Welcome to Tactical Gamer

View Poll Results: Who is better in your opinion?

Voters
60. You may not vote on this poll

  • The Beatles

    44 73.33%

  • The Rolling Stones

    16 26.67%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 42
Discussion: General Forums / General Discussion - Who is better? - Beatles lyrics sounded like they were written by a five year old. I seem to
  1. 06-21-2009, 04:47 AM #16
    alexandermottram
    alexandermottram is offline

    alexandermottram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    158

    Re: Who is better?

    Beatles lyrics sounded like they were written by a five year old. I seem to be one of the few people in the world, but I find them truly dull and uninspiring. Rolling Stones are good, (I can't get no, and You Can't Always Get What You Want) but some of their songs a a bit unimaginative as well.
    Before you judge a man, try walking a mile in their shoes first. That way your a mile away and you have their shoes.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    2.  
  2. 06-21-2009, 10:25 AM #17
    westyfield
    westyfield is offline

    westyfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bath / Southampton, UK
    Posts
    2,715
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Who is better?

    Voted Stones, cause Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds makes me want to kill something. I'm not a huge fan of either, both have good and bad songs, but I prefer the musical style of the Rolling Stones.
    |TG-Irr| westyfield

    Sig pic by Sonic, avatar by Chalcas. Thanks!
    Irregular since 2007.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    3.  
  3. 06-21-2009, 11:39 AM #18
    Trooper
    Trooper is offline

    Trooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Age
    29
    Posts
    9,329

    Re: Who is better?

    Quote Originally Posted by alexandermottram View Post
    Beatles lyrics sounded like they were written by a five year old. I seem to be one of the few people in the world, but I find them truly dull and uninspiring. Rolling Stones are good, (I can't get no, and You Can't Always Get What You Want) but some of their songs a a bit unimaginative as well.
    when you compare them to other bands of the day this is completely true. I just so sick of hearing the same 5 "good" beatles songs over and over. Compare them to Zeplin Beach boys the doors and other bands of that time frame, they just dont compare.
    that sounds like a good idea trooper.
    -Vulcan
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    4.  

     
  4. 06-21-2009, 11:43 AM #19
    Capt Splendid
    Capt Splendid is offline

    Capt Splendid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Indy-ish.
    Age
    24
    Posts
    81

    Re: Who is better?

    I just feel like the Beatles did more for not just rock but music as a whole.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    5.  
  5. 06-21-2009, 12:07 PM #20
    alexandermottram
    alexandermottram is offline

    alexandermottram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    158

    Re: Who is better?

    I just feel like the Beatles did more for not just rock but music as a whole.
    What? That is quite a big statement to make, people knew about music before the Beatles, the Beatles never ventured into classical, jazz, early RnB. I mean it's not like they made more people listen to music, if they weren't there people would have been listening to other things. They were just a band when it comes to it.
    Before you judge a man, try walking a mile in their shoes first. That way your a mile away and you have their shoes.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    6.  
  6. 06-21-2009, 12:24 PM #21
    CingularDuality
    CingularDuality is offline

    CingularDuality's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dallas/Ft. Worth area of Texas, USA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    18,761

    Re: Who is better?

    Quote Originally Posted by alexandermottram View Post
    What? That is quite a big statement to make, people knew about music before the Beatles, the Beatles never ventured into classical, jazz, early RnB. I mean it's not like they made more people listen to music, if they weren't there people would have been listening to other things. They were just a band when it comes to it.
    I voted for The Beatles precisely because of this. There were other popular music artists, but none had the influence on the way we listen to music like The Beatles had... The innovations in the studio, their willingness to sample, the idea of looping music, unique microphone placement, melding traditional music (string quartet?) with rock, providing videos with their audio releases, all in addition to their international rockstar status that has them at the top of many, many charts. Without The Beatles there would be no Pink Floyd, there would be no rap, there would be no modern bubblegum pop crap (it can be argued that this would be a good thing...). The Beatles may have been just a band, but they were a band that made lots of incredible advances in music. Sure, you could say that it was simply luck that put them in a place to take advantage of technological evolution, but, then, we could say that about anyone that's ever been successful, no?

    I sure prefer to listen to the Stones, but The Beatles are undoubtedly better when it comes to their influence on the music that you and I listen to today.
    Become a supporting member!
     Buy a Tactical Duck!
    Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
    TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    7.  

     
  7. 06-21-2009, 07:34 PM #22
    alexandermottram
    alexandermottram is offline

    alexandermottram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    158

    Re: Who is better?

    Sorry you think the Beatles were there first to have string quartets in their music. I may have had six pints atm, and have to rely on spell check, but the Beatles were not the first to use string quartets or rap within their songs that is utter nonsense.
    Before you judge a man, try walking a mile in their shoes first. That way your a mile away and you have their shoes.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    8.  
  8. 06-21-2009, 08:21 PM #23
    Birdman1011395
    Birdman1011395 is offline

    Birdman1011395's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Age
    24
    Posts
    278

    Re: Who is better?

    The British Invasion started with The Beatles, so there. XP

    Oh, and yes it would've a much harder choice if Pink Floyd was there (even with The Final Cut ).
    BF 2142:|TG| Birdman10113
    CoD4: |TG|Birdman

    Let's put the badges here...
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    9.  
  9. 06-21-2009, 10:27 PM #24
    CingularDuality
    CingularDuality is offline

    CingularDuality's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dallas/Ft. Worth area of Texas, USA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    18,761

    Re: Who is better?

    Quote Originally Posted by alexandermottram View Post
    Sorry you think the Beatles were there first to have string quartets in their music. I may have had six pints atm, and have to rely on spell check, but the Beatles were not the first to use string quartets or rap within their songs that is utter nonsense.
    I never said they were the first. Henry Ford didn't make the first car. But they put things together to revolutionize their industries.
    Become a supporting member!
     Buy a Tactical Duck!
    Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
    TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    10.  

     
  10. 06-22-2009, 07:32 AM #25
    alexandermottram
    alexandermottram is offline

    alexandermottram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    158

    Re: Who is better?

    The music industry was built up before the Beatles, and they did not introduce any new recording techniques that wouldn't have been without them, they aren't even the top album selling band in the world, they are beaten by Michael Jackson. The didn't introduce any new instrumental techniques or anything similar.
    They are basically the first boy band thats all.
    Before you judge a man, try walking a mile in their shoes first. That way your a mile away and you have their shoes.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    11.  
  11. 06-22-2009, 01:06 PM #26
    Delta*RandyShugart*
    Delta*RandyShugart* is offline


    Delta*RandyShugart*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Good ol Suburbia in Southern Westchester County NY
    Posts
    6,091
    Blog Entries
    49

    Re: Who is better?

    I love the beatles when they rocked out, and before strawberry fields, and all that stuff, after that I can't stand them, but that is just my personal opinion.

    I voted for the Stones, because really no matter what, and how old they have gotten they have continually rocked out and stayed together (for the most part).
    Randy = Ace ! - Warlab






    Randy/Bob/Magnum
    RSS Feeds:Bamboo | |TG-31st| LR IHS Info | 9/11 - Never Forget |
    Apophis - "TG was created to cater to a VERY specific type of gamer rather than trying to appeal to the greater gaming population.
    Tactical Gamer is not mainstream.
    We are not trying to attract mainstream gamers."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    12.  
  12. 06-23-2009, 12:17 AM #27
    Hambergler
    Hambergler is offline

    Hambergler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    HTX
    Age
    37
    Posts
    1,708

    Re: Who is better?

    The Beatles did not revolutionize much. They were copying American music, like everyone else in England at the time. They were a boy band, but what makes them better then the Stones is their songwriting. I have never cared to listen to the Beatles themselves. They don't sound very diffrent from the Monkeys to me. However cover versions of their songs are incredible. One example: Joe Cockers - Little Help from My Friends at woodstock is far better then anything the stones have ever done.

    Here's an amazing list of artists who have covered the Beatles.
    http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~ratib/beatles/songs.htm

    All said and done. I prefer to listen to the Stones.

    As for recordings, any band with a good producer and a big budget is going to try to create a unique recording. Pink Floyd were far more innovative in this department from day one.

    I don't think Love Me Do or P.S. I Love You inspired Sid Barret and Roger Waters at all.

    Paul McCartney and rap music? I do not see a resemblance. Now James Brown.. YES
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    13.  

     
  13. 06-23-2009, 01:43 AM #28
    Shane
    Shane is offline

    Shane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    MARS
    Age
    36
    Posts
    521

    Re: Who is better?

    Beatles 1, Stones 2, Floyd 3. in that order than Milli Vanilli and MC hammer. LOL just kidding about the last 2.

    |TG-Irr| LG-99
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    14.  
  14. 06-23-2009, 04:54 AM #29
    alexandermottram
    alexandermottram is offline

    alexandermottram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    158

    Re: Who is better?

    I love MC Hammer!!!!
    Before you judge a man, try walking a mile in their shoes first. That way your a mile away and you have their shoes.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    15.  
  15. 06-23-2009, 06:45 AM #30
    CingularDuality
    CingularDuality is offline

    CingularDuality's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dallas/Ft. Worth area of Texas, USA
    Age
    37
    Posts
    18,761

    Re: Who is better?

    Quote Originally Posted by alexandermottram View Post
    The music industry was built up before the Beatles, and they did not introduce any new recording techniques that wouldn't have been without them...
    Quote Originally Posted by Hambergler View Post
    The Beatles did not revolutionize much.
    I'm sorry, but you are ignorant of what went on in The Beatles studio. They absolutely did things that had never been done before that EVERYONE does now. They absolutely revolutionized recorded music. The studio engineers are what made The Beatles what they became, and they completely changed the music industry because of it.
    Become a supporting member!
     Buy a Tactical Duck!
    Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
    TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    16.  

     
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Forum Rules



  
 

Back to top
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9
Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0


©2004-2011 - Tactical Industries, LLC - All Rights Reserved
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:13 AM.