and laughable.

I guess you're now seeing this with successive waves of rap music too? The 80s stuff has seemed quaint for some time now and now the 90s stuff which was once absolutely sacrosanct is laughed at for being "dusty".

But then perhaps the genuinely good stuff survives this effect (what I've termed the "time barrier" phenomenon).

 

[Corpsey]

And of course the beatles have a sort of "naivety" baked into them, as part of their appeal. Playing dress up, falling prey to all the pitfalls of the 60s, etc.

The Stones by contrast had that sort of "seen it all before" battered cynicism about things. Been there done that shagged the t-shirt.

 

[line b]

I guess you're now seeing this with successive waves of rap music too? The 80s stuff has seemed quaint for some time now and now the 90s stuff which was once absolutely sacrosanct is laughed at for being "dusty".

the 'dad rock' of hip hop

 

[Corpsey]

Yes it's the "time barrier" at work. And possibly also what I call "dematerialisation" - these things with the grain of the real world look older and older in our digital, dephysicalised world.

 

[rubberdingyrapids]

Makes me think though that the Beatles are a much more English band than the Rolling Stones.

(tongue in) Cheeky, self-effacing, comical, provincial, modest, genital-less etc etc.

Are the Stones more popular than the Beatles in the states?

stone always wanted to sound american.
beatles didnt.
ergo, beatles are better.
not cos its bad to sound american, but cos the beatles did it without sounding as silly as mick often does. and without the same sort of reverence. the beatles were more irreverent, and more 'british' in that sense?
the stones def have a great greatest hits compilation in them, but the beatles just had more complete albums that are worth listening to in their own right.

 

[...]

In the South The Stones, The Who and Cream are still loved the most of the British bands.

 

[Leo]

In the South The Stones, The Who and Cream are still loved the most of the British bands.

Cream! Often forget about them but they were huge. Were the Kinks too peculiar to make it into the top 3? I'd have thought they had more hits.

 

[line b]

Cream is by far the worst