Jump to content

Beatles Stones  

93 members have voted

  1. 1. Which is the better band



Recommended Posts

  • Replies 281
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Posted

thank god!

 

I'm not gonna deny that Gene is a marketing genius. He admits to this. William Shatner asked him what his favorite Kiss song was he said it was "Rock and Roll All Nite" Because it's the most popular, and it makes him the most money.

 

Keith is quite underrated as a rhythm guitarist. He's not gonna come out with any shredding solos like Jimmy Page or Eddie Van Halen, but as far as his simple catchy riffs, he's the best.

Posted

i know i am in a great minority, but i really do not like van halen the band, and feel even less for eddie van halen, no real good reason, but to me, evh had one riff and made a career out of it...i know i am oversimplifying it, just was NEVER a fan AT ALL.

 

Are you saying you're not a fan of EVH?

Posted

i know i am in a great minority, but i really do not like van halen the band, and feel even less for eddie van halen, no real good reason, but to me, evh had one riff and made a career out of it...i know i am oversimplifying it, just was NEVER a fan AT ALL.

 

I can understand not being a fan of the sound. I am, but realize it isn't for everybody. You can't deny that the members of the band are extremely talented though.

Posted

Details, please. Because everything Richards played was played generations before him. And the Stones had very little musical talent; talent isn't what Rock and Roll is about, though, so it didn't matter. The Beatles created their own genre and did it with an incredible amount of talent - mostly from Paul McCartney.

 

 

I think Mick is an excellent harp player and woodie is awful good on slide and pedal steel. Bill Wyman was a real strong bass player. Please

Yeah, but all the riffs are the brainchild of Keef. He's the leader of the band from a musical point. Even live, Charlie says that he follows Keith's beat.

 

 

You better go listen to some things again Woody has a huge influence on Riffs

Posted

Bashing Ringo is easy. He is an okay drummer. But saying Charlie W. is anything more than marginally better is just silly.

 

McCartney, alone, has more talent than the Stones put together. Keith Richards' riffs, while sweet to listen to, are far from original. Nearly everything the Beatles did, beginning with the Help! album was purely original.

 

Apples and oranges; Beatles were not a rock-n-roll band past 1965 or so. The Stones were Rock and Roll.

The Stones are, by design, simple music, therefore, Charlie's drumming is naturally gonna be simplistic. If you look up some of his non stones work, he has his own jazz band as well, he's much more talented than his work in the Stone's shows off.

Posted

I like their simple music then, also Chuck Berry

Rock and Roll was designed to be simple. That's why I like the simpler artists. I'm a HUGE Chuck Berry fan. Shook his hand once. Also, one band that's underappreciated is AC/DC. They're mistakenly labeled as heavy metal. But their really just hard rock. They're Chuck Berry/Little RIchard on steroids. Malcolm Young was a beast.

Posted

Rock and Roll was designed to be simple. That's why I like the simpler artists. I'm a HUGE Chuck Berry fan. Shook his hand once. Also, one band that's underappreciated is AC/DC. They're mistakenly labeled as heavy metal. But their really just hard rock. They're Chuck Berry/Little RIchard on steroids. Malcolm Young was a beast.

Agree here! Its what their music does to your head. By nodding or moving it

Posted

i know i am in a great minority, but i really do not like van halen the band, and feel even less for eddie van halen, no real good reason, but to me, evh had one riff and made a career out of it...i know i am oversimplifying it, just was NEVER a fan AT ALL.

 

 

I saw Van Halen twice for free (once in the front row) and wanted my money back!

 

Posted

When though? Van Hagar? And I've heard Diaomond Dave doesn't have it anymore.

 

1979 or 80. Diamond Dave was swilling "Jack Daniels" that I'm sure was iced tea, and telling us how he's going to teach Buffalo how to party and then come back next year and we'll do it. (Front row)

 

2004 with Sammy. From the front row of a luxury suite.

 

Posted

 

1979 or 80. Diamond Dave was swilling "Jack Daniels" that I'm sure was iced tea, and telling us how he's going to teach Buffalo how to party and then come back next year and we'll do it. (Front row)

 

2004 with Sammy. From the front row of a luxury suite.

 

Are really denying DLR's ability to consume toxins?

×
×
  • Create New...