who's your preference...

[zeegler]

Re: who\'s your preference...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Who!

[/ QUOTE ]
There ya go, I can listen to the Who before I do/would the stones or beatles anyday.
The Who, to me, had an edgier sound.

[/ QUOTE ]

You got it, metal didn't come from the Stones, or the Beatles. It came from Hendrix, and The Who. [img]/images/graemlins/headbang.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]

I voted for the Beatles. They wrote hundreds of damn good songs, and they had much more variety. The Stones had a lot of good songs too, but they should have ended in 1980. They have only put out shite since then, and IMHO it taints their image.

Now let's travel back in time, and imagine a 1970s type Clash of the Titans. The Who, The Stones, and The Beatles in one show. Who would be the standout act? Yes they would. [img]/images/graemlins/headbang.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/headbang.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]

Pete, Roger, John, and Keith would fucking lay waste to the place. [img]/images/graemlins/band.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[JRTME]

Re: who\'s your preference...

I like the Stones better. The beatles were "clean" compared to them.

[atomic charvel guy]

Re: who\'s your preference...

I give up. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Shawn Lutz]

Re: who\'s your preference...

no doubt the Stones had some great songs and studio albums but I still stand by my "they suck" comment. Worst show I ever saw was the Stones in Pontiac stadium in 1982 which at the time was supposed to be their final tour. You know its bad when you keep looking at your watch and falling asleep in you seat [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[VulfgangPfuck]

Re: who\'s your preference...

I Am The Walrus...goo goo gajoob!

[VulfgangPfuck]

Re: who\'s your preference...

[ QUOTE ]
I like the Stones better. The beatles were "clean" compared to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Stones had a bluesier/R&B influence than the Beatles, thats why the cleaner/dirtier thing. The Stones had the "Dirty boy" attitude, while the Beatles had their schtick as 4 clean cut lads from Liverpool. I love both, but I have to side with the Beatles. Lennon/McCartney were probably the greatest songwriting team in the history of Rock And Roll

[semagic]

Re: who\'s your preference...

[ QUOTE ]
I give up. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

reminds me of how it went at work [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[atomic charvel guy]

Re: who\'s your preference...

Standing alone is always a tough one-lol

[fett]

Re: who\'s your preference...

You had to be there. The Beatles revolutionized what we listened to. The Stones were the bad boys, but didn't have the creative power. The Who was just way cool. But Zep in 1968? just blew my mind away. The Beatles paved the way for the 60's. The Stones painted the stripes. But Zep made the "Highway" (I'm sorry!!!") to all the metal we really love. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[mm2002]

Re: who\'s your preference...

I'm old enough I should like the Beatles...but they suck. I should like the Stones.....but they suck. Now Zep??? Oh yeah baby!!!!