Share via Email. Print. :) Both bands are blues based and anyone who knows me knows the blues are my first love! The Rolling Stones Band Members With a name based on a Muddy Waters song The Rolling Stones formed in 1962. Looking for Asian music video I last saw in 2006? The Who do it for me though. The longest-performing rock band of all time, the Rolling Stones have greatly influenced rock and roll throughout the decades. (((Dave)))) you always give the best answers! The Rolling Stones: A Tale-of-the-Tape Look at Who Was Really the Best Using categories like innovation, durability and diversity, we … Maybe Townshend didn't do enough jumps. The Stones are based in the Traditional Blues and The Beatles were based in 50's Rock n Roll before growing into Psychedelic Rock, Folk Rock and pure PoP. How? Jump to Comments. The Who. Discussion in 'Entertainment' started by Neal11, Aug 27, 2009. Roger Daltrey with incredible range, Entwistle just standing in one place making it look so easy, Keith Moon a maniac on the drums and the pure genius of Peter Townshend's guitar and song-writing skills made up what is quite possibly the greatest live band the world has ever known. But I've seen them both live before, and honesty, I thought The Rolling Stones put on a better show than The Who. And here is one of the reasons why. The Who. Pete Townshend. Nick Drake fan, Jul 25, 2015 #36 Page 1 of 2 1 2 Next > Aug 27, 2009 at 5:19 AM #1 #1. Mick Jagger responded Friday and pointed out that The Beatles … By those meaures the Stones are better. Between the Buttons is the fifth British and seventh American studio album by the English rock band the Rolling Stones, released on 20 January 1967 in the UK and 11 February 1967 in the US as the follow-up to Aftermath.It reflected the Stones' brief foray into psychedelia and baroque pop balladry during the era.. Four talented members who played each instrument as a lead instrument; put it all together and instead of chaos you have EPICNESS. Baby boomers might argue the Stones. The Stones have obviously had a better career -- more great records, broader influence, greater longevity. Thanks! Wow, that's hard. The Who for me. The Stones with Brian Jones, the blues purist, were incredible. But who is a better band? | iHeartRadio. The Stones always were spotty, could be great or kinda bad...I'm just imaging a battle of the bands between the two of em at their peak. Share on Facebook. My friend and I are having a debate on which band is better. The Rolling Stones refused to release this ambitious effort for 28 years, supposedly because they were unhappy with their own set. The Rolling Stones had an edgier reputation than The Beatles Credit: Terry O'Neill - Getty THE Stones have released 30 studio albums, 28 live albums and 120 singles around the world. What bands/artists did the average teenager (Boys and girls) listen to in the 70's, 80's, and 90's.. Who are the best bands of all time in your opinion? The Stones have a bigger catalogue of great songs than the Who. Then again, Baba O'Reily and Won't Get Fooled Again are the greatest rocks songs of all time IMHO. I mean, how do you measure which band is better? Terms of Use; Privacy Policy; AdChoices; Advertising; California Privacy Rights; Do Not Sell My Personal Information © 2019 Billboard Media, LLC. Apologies for any downtime or slow forum loading now or within the next week or so. So sorry Kelly for me it has to be the Stones. Rolling Stone released a new version of its list of the 500 Greatest Albums of All Time, but the streaming era, with its explosion of records and musical subgenres, might spell the end of a … Push comes to shove I'm going with The Who. Musical ability The Stones are way out in front. Mick vs. Bono. By 1963 they were finding their musical stride as well as popularity. John McMillian in his new book Beatles Vs Stones reveals Jagger's brooding envy and a candid admission after he watched the Fab Four storm the U.S. in the mid-1960s. Both great bands and it is really hard to say who is better. Who is the world’s greatest rock ’n’ roll band? An offer to open for The Rolling Stones in 2004 helped motivate Metallica to reconcile some of its issues. Still have questions? Revelations On The Rolling Stones. "The Verve's … 'I love The Stones, but I'm with you - The Beatles were better.' They epitomize British rock for me." 00:00. Sorry Kelly, but you do know the Who and one of my favorites of all time, but you know I'm going to say the Stones hands down. Share on Twitter. What's the name of the model appearing in Alice Cooper's "Poison" music video? Research and articles of special interest on The Rolling Stones.The focus is primarily the music of The Rolling Stones with assorted information about the life and times of the band when applicable. I used to spend quite a lot of time around his house in London with Ronnie (Wood of the Rolling Stones). Fiona Adams/Redferns E arly in 1964, Life magazine put it like this: “In [1776] England lost her American colonies. The Rolling Stones vs. U2. By those meaures the Stones are better. But as some one said, it's much better comparing two great rock bands than the Stones or the Beatles. Here is the core reason why The Rolling Stones were so amazing, so hypnotic and able to produce such unbelievable art: their music was 100 percent a result of lifestyle. Darryl is better than Paul on the bass. Their early shows were just shocking, absolutely riveting and stunning and moving and they changed my life completely. Many Progressive rock and psychedelic tunes of the 60s sound different as it progressed. Mick Jagger and Keith Richards are decent songwriters and the band has been rolling along for almost 50 years. I've seen em both too but neither in their prime. Share via Email. … The Rolling Stones are better musically. Kim Pavlicek November 5, 2008. The Rolling Stones have more total number of quality songs but I think The Who's greatest songs are better than anything by The Stones. Which is it for you, the Beatles or The Rolling Stones? I do agree it is a better comparison than The Stones and The Beatles which are totally different styles of music. So you want me to pizz off either my great friend David V (Stones) or my great friend Kelly (The Who). Shortly afterwards, the band began their first tour of the UK, performing Chicago blues and songs by Chuck Berry and Bo Diddley. By pitting their biggest hits in head-to-head battles. Page 1 of 3 - The Behind poll: RUSH vs The Who - posted in Music Of The Spheres: No one knows what it's like To be the bad man To be the sad man Except Tony R The group band played their first show billed as "the Rollin' Stones" on 12 July 1962, at the Marquee Club in London. Put em on stage in a battle of the bands and let the audience decide. The Stones have obviously had a better career -- more great records, broader influence, greater longevity. Join Yahoo Answers and get 100 points today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5SYtI2K5Vs. R&P, what songs do you like by Annie Lennox? Get your answers by asking now. by Chris M. Updated: December 6, 2019. I also like Johnny Cash, Gershwin, Killing Joke, AC/DC and Sly and the Family Stone. Mike Bass, Jul 25, 2015 I love both very much, and put them both on my top 5 bands list, but I am leaning towards the Rolling Stones. Post Reply. Fullscreen . Lyrically, the Who takes the cake. Here are the best Rolling Stones albums from … Drummer Simon Phillips on His Years With the Who, Mick Jagger, Jimmy Page, and Toto The journeyman drummer has also played with Judas Priest, Jeff Beck, and Jack Bruce, and appeared on … Jump to Comments. The Rolling Stones in Marble Arch Car Park circa 1963. At the time, the band consisted of Jones, Jagger, Richards, Stewart, and Taylor. After more than 20 years, the Rolling Stones and The Verve have resolved a sour dispute over the authorship of the song "Bitter Sweet Symphony. I mean, how do you measure which band is better? I think I will pass because I love both people and both bands. Teens all over the world defined themselves by one thing, whether they were loyal to The Beatles or The Rolling Stones , and the rivalry didn’t stop with the fans. I've seen em both too but neither in their prime. As the Stones and all the other groups mentioned above are all blues based when it comes to music as the Beatles were not blues based. Cruz family's Cancún trip rattles their private school, Djokovic beats Medvedev for 9th Australian Open, Kardashian-West divorce should be 'fair': Expert, 'The Talk' co-host responds to 'vaccine-shaming', Wie responds to Giuliani's 'inappropriate' skirt story, Comedian responds to sexual misconduct allegations, Osaka makes awkward gaffe while congratulating foe, Kanye thinks failed WH bid 'cost him his marriage', 2 NYC bars are for sale — asking price is 25 bitcoins, Governor threatens to redirect vaccines for teachers, Life-forms that 'shouldn't be there' found in Antarctic ice. Share on Facebook. Great musicians and songwriters who wrote some of the best music of their era... Why compare them? To celebrate the Rolling stones' 55th anniversary we take on the daunting task of ranking their entire discography. Beginning as part of the British Rock Invasion of the 1960s, the Rolling Stones quickly became the “bad-boy” band with an image of sex, drugs, and wild behavior. Stories History The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones The 1960s were a decade when rock n’ roll was sweeping the scene and the British Invasion came knocking on US doors. "I'm really an absolute Stones fan, and always have been. The Stones set an example for future rock musicians. I'm listening to Who Are You right now and it's a good album. The Who vs. “I was working with The Stones around the same time this record [‘Led Zeppelin’] was made. Still, this survey may surprise even the most loyal fans of both bands. Share on Twitter. I also got into the Who first and own most of their albums. Led Zeppelin, The Who, Aerosmith, the Doors, Iggy Pop & the Stooges, Bruce Springsteen, Guns N' Roses, Bon Jovi, New York Dolls, Bonnie Raitt, AC/DC, Kings of Leon, Joan Jett, MC5, and the Allman Brothers Band are just some of the artists that have been influenced by the Stones. The set did have its … There was a whole guitar-playing bunch: George, Eric … Rolling Stones vs. I do find the Stones overrated at times, especially since they were around the time the Beatles became famous in America. Volume 60%. is the brand-new Best Of compilation album from the Rolling Stones — featuring the biggest hits and classic cuts from every Rolling Stones studio album from 1971 to 2016’s Blue & Lonesome. 00:00. Print. Joined: Aug 21, 2009 Member: #21507 Messages: 197 Gender: Male First Name: Neal Lagrange, GA Vehicle: TRD OFF-ROAD The Beatles vs. Bassist Bill Wyman and drummer Charlie Watts complet You can sign in to vote the answer. You will find the answer to your question on this DVD. It depends on the criteria you use. Both are extremely influential and talented in their own right though. Here we discus why The Who will always be better than The Rolling Stones...Also The Who's covers of The Last Time & Under My Thumb is discussed. I also got into the Who first and own most of their albums. There's no scale of greatness other than your own appreciation, I like all three. About Billboard. We are making some updates and reconfigurations to our server. Springwater, New York, U.S.A., Earth, Cosmos, Analogue Dr. & 2CH Ave. Calgary, AB, Canada, Northern California between Sac and SF, CA, Forum Policies, Rules, and Terms of Service. But if you put both of em in their prime on stage in a one-night battle of the bands live, I bet The Who would win. why were most songs from the late 60s and most of the 70s sad? Rolling Stones vs. They may have been talking about their generation, but the fact remains that The Who is a timeless band that every generation after it has fallen in love with. TRUE OR FALSE: Liking Aerosmith Is SO 2001? I definitely agree the Who are a better live band. The ancient rivalry seemed to resume this week, as Paul McCartney claimed The Beatles were bigger than The Rolling Stones. They also are able to fuse so many other genres into their music. Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Mr. Tambourine Man, Jul 25, 2015. The Rolling Stones are an English rock band formed in 1962 in London when multi-instrumentalist Brian Jones and pianist Ian Stewart were joined by vocalist Mick Jagger and guitarist Keith Richards. These days I'm listening to more Stones than Who. Rewind 10 Seconds. I'll leave my answer up to Pete Townshend. They also are able to fuse so many other genres into their music. Personally, I think this one is closer than comparing the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. My friend and I are having a debate on which band is better. Gen Xers might advocate for U2. Charlotte Downes November 5, 2008. Charlie is a much better drummer than Ringo. Name some reasons why older music is better than today's music? This wasn't always so, and is likely to not be so in the future. The Rolling Stones. By that I mean that they have a more appealing sound that most people today can still appreciate. Neal11 [OP] Well-Known Member. The Stones will always be the greatest for me. They make pretty consistent albums and had a steady fan base. They make pretty consistent albums and had a … The Stones always were spotty, could be great or kinda bad...I'm just imaging a battle of the bands between the two of em at their peak. 00:00. LOL We've had this standoff before in R&P! Page 1 of 2 - The Rolling Stones vs The Who - three poll questions. How do you think about the answers? The Who, on the other hand, is great all the way around. Keef vs. the Edge.
Spot Trace Subscription, Aquarium Stand 40 Gallon Breeder, Magic Chef Ice Maker Hnim27sv, Charlie Parra Del Riego, Justin Woolverton Net Worth, Honda Accord Starter Lawsuit, Graphing And Analyzing Scientific Data Answer Key, Capitol Tour Route, Natural Humectants For Hair,