thebreakfast.info
General Discussions => Tribal Funk Affliction => Topic started by: Yoda on August 05, 2008, 12:57:01 pm
-
At least one person on the board isn\'t running around thinking I\'m a prick, I think...
-
I never said they suck. I just said that The Beatles are on a whole other level. Look back at my original statement - Listening to the rolling stones makes you see how good the beatles really are. No suckage comments there.
That being said wolf, if your "no band sucks" theory hold up, then there\'s a lot of people that owe springsteen an apology on this board.
You\'re right...if you go back, it was FRANKZAPPA who "fixed" Yoda\'s original post to say "the stones sucked ass"
-
I never said they suck. I just said that The Beatles are on a whole other level. Look back at my original statement - Listening to the rolling stones makes you see how good the beatles really are. No suckage comments there.
That being said wolf, if your "no band sucks" theory hold up, then there\'s a lot of people that owe springsteen an apology on this board.
-
Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers, Exile on Main St.
VS
Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, The White Album, Abbey Road
so after condensing this thread, i see that it is indeed a very tough decision.
i can;t identify with thinking this is an easy choice.
the beatles are one the best bands ev, no doubt. those abums right there are phenomenal
the stones just gots that bluesy **** going on. if you\'ve ever got into delta blues, the stones just does it grimey and with ser balls. all their old-school-blues covers are badass.
if you\'re not into delta blues, well ****. you\'re weird
-
First let me say:
A. To each his/her own.
B. You people are balls out freaking insane crazy.
I\'m not even a "huge" stones fan. But I know enough of their music to know you have to be deaf or ignorant not to understand and appreciate what a powerful and beautiful force the Stones have been on music for the last 50 freakin\' years.
The period from \'68 - \'72 produced 4 of rock\'s all time top masterpieces: Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers, Exile on Main St.
Oh, and Yoda what you really should do, before taking one more step in this world is the following:
1. Send your wife and child away for a fun weekend with Grandma & Grandpa.
2. Buy Exile on Main St., a bottle of fine booze, and a sack of fungus.
3. Throw that album on repeat
4. Eat the whole bag of fungus
5. Take large slugs of the fine booze as needed to help control the psychotic-mania
Then you sit back and allow Mick Jagger and Charlie Watts to take you on a journey that may be the only thing to save you and the rest us from this constant flood of MORONIC **** that flows from your head, to your keyboard, and across the airwaves to this site.
Great post Slim.
There\'s a long-running and unfortunate error that people make when discussing music: When someone does not enjoy a band\'s music, instead of saying, "I do not enjoy the music of {Band}" they instead say, "{Band} sucks". It\'s just plain unintelligent. Stating that a band of such documented accomplishment and universal acclaim as The Rolling Stones "sucks at playing music" is a statment that can only serve to bring down the stater\'s own credibility. The Rolling Stones cannot possibly suck at music any more than milk sucks as a beverage or soccer sucks as a sport or Nintendo sucks as a video game system. You may not like milk or soccer or Nintendo, but if that\'s the case then just say that, don\'t say that they suck, it doesn\'t make any sense.
So many times people say that a band they happen not to like "sucks". moe. sucks, Akon sucks, Girl Talk sucks, The Breakfast sucks, Paul Oakenfold sucks, now even The Rolling Stones suck. Um, no. You just don\'t like them. Here\'s a short list of musical acts that actually suck:
Smackin\' Vibes (my high school band)
The person singing karaoke at your local bar
William Hung
Now here\'s the freaky part: I enjoy all 3 of those acts, even though any sensible person would agree that they all suck. So if a band sucks but I like them anyways, would I say, "I do not enjoy that band." No, it would not make any sense for me to say that. Conversely, if a band is great but I don\'t like them anyways, does it make sense for me to say, "That band sucks" No, that makes no sense either and if I said it I would only be putting my own intellectual suckage on display.
Th Beatles vs The Stones....Zep vs The Who....Can we change the subject and talk about something a little less controversial?
:awaits the Lowdown vs. Appettite For Destruction thread: :rolleyes2
I\'m going to go start The Definitive Band Rivalry Throwdown Thread (http://thebreakfast.info/forum/showthread.php?p=198510#post198510)
-
Th Beatles vs The Stones....Zep vs The Who....Can we change the subject and talk about something a little less controversial?
:awaits the Lowdown vs. Appettite For Destruction thread: :rolleyes2
all I know is the guitar player is both bands suck.:)
-
Th Beatles vs The Stones....Zep vs The Who....Can we change the subject and talk about something a little less controversial?
:awaits the Lowdown vs. Appettite For Destruction thread: :rolleyes2
-
Yeah - I know, he\'s a god. I never got into him, but my brother and his wife swear by him, so I downloaded the Coachella show and I was enjoying it until I heard him ruin the Creep cover and I switched to something else on my iPod. Not sure if I want to spend another 2 hours listening to another show of his.
-
Plain and simple, for the most part, I don\'t like the music. Asking me to buy and listen to a RS album, would be like asking me to buy a Prince album and listen to it.
Whoa whoa whoa... no need to bring Prince into this!
-
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
I don\'t know why i felt the need to start reading your posts again, but you\'ve done a great job showing that you are a closed minded, humorless simpleton. Be gone with you...
Not everyone has to like all bands. I\'ve had over 20 years to digest TRS and it just isn\'t working. And yes, I may be humorless to you, I\'m not going anywhere.........................
Th Beatles vs The Stones....Zep vs The Who....Can we change the subject and talk about something a little less controversial?
How do you feel Jesus vs Alah??
With Buddy Christ on my side, how can I lose!
-
Th Beatles vs The Stones....Zep vs The Who....Can we change the subject and talk about something a little less controversial?
How do you feel Jesus vs Alah??
-
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
I don\'t know why i felt the need to start reading your posts again, but you\'ve done a great job showing that you are a closed minded, humorless simpleton. Be gone with you...
-
don\'t do it zuke....i don\'t want to have to start agreeing with the guy.
ok...only for the sake of not hijacking this ridiculous thread
i can\'t help it...
ooooverrrrrraaaaaaaated
clap clap clapclapclap
-
for that matter......keiths a better guitarist than either lennon or harrison and he wasn\'t as good as brian jones or mick taylor. mcartney isn\'t any better than bill wyman and just for posterity....i\'ll say that billy preston and nicky hopkins are a wash as well. while it\'s a good point about the beatles albums during that time, noone was questioning their abilities or status in rock and roll history, just the stones. oh....and.....let it be isnt far from terrible IMHO.
Whoa. You had me until you suggested that mccartney isn\'t any better than wyman. I am obligated to call shannanigans.
McCartney is objectively in a different galaxy in terms of technical skill (not to mention singing and songwriting).
At this point, we should probably start comparing the Who with Led Zeppelin: This, too, can go on infinitum.
-
don\'t do it zuke....i don\'t want to have to start agreeing with the guy.
-
As previously stated, I believe they have their place in rock history, just not as high up as The Beatles. That\'s my opinion.
Your weekend instructions won\'t work for me for multiple reasons - 1. I won\'t spend money on a stones album / 2. The fungus thing ain\'t gonna happen.
Plain and simple, for the most part, I don\'t like the music. Asking me to buy and listen to a RS album, would be like asking me to buy a Prince album and listen to it.
As for all the hype on their live shows, I saw them on the Voodoo Lounge tour because my dad couldn\'t make the show and I got his ticket. Sorry, but it did nothing for me.
I\'ve personally given this band a chance, they just aren\'t my cup of tea.
They are not on the same level as Elvis, The Beatles or Bob Dylan.
what the hell level is that? the level where overrated musicians hang out with the beatles
:banelvis: The King rules! And you\'re really going to knock Dylan, really?
-
They are not on the same level as Elvis, The Beatles or Bob Dylan.
what the hell level is that? the level where overrated musicians hang out with the beatles
-
i\'ll have to get home first to view that but i\'m cracking up just thinking about it.
-
great shot of freddie!
Actually there\'s video of Freddie here: http://www.monkeybriefs.com/view/video/Dog-Dreadlocks_85.html
-
great shot of freddie!
-
now that sounds like the voice of experience right there...
(https://thebreakfast.info/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi71.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi123%2Fthe-pooka-shell%2Fbuddy_jesus.jpg&hash=2051fcb7fb95b2418df898183c8a4cafccb26796)
-
now that sounds like the voice of experience right there...
-
And in a 5 year time period listed below, The Beatles gave us some gems of their own:
Help!, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, The White Album, Abbey Road and Let It Be.
Again, to each is own, but in my eyes, there is no comparison to the two.
You simply don\'t get it (see my weekend instructions for you... it\'ll help). Trying to compare these 2 bands is like trying to jerk off with your own feet. At first it may seem like a fun idea, but you quickly cramp up and then you never end up getting anywhere.
-
for that matter......keiths a better guitarist than either lennon or harrison and he wasn\'t as good as brian jones or mick taylor. mcartney isn\'t any better than bill wyman and just for posterity....i\'ll say that billy preston and nicky hopkins are a wash as well. while it\'s a good point about the beatles albums during that time, noone was questioning their abilities or status in rock and roll history, just the stones. oh....and.....let it be isnt far from terrible IMHO.
-
is ringo starr any better at drums than charlie watts? think about that.
-
How about giving them credit for originality. I know they copied the great blues artists but they took it somewhere new and original for their time creating a style that is still copied by many. Would we have the Black Crowes if the Stones never existed?
Ok...maybe they\'re not the most technical band out there but since when did great art have to use great technique? I saw Al Dimeola open for BB King at the Hollywood bowl 100 years ago...Dimeola is possibly one of the best technically gifted guitarists ever but when BB came out and played ONE...and I mean ONE NOTE...I got tears in my eyes. A far as a baby playing Charlie Watts....that\'s rough. To me he played no more or no less then what was needed. He can kick the **** out of big band music when he wants so skill isn\'t the issue. Great players only play what\'s needed...imagine ZZtop with Jaco instead of Dusty Hill....or Van Halen with Les Claypool instead of Michael Anthony. Neil Young used to have Nils Lofgren play piano because he knew nothing about it. He didn\'t want flash and technique, he wanted emotion.
I saw The Stones live and the show was one of the best I ever saw...Keith was sloppier then **** but that\'s what made it so great. All attitude........NOTES are overrated.
AND SLIM RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GREAT POINTS
-
And in a 5 year time period listed below, The Beatles gave us some gems of their own:
Help!, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, The White Album, Abbey Road and Let It Be.
Again, to each is own, but in my eyes, there is no comparison to the two.
-
right, Slim!
-
The period from \'68 - \'72 produced 4 of rock\'s all time top masterpieces: Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers, Exile on Main St.
what he said (particularly the first two IMHO)
-
First let me say:
A. To each his/her own.
B. You people are balls out freaking insane crazy.
I\'m not even a "huge" stones fan. But I know enough of their music to know you have to be deaf or ignorant not to understand and appreciate what a powerful and beautiful force the Stones have been on music for the last 50 freakin\' years.
The period from \'68 - \'72 produced 4 of rock\'s all time top masterpieces: Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers, Exile on Main St.
Oh, and Yoda what you really should do, before taking one more step in this world is the following:
1. Send your wife and child away for a fun weekend with Grandma & Grandpa.
2. Buy Exile on Main St., a bottle of fine booze, and a sack of fungus.
3. Throw that album on repeat
4. Eat the whole bag of fungus
5. Take large slugs of the fine booze as needed to help control the psychotic-mania
Then you sit back and allow Mick Jagger and Charlie Watts to take you on a journey that may be the only thing to save you and the rest us from this constant flood of MORONIC **** that flows from your head, to your keyboard, and across the airwaves to this site.
-
i love monkey man, loving cup i got into cause of phish but the stones version is sweet
-
wow...
off the top of my head, here\'s some tunes that you may not hear on the radio but i hope you enjoy...
child of the moon
soul survivor
jigsaw puzzle
stray cat blues
i don\'t know why
sister morphine
monkey man
tumbling dice
dancing with mr. d
slave
memo to turner
loving cup
live with me
citadel
2000 light years from home
she\'s like a rainbow
i don\'t know. i just feel this band right up from my gut. i guess you either feel em or you don\'t. personally, i don\'t feel the beatles at all. can barely stand listening to them, to be honest...
-
To me, it\'s the level of the music. But I also think that say, if you swapped Daltrey for Jagger, I might enjoy TRS more. For the most part, it\'s not the music, it\'s his voice.
But again, I think that The Beatles are on a higher level on all sides.
-
The disconnect here might be the use of the word "level." Level of what? Level of popularity? Level of live performance? Level of technical skill? Level of songwriting? Level of influence on other bands?
I think we might all agree that depending on what level you\'re talking about, the answer is going to change.
-
I think that part of the reason that I never got into TRS is because of the following reasons
- Jagger\'s voice does to my ears what a kidney stone would do...well you get my point.
- Their greatest hits cds are way too expensive ($20+ for 21 songs / lets get real)
- $72-$367 for a single ticket; I know a lot of bands charge hight prices now, but unless I\'m getting lower level seating, I\'m not paying $72 a ticket. That\'s why I was forced to be sidelined for the Bruce shows at GS. Artists are just getting greedier by the day.
- You could put a newborn baby behind the drum kit and he would do more than Watts does.
I do agree that the Stones deserve their place in R&R history. To me, they are on the same level as Led Zeppelin, The Who, The Doors, etc....
They are not on the same level as Elvis, The Beatles or Bob Dylan.
-
Not a huge fan but I would never use the word suck
I could condense their entire catalog to 2 cd\'s worth of awesome music I like.
-
I am not the hugest Stones fan, but i definitely have to put them up there and give them props. Their earlier work is truly foundation for many rock bands that followed. I think many people tend to only think of their horrible albums of the 80s to modern day.
My fav songs have always been Under my Thumb, Sympathy for the Devil, and Angie.
-
I don\'t like anchovies
-
Their catalog is HUGE so their is def. some **** in there. That said Exile is everything a rock album should be. The Mick Taylor years (1969-1974) produced their best material by far.
Someone once me that you can\'t truly understand the Beatles until you\'ve been in love. I agree.
I\'d like to add that you can\'t truly understand the Rolling Stones until you\'ve **** up your life from pure recklessness.
-
wow, i really don\'t get you people... but to each his/her own.
Ah, I \'m just trying to annoy dianna much like when I hugged her while wearing a youk jersey. I like a couple of the songs from the early 60\'s like off of my cloud and mothers little helper, but overall they just do nothing for me. I\'ve said it before, I could condense their entire catalog to 2 cd\'s worth of awesome music I like. The rest of it I could care less about.
-
Can\'t You Hear Me Knocking, Dead Flowers, Paint It Black, Gimme Shelter and thats not even scratching the surface.
!!!!!!!
i can\'t believe i\'m reading about the stones as being a band that "sucked".
wow.
-
Love Painted Black, but that\'s probably because it was in every Vietnam movie or tv show ever made - and that\'s all I watched as a kid. I personally don\'t hate them, I just can\'t stand Jagger\'s voice after 30 seconds. And I don\'t understand how people put them on the same level as The Beatles...it\'s not even close.
Paint It Black is a fantastic song, but Eric Burdon & the New Animals did the definitive version of it - they take it to planes the Stones couldn\'t even dream about.
I have to admit to liking a lot of the Stones\' hits, but the actual albums drag and Jagger\'s voice, as has been said, is irritating, so I\'ve never replaced any of my vinyl and cassette copies from 25 years ago, other than buying the greatest hits on CD.
Now the Pretty Things on the other hand, they were (and are) still all about real rock \'n\'roll and their antics in the day made the Stones look like the Take That of the r\'n\'b scene. Then, when they went psychedelic and produced \'SF Sorrow\' and then \'Parachute\', they eclipsed everything the Stones ever did. And to think that Dick Taylor left the Stones to go to college because he thought they weren\'t going anywhere... he may have lost the chance of fame and fortune, but at least retained his artistic integrity.
-
Love Painted Black, but that\'s probably because it was in every Vietnam movie or tv show ever made - and that\'s all I watched as a kid. I personally don\'t hate them, I just can\'t stand Jagger\'s voice after 30 seconds. And I don\'t understand how people put them on the same level as The Beatles...it\'s not even close.
-
The Stones kick ass. Granted, I love love love the Beatles, but the Stones are amazing as well.
Can\'t You Hear Me Knocking, Dead Flowers, Paint It Black, Gimme Shelter and thats not even scratching the surface. the Beatles are a pop band that got a little rock and rolly at times. the Stones are Rock and Roll personified.
-
love the stones!!
-
I was only a casual Stones fan until I saw them at their unannounced show at Toad\'s Place in the summer of 1989. Don\'t know what their energy is like these days, but at that show, I was schooled in how straight up rock should be played. Their feel and groove was spectacular and I gained heeps of respect for them.
Of course, I can understand why fans of high musicianship and technical skill would think they suck. They aren\'t skilled technicians. But, like Muddy Waters and John Lee Hooker, there\'s something to be said about the redeeming value of soul and feel. And Keith is saturated with it....
-
Rolling Stones Sucked ????
Wow. Just when I think I have .infoers figured out.
Their early stuff is great and Keith Richards is the man when it comes to writing really cool guitar riffs.
Not a huge fan but I would never use the word suck
-
wow, i really don\'t get you people... but to each his/her own.
wait, who said anything about transexuals?
-
wow, i really don\'t get you people... but to each his/her own.
-
As I stated previously somewhere, listening to the rolling stones make me remember how much the rolling stones sucked ass.
fixed.
Okay - I just just trying to be diplomatic, but... :that:
-
As I stated previously somewhere, listening to the rolling stones make me remember how much the rolling stones sucked ass.
fixed.
-
As I stated previously somewhere, listening to the rolling stones make me appreciate how good The Beatles were.
omg... don\'t get me started...
-
As I stated previously somewhere, listening to the rolling stones make me appreciate how good The Beatles were.