I'm surprised the Eagles haven't at least gotten a mention.
For me probably Pink Floyd.
There's only a handful of songs that when they come on the radio
I still have to turn up the volume just like when I was a teenager...
Hotel California- Eagles
Time- Pink Floyd
Blinded by the light- Manfred Mann
Aqua Lung- Jethro Tull
Maybe a few others depending on how old I feel when it comes on the radio.
1960's The Beatles
1970's Led Zeppelin
1980's sucked but I'll go Talking Heads
1990's Nirvana
2000's The White Stripes
Did, the thread may be closed now that this is settled
m
There was a ton of great stuff in the 80's, you just had to look for it beyond the radio or MTV (unless you watched 120 Minutes), or you weren't the type who only listened to the "white guys play the blues" bands of the 60's and 70's or generic bands like the Eagles.
To some of us, Nirvana (while all talented musicians) did little more than fuse what Greg Sage and Pixies were already doing (even though most people think they reinvented the wheel), but that's because very few people know who Greg Sage is (most all of the Seattle bands on that era certainly did). But even a band like The Church was a great band.
#LetsGoSwitzerlandThe Man Who Does Not Read Has No Advantage Over the Man Who Cannot Read. The biggest obstacle to progress is a habit of “buying what we want and begging for what we need.”You get the Freedom you fight for and get the Oppression you deserve.
@lanemeyer85 I lived in Detroit and I ruled the 80's ; ) Rock as I knew it almost died in the 80's. I have nothing against 80's music it's just rock as I viewed it was weak. Hair bands, Bon Jovi, Def Leppard, Whitesnake, Journey, R.E.M just didn't do it for me. AC/DC and Van Halen I associate with 70's. Metallica and Guns and Roses meh. I just find it the weakest decade of rock.
The Pixies I have their complete catalog
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@Justacommeman said: @lanemeyer85 I lived in Detroit and I ruled the 80's ; ) Rock as I knew it almost died in the 80's. I have nothing against 80's music it's just rock as I viewed it was weak. Hair bands, Bon Jovi, Def Leppard, Whitesnake, Journey, R.E.M just didn't do it for me. AC/DC and Van Halen I associate with 70's. Metallica and Guns and Roses meh. I just find it the weakest decade of rock.
The Pixies I have their complete catalog
m
nothing weak about Sonic Youth, Fugazi, The Replacements or Husker Du. But yeah, just one's preference. I'm a 90's kid, but the late 70's to 1991 will always be my era of most interest. To me, it's a much better era than the 70's mainly because I find most (popular) music of the 70's boring, overproduced and generic (including post-Syd Barrett PInk Floyd and anything solo Clapton did), aside from the last part of the decade, with some of the unique punk bands like Television and Richard Hell and Wire and that kind of stuff. But the whole "post-punk" or DIY sound or however you want to describe it, is my preference.
Started in the late 70's with bands like Wire and Magazine, PiL, etc, and then on to even early u2, and some of my favorite bands like New Model Army, Chameleons UK, Mission of Burma, For Against etc. Instead of all the bands that were influenced by the Beatles and Stones, you had bands that went the other way playing off of the Velvet Underground and Iggy & The Stooges. Then you had the indie labels springing up in the 80's so there was a much wider variety of music other than the Beatles and Stones clones or all that generic 70's garbage like Boston or any band named after a city or state, and it was often regional so you had to hunt the stuff down. A lot of things changed in the 80's that way. And that era to around 1991 was really the last point in time actual ground was being broken musically or artistically (bands got to control their music more post 70's) aside from DIY recording technology getting galactically better in the early 2000's.
I hear you lanemeyer85. Jams, too each is own. Love every band you referenced regardless
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
A lot of great bands mentioned in this thread. I listen to most genres. Well known bands and obscure. As I have mentioned before, my favorite band is Modest Mouse. However, that is really pre 2002 Modest Mouse. Do not care for their change in direction. But they are a band few know.
I get you @lanemyer85 . Though my favorite music was mostly made in the 90s.
I remember buying The Black Album when it first came out, one of greatest albums ever. This is my favorite, it's James Hetfield's most personal song on The Black Album and it's about his childhood turmoil and struggles in life.
oh yeah, there's nothing wrong with the 90's either, but aside from what My Bloody Valentine were doing, or if you were into Trip Hop, what Massive Attack were doing basically creating their own subgenre, it's not quite as interesting as what was going on in the early days of the 80's indie world. I wasn't much for the Pearl Jams and Soundgardens and that ilk, but I also don't hate that stuff either. I can recognize what Pearl Jam is good at even though I just largely think of them as my generation's Springsteen/E Street Band, which I don't really care for. I can't stand the Chili Peppers, primarily because of Kiedis, but I also recognize that Flea is probably the most talented musician of this or potentially any era. Arguably the greatest bassist of all time, and reportedly Miles Davis-level-great on the trumpet, in addition to being proficient on 20+ different instruments, and Frusciante and (drummer Chad Smith) are both really good in isolation, but the Chili Peppers' music does absolutely nothing for me. So I kind of think of the popular stuff from the 90's in that way. It's not that it's terrible, a lot of it just isn't for me.
But Fugazi, Sonic Youth, some of Pavement and Slint, then more stripped down stuff like the Red House Painters, Guided By Voices and Game Theory (by the by people, Scott Miller is the best songwriter you've never heard of) and that type of stuff is the stuff I get into. Also a big Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds fan. But yeah, I listen to everything from Townes Van Zant to the Pogues to Tribe Called Quest to even some newish electronic/downbeat stuff like Tycho. I also cover some real estate when it comes to music.
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
The forum is a better place when lanemyer85 is posting
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@Justacommeman said:
The forum is a better place when lanemyer85 is posting
m
Yeah but its almost embarrassing to admit I like bands that are actually well known when he's posting.
I've never heard of roughly 100% of the bands he mentioned.
I don't care for bands like Poison, Guns and Roses, Metallica, Whitesnake and several others.
Play one of their songs and I'd probably have to guess which band it is. I agree they're generic, generically loud.
But I don't understand why he thinks Pink Floyd is generic post Syd Barrett. They turned into a great band
after his tragic demise. Play a Pink Floyd song and you're not playing a game of guess the band. You know who it is.
It isn't a mistake that Dark side of the moon is the best selling album ever.
But agree with you lanemyer's posts are a great read, really enjoy them also.
As head nerd of the forum I feel its my duty to list a few of the bands I liked in my teens and early twenties.
First and foremost- Styx.
Night Ranger.
.38 Special.
Loverboy.
Huey Lewis and the News.
Asia.
REO speedwagon.
Kansas. Of course
And I still have the cassettes from them and several more to prove it.
Confession- I still like those bands even in my fifties.
@Justacommeman said:
The forum is a better place when lanemyer85 is posting
m
Yeah but its almost embarrassing to admit I like bands that are actually well known when he's posting.
I've never heard of roughly 100% of the bands he mentioned.
I don't care for bands like Poison, Guns and Roses, Metallica, Whitesnake and several others.
Play one of their songs and I'd probably have to guess which band it is. I agree they're generic, generically loud.
But I don't understand why he thinks Pink Floyd is generic post Syd Barrett. They turned into a great band
after his tragic demise. Play a Pink Floyd song and you're not playing a game of guess the band. You know who it is.
It isn't a mistake that Dark side of the moon is the best selling album ever.
But agree with you lanemyer's posts are a great read, really enjoy them also.
Generic probably wasn't the right word, but in general, I find post-Barrett Floyd boring, and some of that has to do with how albums were recorded back then. All of the majors had their own in house producers and engineers so that's why so much of the music from the 70's sounded the same. Overproduced, glossy, formulaic etc. They're not a terrible band or anything, I just preferred the early psyche-experimental/garage-y Floyd. Don't know a ton about their background, but I'm guessing sometime in 68 or 69 they got their hands on a Silver Apples album.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
Eh, I think just about every major band have been accused of copying other artists. The Beatles copied many other artists as well.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
Eh, I think just about every major band have been accused of copying other artists. The Beatles copied many other artists as well.
Buddy Holly was a big influence on Paul McCartney. Chuck Berry was a big influence on Keith Richards.> @coolstanley said:
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
Eh, I think just about every major band have been accused of copying other artists. The Beatles copied many other artists as well.
Buddy Holly was a big influence on Paul McCartney. Chuck Berry was a big influence on Keith Richards. The Beatles albums were a big influence on the Rolling Stones albums.
That's how a particular era of the top bands are remembered most - by their albums.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
Scroll to 0:50 Lennon states how the Rolling Stones "imitates" the Beatles.
LOL nope, just because he said that doesn’t make it true
The problem with your comment is I've heard other musical historians agree with Lennon. It's really not a debatable point.
I've never heard Jagger or Richards refute what Lennon stated. They didn't refute it because it's fact.
@JoeBanzai said:
Can't speak to a lot of these bands in this regard, but has anyone ever tried to play a Beatles song on the guitar?
Geez, most of them have 10 different chords, and a lot of unusual ones. Complex music that sounds simple.
Equate that not only to the genius of the Beatles, but that of George Martin as well. He is often known as the fifth Beatle, and even the four Beatles acknowledge that.
Martin was not only a phenomenal music producer, but he had an amazing ear for hit music.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
Scroll to 0:50 Lennon states how the Rolling Stones "imitates" the Beatles.
LOL nope, just because he said that doesn’t make it true
The problem with your comment is I've heard other musical historians agree with Lennon. It's really not a debatable point.
I've never heard Jagger or Richards refute what Lennon stated. They didn't refute it because it's fact.
Anything is debatable Steve, I’ve read plenty of stuff on The Rolling Stones, Keith Richards rubbed a few people the wrong way over the years, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes, there are many agendas by many different people. We can agree to disagree or you can think I’m flat out wrong, I don’t really care either way. Your still a good guy in my book 🍻
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
Scroll to 0:50 Lennon states how the Rolling Stones "imitates" the Beatles.
LOL nope, just because he said that doesn’t make it true
The problem with your comment is I've heard other musical historians agree with Lennon. It's really not a debatable point.
I've never heard Jagger or Richards refute what Lennon stated. They didn't refute it because it's fact.
Anything is debatable Steve, I’ve read plenty of stuff on The Rolling Stones, Keith Richards rubbed a few people the wrong way over the years, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes, there are many agendas by many different people. We can agree to disagree or you can think I’m flat out wrong, I don’t really care either way. Your still a good guy in my book 🍻
The Beatles actually gave away one of their early hit songs to the Rolling Stones. "I Wanna Be Your Man" was given to the Rolling Stones and they gladly took it.
I stated earlier that the Rolling Stones are a great rock band simply because they are. I don't consider them copying the Beatles albums as any sort of gross insult. If I was a musician trying to record a hit album and make money back then, I would have done the same thing...copy a successful album. Just not enough copying to get sued over it.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
Scroll to 0:50 Lennon states how the Rolling Stones "imitates" the Beatles.
LOL nope, just because he said that doesn’t make it true
The problem with your comment is I've heard other musical historians agree with Lennon. It's really not a debatable point.
I've never heard Jagger or Richards refute what Lennon stated. They didn't refute it because it's fact.
Anything is debatable Steve, I’ve read plenty of stuff on The Rolling Stones, Keith Richards rubbed a few people the wrong way over the years, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes, there are many agendas by many different people. We can agree to disagree or you can think I’m flat out wrong, I don’t really care either way. Your still a good guy in my book 🍻
The Beatles actually gave away one of their early hit songs to the Rolling Stones. "I Wanna Be Your Man" was given to the Rolling Stones and they gladly took it.
I stated earlier that the Rolling Stones are a great rock band simply because they are. I don't consider them copying the Beatles albums as any sort of gross insult. If I was a musician trying to record a hit album and make money back then, I would have done the same thing...copy a successful album. Just not enough copying to get sued over it.
You mean like The Beach Boys did to Chuck Berry? They were basically Weird Al Yankovic, surf style, in their early days of playing new lyrics over Chuck Berry licks…
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
Scroll to 0:50 Lennon states how the Rolling Stones "imitates" the Beatles.
LOL nope, just because he said that doesn’t make it true
The problem with your comment is I've heard other musical historians agree with Lennon. It's really not a debatable point.
I've never heard Jagger or Richards refute what Lennon stated. They didn't refute it because it's fact.
Anything is debatable Steve, I’ve read plenty of stuff on The Rolling Stones, Keith Richards rubbed a few people the wrong way over the years, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes, there are many agendas by many different people. We can agree to disagree or you can think I’m flat out wrong, I don’t really care either way. Your still a good guy in my book 🍻
The Beatles actually gave away one of their early hit songs to the Rolling Stones. "I Wanna Be Your Man" was given to the Rolling Stones and they gladly took it.
I stated earlier that the Rolling Stones are a great rock band simply because they are. I don't consider them copying the Beatles albums as any sort of gross insult. If I was a musician trying to record a hit album and make money back then, I would have done the same thing...copy a successful album. Just not enough copying to get sued over it.
They absolutely did remakes of a few songs, of course they were always better versions once the Stones were done with it, but their best music was all Rolling Stones and putting their longevity and amount of quality music up against the Beatles is surely not debatable since the Stones are far better in both categories.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
Scroll to 0:50 Lennon states how the Rolling Stones "imitates" the Beatles.
LOL nope, just because he said that doesn’t make it true
The problem with your comment is I've heard other musical historians agree with Lennon. It's really not a debatable point.
I've never heard Jagger or Richards refute what Lennon stated. They didn't refute it because it's fact.
Anything is debatable Steve, I’ve read plenty of stuff on The Rolling Stones, Keith Richards rubbed a few people the wrong way over the years, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes, there are many agendas by many different people. We can agree to disagree or you can think I’m flat out wrong, I don’t really care either way. Your still a good guy in my book 🍻
The Beatles actually gave away one of their early hit songs to the Rolling Stones. "I Wanna Be Your Man" was given to the Rolling Stones and they gladly took it.
I stated earlier that the Rolling Stones are a great rock band simply because they are. I don't consider them copying the Beatles albums as any sort of gross insult. If I was a musician trying to record a hit album and make money back then, I would have done the same thing...copy a successful album. Just not enough copying to get sued over it.
You mean like The Beach Boys did to Chuck Berry? They were basically Weird Al Yankovic, surf style, in their early days of playing new lyrics over Chuck Berry licks…
The funny thing about the Beach Boys is that only one of them, I forget which one, actually ever surfed.
Of course the lifestyle of surfing was the subject in a number of their songs. One of them meant it, the other ones just faked it. LOL
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
Scroll to 0:50 Lennon states how the Rolling Stones "imitates" the Beatles.
LOL nope, just because he said that doesn’t make it true
The problem with your comment is I've heard other musical historians agree with Lennon. It's really not a debatable point.
I've never heard Jagger or Richards refute what Lennon stated. They didn't refute it because it's fact.
Anything is debatable Steve, I’ve read plenty of stuff on The Rolling Stones, Keith Richards rubbed a few people the wrong way over the years, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes, there are many agendas by many different people. We can agree to disagree or you can think I’m flat out wrong, I don’t really care either way. Your still a good guy in my book 🍻
The Beatles actually gave away one of their early hit songs to the Rolling Stones. "I Wanna Be Your Man" was given to the Rolling Stones and they gladly took it.
I stated earlier that the Rolling Stones are a great rock band simply because they are. I don't consider them copying the Beatles albums as any sort of gross insult. If I was a musician trying to record a hit album and make money back then, I would have done the same thing...copy a successful album. Just not enough copying to get sued over it.
They absolutely did remakes of a few songs, of course they were always better versions once the Stones were done with it, but their best music was all Rolling Stones and putting their longevity and amount of quality music up against the Beatles is surely not debatable since the Stones are far better in both categories.
I actually like the Stones much more than the Beatles. Sticky Fingers is one of my favorite albums of all time.
That being said, the Beatles are the GOAT, not only over the Stones, but every other rock band.
@Hydrant said:
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
Scroll to 0:50 Lennon states how the Rolling Stones "imitates" the Beatles.
LOL nope, just because he said that doesn’t make it true
The problem with your comment is I've heard other musical historians agree with Lennon. It's really not a debatable point.
I've never heard Jagger or Richards refute what Lennon stated. They didn't refute it because it's fact.
Anything is debatable Steve, I’ve read plenty of stuff on The Rolling Stones, Keith Richards rubbed a few people the wrong way over the years, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes, there are many agendas by many different people. We can agree to disagree or you can think I’m flat out wrong, I don’t really care either way. Your still a good guy in my book 🍻
The Beatles actually gave away one of their early hit songs to the Rolling Stones. "I Wanna Be Your Man" was given to the Rolling Stones and they gladly took it.
I stated earlier that the Rolling Stones are a great rock band simply because they are. I don't consider them copying the Beatles albums as any sort of gross insult. If I was a musician trying to record a hit album and make money back then, I would have done the same thing...copy a successful album. Just not enough copying to get sued over it.
They absolutely did remakes of a few songs, of course they were always better versions once the Stones were done with it, but their best music was all Rolling Stones and putting their longevity and amount of quality music up against the Beatles is surely not debatable since the Stones are far better in both categories.
I actually like the Stones much more than the Beatles. Sticky Fingers is one of my favorite albums of all time.
That being said, the Beatles are the GOAT, not only over the Stones, but every other rock band.
Well I’m siding with Double D’s wife and saying the Stones are the GOAT
Comments
This one is a classic from the 80s.
This is my wife's favorite AC/DC song.
I also love Offspring, this is my favorite.
Some of my favorite bands:
Pink Floyd
The Who
ZZ Top
AC/DC
Van Halen
Rush
Led Zeppelin
Aerosmith
Queen
Steve
Another classic.
Took these pics from 6 rows back from the stage on Van Halen's last tour. These are from the 2012 Palace of Auburn Hills show. RIP Eddie.
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
I'm surprised the Eagles haven't at least gotten a mention.
For me probably Pink Floyd.
There's only a handful of songs that when they come on the radio
I still have to turn up the volume just like when I was a teenager...
Hotel California- Eagles
Time- Pink Floyd
Blinded by the light- Manfred Mann
Aqua Lung- Jethro Tull
Maybe a few others depending on how old I feel when it comes on the radio.
And 80's.
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
These guys were cool.
There was a ton of great stuff in the 80's, you just had to look for it beyond the radio or MTV (unless you watched 120 Minutes), or you weren't the type who only listened to the "white guys play the blues" bands of the 60's and 70's or generic bands like the Eagles.
To some of us, Nirvana (while all talented musicians) did little more than fuse what Greg Sage and Pixies were already doing (even though most people think they reinvented the wheel), but that's because very few people know who Greg Sage is (most all of the Seattle bands on that era certainly did). But even a band like The Church was a great band.
Milli Vanilli! jk.
@lanemeyer85 I lived in Detroit and I ruled the 80's ; ) Rock as I knew it almost died in the 80's. I have nothing against 80's music it's just rock as I viewed it was weak. Hair bands, Bon Jovi, Def Leppard, Whitesnake, Journey, R.E.M just didn't do it for me. AC/DC and Van Halen I associate with 70's. Metallica and Guns and Roses meh. I just find it the weakest decade of rock.
The Pixies I have their complete catalog
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
nothing weak about Sonic Youth, Fugazi, The Replacements or Husker Du. But yeah, just one's preference. I'm a 90's kid, but the late 70's to 1991 will always be my era of most interest. To me, it's a much better era than the 70's mainly because I find most (popular) music of the 70's boring, overproduced and generic (including post-Syd Barrett PInk Floyd and anything solo Clapton did), aside from the last part of the decade, with some of the unique punk bands like Television and Richard Hell and Wire and that kind of stuff. But the whole "post-punk" or DIY sound or however you want to describe it, is my preference.
Started in the late 70's with bands like Wire and Magazine, PiL, etc, and then on to even early u2, and some of my favorite bands like New Model Army, Chameleons UK, Mission of Burma, For Against etc. Instead of all the bands that were influenced by the Beatles and Stones, you had bands that went the other way playing off of the Velvet Underground and Iggy & The Stooges. Then you had the indie labels springing up in the 80's so there was a much wider variety of music other than the Beatles and Stones clones or all that generic 70's garbage like Boston or any band named after a city or state, and it was often regional so you had to hunt the stuff down. A lot of things changed in the 80's that way. And that era to around 1991 was really the last point in time actual ground was being broken musically or artistically (bands got to control their music more post 70's) aside from DIY recording technology getting galactically better in the early 2000's.
^^^^^^
I hear you lanemeyer85. Jams, too each is own. Love every band you referenced regardless
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
A lot of great bands mentioned in this thread. I listen to most genres. Well known bands and obscure. As I have mentioned before, my favorite band is Modest Mouse. However, that is really pre 2002 Modest Mouse. Do not care for their change in direction. But they are a band few know.
I get you @lanemyer85 . Though my favorite music was mostly made in the 90s.
I remember buying The Black Album when it first came out, one of greatest albums ever. This is my favorite, it's James Hetfield's most personal song on The Black Album and it's about his childhood turmoil and struggles in life.
oh yeah, there's nothing wrong with the 90's either, but aside from what My Bloody Valentine were doing, or if you were into Trip Hop, what Massive Attack were doing basically creating their own subgenre, it's not quite as interesting as what was going on in the early days of the 80's indie world. I wasn't much for the Pearl Jams and Soundgardens and that ilk, but I also don't hate that stuff either. I can recognize what Pearl Jam is good at even though I just largely think of them as my generation's Springsteen/E Street Band, which I don't really care for. I can't stand the Chili Peppers, primarily because of Kiedis, but I also recognize that Flea is probably the most talented musician of this or potentially any era. Arguably the greatest bassist of all time, and reportedly Miles Davis-level-great on the trumpet, in addition to being proficient on 20+ different instruments, and Frusciante and (drummer Chad Smith) are both really good in isolation, but the Chili Peppers' music does absolutely nothing for me. So I kind of think of the popular stuff from the 90's in that way. It's not that it's terrible, a lot of it just isn't for me.
But Fugazi, Sonic Youth, some of Pavement and Slint, then more stripped down stuff like the Red House Painters, Guided By Voices and Game Theory (by the by people, Scott Miller is the best songwriter you've never heard of) and that type of stuff is the stuff I get into. Also a big Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds fan. But yeah, I listen to everything from Townes Van Zant to the Pogues to Tribe Called Quest to even some newish electronic/downbeat stuff like Tycho. I also cover some real estate when it comes to music.
widespread panic.
Hey boys, I don't want to rock the boat, but.......The Lovely Mrs. Hydrant and myself both agree (forever) that the Rolling Stones ......are HORRIBLE! Except.... Symphony For The Devil. Everybody gets lucky once. That song Angie?....OH PLEASE!!!!
P.S. Gram Parsons saved that worthless band. WILD HORSES.
The Stones basically copied everything the Beatles ever did, of course putting it into their blues format.
You're right, Angie is an awful song in my opinion, the Stones trying to copy the Beatles smashing success of the classic song Yesterday.
But overall the Rolling Stones are a great rock band, and miraculously still around today.
GOAT rock band. It has to be the Beatles for a number of reasons.
But for my personal taste, the GOAT is whatever i'm in a mood to listen to at any particular time.
The forum is a better place when lanemyer85 is posting
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Yeah but its almost embarrassing to admit I like bands that are actually well known when he's posting.
I've never heard of roughly 100% of the bands he mentioned.
I don't care for bands like Poison, Guns and Roses, Metallica, Whitesnake and several others.
Play one of their songs and I'd probably have to guess which band it is. I agree they're generic, generically loud.
But I don't understand why he thinks Pink Floyd is generic post Syd Barrett. They turned into a great band
after his tragic demise. Play a Pink Floyd song and you're not playing a game of guess the band. You know who it is.
It isn't a mistake that Dark side of the moon is the best selling album ever.
But agree with you lanemyer's posts are a great read, really enjoy them also.
As head nerd of the forum I feel its my duty to list a few of the bands I liked in my teens and early twenties.
First and foremost- Styx.
Night Ranger.
.38 Special.
Loverboy.
Huey Lewis and the News.
Asia.
REO speedwagon.
Kansas. Of course
And I still have the cassettes from them and several more to prove it.
Confession- I still like those bands even in my fifties.
Beatles are the GOAT.
Personal favorites I didn't see listed; Allman Brothers Band and Fleetwood Mac.
@lanemyer85 The Chameleons UK and MOB are great!
Generic probably wasn't the right word, but in general, I find post-Barrett Floyd boring, and some of that has to do with how albums were recorded back then. All of the majors had their own in house producers and engineers so that's why so much of the music from the 70's sounded the same. Overproduced, glossy, formulaic etc. They're not a terrible band or anything, I just preferred the early psyche-experimental/garage-y Floyd. Don't know a ton about their background, but I'm guessing sometime in 68 or 69 they got their hands on a Silver Apples album.
Totally disagree. I don't think any of the Stones tracks sound like Beatles,..who were a pop band. Stones were also a better live band. They rocked.
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
Seriously I think the guy needs to clean out his ears. Never heard anyone say that BOSTON is a garbage band.
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
They are the Taco Bell of 70's schlock.
yep, definitely in my top 5. Also forgot to mention The Sound (the Adrian Borland band, not early 2000's indie pop band).
Ya sure. They have the 2nd highest debut album in history
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
ok, and like every top grossing movie is one of those stupid comic book movies. Are those better than Casablanca or The Godfather 1 or 2, then?
I didn't mean that the Stones tracks sound like the Beatles. To clarify, the Stones basically copied every album idea the Beatles ever did. As did many other bands copied the Beatles ideas.
Eh, I think just about every major band have been accused of copying other artists. The Beatles copied many other artists as well.
Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!
Ignore list -Basebal21
This is one of the most confusing statements on CU ever lol
Maybe this John Lennon interview will unconfuse you.
Scroll to 0:50 Lennon states how the Rolling Stones "imitates" the Beatles.
Can't speak to a lot of these bands in this regard, but has anyone ever tried to play a Beatles song on the guitar?
Geez, most of them have 10 different chords, and a lot of unusual ones. Complex music that sounds simple.
LOL nope, just because he said that doesn’t make it true
Buddy Holly was a big influence on Paul McCartney. Chuck Berry was a big influence on Keith Richards.> @coolstanley said:
Buddy Holly was a big influence on Paul McCartney. Chuck Berry was a big influence on Keith Richards. The Beatles albums were a big influence on the Rolling Stones albums.
That's how a particular era of the top bands are remembered most - by their albums.
The problem with your comment is I've heard other musical historians agree with Lennon. It's really not a debatable point.
I've never heard Jagger or Richards refute what Lennon stated. They didn't refute it because it's fact.
Equate that not only to the genius of the Beatles, but that of George Martin as well. He is often known as the fifth Beatle, and even the four Beatles acknowledge that.
Martin was not only a phenomenal music producer, but he had an amazing ear for hit music.
Anything is debatable Steve, I’ve read plenty of stuff on The Rolling Stones, Keith Richards rubbed a few people the wrong way over the years, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes, there are many agendas by many different people. We can agree to disagree or you can think I’m flat out wrong, I don’t really care either way. Your still a good guy in my book 🍻
The Beatles actually gave away one of their early hit songs to the Rolling Stones. "I Wanna Be Your Man" was given to the Rolling Stones and they gladly took it.
I stated earlier that the Rolling Stones are a great rock band simply because they are. I don't consider them copying the Beatles albums as any sort of gross insult. If I was a musician trying to record a hit album and make money back then, I would have done the same thing...copy a successful album. Just not enough copying to get sued over it.
You mean like The Beach Boys did to Chuck Berry? They were basically Weird Al Yankovic, surf style, in their early days of playing new lyrics over Chuck Berry licks…
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
They absolutely did remakes of a few songs, of course they were always better versions once the Stones were done with it, but their best music was all Rolling Stones and putting their longevity and amount of quality music up against the Beatles is surely not debatable since the Stones are far better in both categories.
The funny thing about the Beach Boys is that only one of them, I forget which one, actually ever surfed.
Of course the lifestyle of surfing was the subject in a number of their songs. One of them meant it, the other ones just faked it. LOL
I actually like the Stones much more than the Beatles. Sticky Fingers is one of my favorite albums of all time.
That being said, the Beatles are the GOAT, not only over the Stones, but every other rock band.
Well I’m siding with Double D’s wife and saying the Stones are the GOAT
@stevek
I enjoy your posts.
I also love when you declare that something is not debatable then debate it for many posts.
😉
Keep up the great content!
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest