Unpopular opinions

[Hoddle is a god]

I saw them at Wembley around 1992 and they were brilliant. Even though it’s a huge arena and you lose all of the intimacy of a small venue they still sounded superb.

Mick Jagger who was probably in his early 50’s then was more energetic than a 25 year old.

I saw them in 1981 at Knebworth and they couldn't have been any worse.

I still think of Ronnie Wood as a complete and utter arsehole, as a result of that concert.

10CC was the support act, and they were brilliant.

 

[Chief]

Nothing to do with being edgy it's an opinion, I respect you don't agree with that opinion, but it's still my view.

I was being generic in what I said as I don't really think you said they were **** as such?

Plenty do though.

Oasis, fair enough. They are ****!

 

[NSIS]

I know you know your stuff - we can discount HiaG

That just leaves @NSIS - what was your view mate?

I’ve said it before, you have to take a lot of their music in the context of the time it was written.

It’s also true to say that without The Beatles it’s unlikely there would have been any Rolling Stones.

I guess you had to be there, but the Beatles literally revolutionized the world view of pop music,

 

[Hoddle is a god]

I’ve said it before, you have to take a lot of their music in the context of the time it was written.

It’s also true to say that without The Beatles it’s unlikely there would have been any Rolling Stones.

I guess you had to be there, but the Beatles literally revolutionized the world view of pop music,

Not so sure about that.

Both the Beatles and the Stones took their inspiration from black American artists. Both bands, for example, covered Chuck Berry songs during their formative years, before they were "discovered." The Stones continued down that road of influence ,whereas the Beatles met George Martin, and took a more structured and eclectic approach.

The Stones would still have emerged, even without the Beatles, in my opinion.

 

[armchairblue]

I saw them at Wembley around 1992 and they were brilliant. Even though it’s a huge arena and you lose all of the intimacy of a small venue they still sounded superb.

Mick Jagger who was probably in his early 50’s then was more energetic than a 25 year old.

If you're talking about 90 and not 92 thats when i saw them.Was the world cup year,i went the night
before we were done by the Gerries.At the time thought it may be their last tour.........

 

[PINKIE]

If you're talking about 90 and not 92 thats when i saw them.Was the world cup year,i went the night
before we were done by the Gerries.At the time thought it may be their last tour.........

It might have been 1990. I was going out with a maniacal half Iranian ballet dancer back then and I’ve tried to blank those years from my memory.

 

[Milk not bear jizz]

I think it weird when people say The Beatles were ****. It's as if it makes them uber edgy to say it.

The clearly weren't ****, they were brilliant and pioneers of their time. They also evolved into great musicians and were prolific in their output.

Rightly seen as one of the best bands.

Pretty much changed the direction of popular music and inspired dozens of wannabe bands in the 60's. Half the bands in the late 60's were trying to mimic the Beatles.

The reason they don't sound so great to many people today is... Well it's pushing on 60 year old music... There's not many things your grandma threw your knickers at that you would find inspiring... It's overplayed... And the reason it sounds generic and uninspired is everyone copied them for years later.

They've never been my favourite band, but they get respect from me.

 

[PINKIE]

There's not many things your grandma threw your knickers at that you would find inspiring

HIAG plays old 60’s covers precisely because old grannies throw their knickers at him.

 

[NSIS]

Not so sure about that.

Both the Beatles and the Stones took their inspiration from black American artists. Both bands, for example, covered Chuck Berry songs during their formative years, before they were "discovered." The Stones continued down that road of influence ,whereas the Beatles met George Martin, and took a more structured and eclectic approach.

The Stones would still have emerged, even without the Beatles, in my opinion.

The only reason anybody listened to that sort of music was because of the Brit bands, who basically reintroduced a deeply racially divided America to the music on their own doorstep.

Nobody in America gave a flying **** about British music until The Beatles woke them up. The others that followed, like the Stones, Animals, etc walked through a door that was opened for them by The Beatles.

 

[Archers Road]

I saw The Who about five or six years back.

Zac Starkey was on drums, he was pretty good actually.

Unfortunately, the sound system kept breaking down so the whole show was continually disrupted and a bit **** to be honest.

Charlatans supported, they were ok.

Yeah, that wasn’t The Who mate, sorry. Half of them were dead by then.

Just as Led Zep weren’t Led Zep without John Bonham.

 

[Hoddle is a god]

The only reason anybody listened to that sort of music was because of the Brit bands, who basically reintroduced a deeply racially divided America to the music on their own doorstep.

Nobody in America gave a flying **** about British music until The Beatles woke them up. The others that followed, like the Stones, Animals, etc walked through a door that was opened for them by The Beatles.

The Stones being "discovered" was not reliant on the Beatles - they ploughed their own musical field, a completely different type of music that was actually more suited to the American market.

The success of the Beatles gave opportunities to other British bands, for sure. Bands that followed down that sickly, poppy road, in imitation of the Beatles.

 

[NSIS]

The Stones being "discovered" was not reliant on the Beatles - the ploughed their own musical field, a completely different type of music that was actually more suited to the American market.

The success of the Beatles gave opportunities to other British bands, for sure. Bands that followed down that sickly, poppy road, in imitation of the Beatles.

Being discovered in America was. Without The Beatles there was no open door to the US.

 

[Hoddle is a god]

Being discovered in America was. Without The Beatles there was no open door to the US.

I don't accept that. That's all part of the over blown Beatles myth.

This idea that without the Beatles, British bands would have been **** in America.

Complete hogwash!

 

[thefanwithnoname]

I don't think Marilyn Munroe was all that

 

[NSIS]

I don't accept that. That's all part of the over blown Beatles myth.

This idea that without the Beatles, British bands would have been **** in America.

Complete hogwash!

Sorry mate, but you’re the one talking hogwash. I was there, I remember it. The Beatles opened the door to Brit bands for all the others.

Type of music has **** all to do with it. Nobody in America have a toss about Brit bands or artists before The Beatles opened the door for them all,.

 

[Hoddle is a god]

Sorry mate, but you’re the one talking hogwash. I was there...

It must be true, then.

You win.

 

[Archers Road]

Not so sure about that.

Both the Beatles and the Stones took their inspiration from black American artists. Both bands, for example, covered Chuck Berry songs during their formative years, before they were "discovered." The Stones continued down that road of influence ,whereas the Beatles met George Martin, and took a more structured and eclectic approach.

The Stones would still have emerged, even without the Beatles, in my opinion.

And The Stones spent their entire career imitating (extremely well, I’ll grant you) 50’s and 60’s blues, soul, and R&B. They were basically a brilliant Slim Harpo tribute act. They never moved on from that, despite writing their own material.

The Beatles reinvented themselves with every album they released. The White Album was a million miles from Please Please Me.

 

[NSIS]

It must be true, then.

You win.

It’s not a matter of winning. Just stating facts.

And as a matter of fact, one of The Stones’ earliest hits was ‘I wanna be your man’ written by......Lennon & McCartney.

 

[NSIS]

And The Stones spent their entire career imitating (extremely well, I’ll grant you) 50’s and 60’s blues, soul, and R&B. They were basically a brilliant Slim Harpo tribute act. They never moved on from that, despite writing their own material.

The Beatles reinvented themselves with every album they released. The White Album was a million miles from Please Please Me.

True.


That was later on, of course.

 

[Hoddle is a god]

And The Stones spent their entire career imitating (extremely well, I’ll grant you) 50’s and 60’s blues, soul, and R&B. They were basically a brilliant Slim Harpo tribute act. They never moved on from that, despite writing their own material.

The Beatles reinvented themselves with every album they released. The White Album was a million miles from Please Please Me.

Yeah, the Beatles were undoubtedly the more talented band, with better overall musicianship and song writing skills.

The Stones' heart and soul was was closer to real rhytmn and blues, than was that of the Beatles.

Each was a very different band .

I will not accept that the Stones won't have made it without the Beatles. That's bollocks.

It might have taken them longer, but they would still have made it.

Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Exile On Main Street, Sticky Fingers... these are all fantastic albums.