IT'S A GAS, GAS, GAS!!
MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVES/WEEKLY ROCK POLL POST
Return to Gasx3/Poll Post Board Homepage
Name: gomper
E-Mail: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Subject: What's better early Beatles or early Stones?
Date: Monday, August 14, 2017
Time: 7:40:51 PM
Remote Address: 67.193.215.92
Message ID: 310459
Parent ID: 0
Thread ID: 310459
What do you guys think is better, the early works of the Beatles or the early works of the Stones?
Both bands kind of had a turning point where the evolution of their sound seemed to accelerate. For the Beatles that point was somewhere between Rubber Soul and Revolver, before arriving at Sgt Pepper's after which they - and all of popular music - would never be the same. So perhaps we can consider all before this period to be their 'early' works. For the Stones, this point is between '66 and '68. Aftermath and Between The Buttons showed real progression but Beggar's Banquet was a revelation for them. So maybe their early period is anything before this period.
I love the Beatles, but in therm of early works, I think the Stones are better and are more listenable today. I was just totally getting into King Bee and Carol today. The Stones could just nail the Blues as far back as '64, probably earlier. The Beatles early stuff is just a bit to flimsy and poppy for me. But don't get me wrong, I am crazy about the Beatles and their music of the late 1960s will live forever.
Thoughts on this, Gassers? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Note: Do not hit the "Post Message" button more than once, even if it is taking a long time to post your message. Doing so may cause a double post to appear and could slow down your posting time even more.
Download your free, customizable Burton Networks Message Board now!
© 1998 - 2022 by Keno Internet Services, except where otherwise noted. All rights reserved.