It's kind of hard to choose, I mean I like I Can See For Miles better, and The Beatles are my favorite band. Helter Skelter is heavier, but I Can See For Miles has better lyrics and is more catchy, I love both songs, but I gotta say I Can See For Miles is better.
Well Clearly Beatles is Loder But I Can See For Miles is My Fav Who Song George Was A Great Guitarist and i think Pete was too but George was more heavy on the song Helter Skelter John Enwistle Was A Great Bassist no Doubt i prefer him Paul Was Great too but John was better KEITH MOON IS THHEEE GREATEST DRUMMER THERE EVER WAS SO NO CONTEST MOONIE WINS BUT seeing as ringo was not drumming on this i can understand why the drumming was a little weird..they were both great The Greatest Band Ever <3
wow George Harrison's leads on Helter skelter destroy Townshend's on I can see for miles.... honestly i think Harrison was just a all around better lead guitarist...
the beatles cant touch the who. sub-par guitar playing, terrible drumming, and average bass. Also, the songs the wrote were simple and had no meaning other than drugs. The Who on the other hand were the best, instrumentally, and wrote epic songs all with hidden meanings. They also were a much better live band. No comparison.
@abt7217tc Harrison was a better Guitarist, sub par??? thats bull shit. Ringos drumming was never terrible, pauls was when ringo guit during the white album, and McCartney was one of the most melodic base players ever(listen to rain, old brown shoe, Octopuses Garden, Something, as well as their live at the BBC recordings.) Lennon/McCartney and harrison wrote some of the greatest songs of all time, THe whos claim to fame is tommy and maybe whos next. Every beatles album was an achievement
Basically, if it weren't for the Beatles, there'd be no Who and other bands that followed, the Beatles laid the foundations of the 'modern era' and when they split they took the blueprint with them!! End of!
I was first and foremost a Beatles fan, but I always thought that Helter Skelter was just one of those things they knock up to fill a space on the album. I can see for miles and miles was miles and miles better than Helter Skelter. I was never a great fan of the who but I couldn't deny that miles and miles was a GREAT track.
The Who win this one, better band and better song. And I take issue with those who state that the Beatles were far better songwriters. No one wrote songs like Peter Townshend and John Entwhistle was an incredible songwriter in his own right. The Who were able to far better translate their songs from studio to stage and Townshends incredible songwriting was truly ahead of its time.
Kieth moons drumming is sooo much better in i can see for miles.....tho i know kieth moon and ringo were good friends..ringos a good song writer but with ALL DUE respect a half ass drummer!!!
Eh I love both bands a ton, but I think the I Can See For Miles wins this because Helter Skelter wasn't the type of song that The Beatles typically played and it wasn't there style. The Who, however, played lots of songs in the same style as I Can See For Miles and they are far more comfortable with that style, unlike The Beatles.
i know that black sabbath was influenced alot by the beatles, and that the beatles wanted to write a heaveyer song than i can see for miles, but black sabbath took of the idea of making songs as heavey and scary as they could possibly be to a totaly new level high above bolth the who and the beatles, which underminded that they came after bolth bands.
@guitarstuffplace black sabbath were different again, not all music or rock fans liked that very heavy sound,they were different again but no better, to heavy rock fans mabbe,but to most no.
i can see for miles and miles rules!!! well nobody can compare the who and the beatles cause they're two different bands.... they both rock! but the who is a little bit heavier than the beatles, that's the difference.
@53moreHP Well if it wasent for "I can see for miles" then there might not have been "Helt Skelter" i also like how "I can see for miles" sounds alot darker. I say "I can see for miles" is better. Long live Who!!!1
@53moreHP Well if it wasent for "I can see for miles" then there might not have been "Helt Skelter" i also like how "I can see for miles" sounds alot darker. I say "I can see for miles" is better. Long live Who!!!
why is it better,im a beatles fan and a who fan,but daltry is a better rock vocalist, moon was a better drummer,entwhistle,one of the best bass players ever,and townsend a better lead guitarist,superior live, no one can take or better the beatles songwriting ability,but other bands had better musicians,better individuals,which as a beatles fan to,was a reality.
@TheMightOfTheEnglish Yeah,that thought came to me a while ago.But for me,in terms of genius,The Beatles just miles ahead.They might not have the best drummer,guitarist,vocalist or bassist but somehow they have the BEST combination of what's needed to be a legendary band.One thing that appeals to me is that The Beatles experimenting a lot with music after 1966 and that leads the way for other band.
@ej36055 for song writing ,no one can match the beatles,as a live band ,the beatles gave up playing live because no one could hear them for the screaming,every beatles song does sounds so much different,another thing many bands couldnt do,they did pve the way ,and were a one off ,and if there was a league table would be at the top,,mabbe its because of over exposure ,and youve heared the songs so many times,just havent got the wow factor when you listen to them play
Dead plastic baby dolls... no more babies in the future, avatars? haha. Isn't it ironic?! What is happening now?? Don't follow, let me follow... it is the between the illusion of fate and choice... every Planck's fraction, but I cannot read at that speed, maybe y'all can????
Actually, it's not considered the loudest, but the heaviest. From what I recall, Pete Townshend believed that they had the heaviest song ever written and Paul McCartney responded. While it's impossible to tell which song is louder (because its based on how loud you have the volume or how loud the song recording you have is), I think 'I Can See For Miles' is much heavier. There's just so much sound being poured in and every second has a new note butting in. Helter Skelter just sounds jumbled.
The Who did well with there song the retaliation of the Beatles Heitlter Skelter is great exept the Beatles win thow because it was new and much harder then i can see for miles plus it was the first metal song ever they say so this one goes to the Beatles
I've never liked I Can See for Miles all that much, really. Actually, I was surprised when I discovered this connection, because I'd never thought of it as very loud at all.
Anyway, I'd say Helter Skelter is definitely louder, and I suppose it's because it was meant to be. The Who were just doing what they normally did, whereas The Beatles were making a special effort to be experimental.
I love, actually adore, both bands and i can't tell which one's better... but I can see for miles ispired Helter Skelter!!! and yes, The Who are way louder!!!
There is no comparison at all. The Who were obviously louder than The Beatles.
Helter Skelter would not even have happened without I Can See For Miles.
The reason is sounds so gritty is because it was out of their comfort zone. I Can See For Miles sounds much more smoother as The Who played like this all the time. Whereas The Beatles were a pop band. Songs like My Generation and Anyway Anyhow Anywhere were on the go when The Beatles were still singing about Holding Hands and 8 Days A Week
@evertonio Actually they were singing about having an affair with someone and burning down their house in anger. And do I even have to mention Tomorrow Never Knows... Actually The Beatles were rocking hard before the who. Go look up The Beatles Live At the Star club. They're both great bands but you got your info a little bit wrong.
Helter was an anomaly for the Beatles, great song but not a typical Beatles song. The Who had plenty of "loud" songs. I enjoy both bands, but I think Kieth Moon`s style was awesome compared to Ringo`s quirky(gay) hit from the left-side style, and odd fills.
But it is hard to compare these two bands, each had members that complemented each other's style, if you mixed the players up things would probably not have worked well. -i.e. Kieth in the Beatles? Maybe for Helter Skelter...
2.) Helter Skelter is abrasive; Miles is sumptuous. The question now breaks off into two branches: -Which of these songs most thoroughly manifests its particular quality? -Is it better for a song to be abrasive or sumptuous?
3.) Answer 1: Miles. Answer 2: Sumptuous. A fortified victory for the Who. But also Pyrrhic victory. The Beatles are generally a much better band.
they're only compared because of the time they came out. the who was an all around louder band, the beatles were done when the who reached that really in your face loud level. try Helter Skelter and almost any live song by the who, and the who wins. no biasseding here, i love both bands
helter skelter. thats it man. the beatles literally made a song that was loud agressive and rude. it tops all...i can see for miles is great but compared to the primal riff and screaming of helter they do not even come close.
Helter Skelter is louder, in my opinion. But, I can't pick which song is better, although Helter Skelter is getting old as I've listen to it SO MANY times, but I'm just coming back to The Who. All in all, I love The Beatles more, but The Who are my second favorite, not to far behind.
George Harrisons leads in Helter Skelter are better than Townshends in ICSFM. McCartney has a better voice and skelter has a better bass line... I will give the who the drums thought because moon was the best drummer of all time....
Dude get ur facts straight first off any member of Sabbath are nearly as good of writers as Townshene d When sabbath has an album on broadway than talk .. two years more like 4 Paranoid was released late 70 Miles release early 67 andd the Who were heavy as fuck in 65 while Ozzy was worshipping the beatles at the same time .. And Paranoid and volume 4 and Sabbath Bloody Sabbath .. In Fact the only real two great songs on that album are handi of doom and fairies wear boots
@guitarstuffplace Compare Young Man Blues from Live at Leeds to...well, any other band really, and they'll all sound like a bunch of wimps. That song, and that album in general, is the best thing mankind's ever produced.
Its a domino effect. If sabbath had been around 10 years earlier they'd be trying to out-rock Elvis and Chuck Berry. Which would probably sound alot like the Beatles or the Who. :)
that's just silly. black sabbath is about twenty steps lower than either the who or the beatles. they made nice stupid music, not earth shattering profound music.
Both songs are as loud as the master and your speakers... Helter Skelter is a really good song but it's really no match for I Can See For Miles. ICSFM is just so clever musically and lyrically... It manages to be almost deadly catchy, without being simplistic at the same time. Just my opinion of course, as good as anyone else's.
I think i can see for miles is much better. Its not as loud as helter skelter, but if u listen a gud quality version of the whos song, u mite actually be allowed to listen to all the instruments bein played. Seems like this member was a bit biased towards the Beatles when makin this video.. No offence
Eh, not really, sorry. Though I can see how it may seem that way, with the cheesy Beatles intro I put in. And I wasn't intending for users to base their opinions off of the crappy Youtube-quality audio snippets here.
I CAN SEE FOR MILES AND MILES AND MILES IS THE BEST!!!!!!!!! cause:
1ºThe who play it
2ºpete didnt copy anybody or saw or whatever
3ºjohn is playing the bass
4ºkeith is playing the drums
5º and yeah, helter skelter is much louder than i can..., but mccartney sounds like he was crying or dying and the song means nothing while the other song has a meaning, and the sound has no ryhthm, its a bad imitation of the who :D
@ystrianka George Harrison played better leads and McCartney, Lennon, and Harrison sang better. Bass players tie and the who gets the best drumming spot due to Kieth Moon but all in all the beatles were more talented.
@BL80488 you're right, i'm a beatles fan. by the way dont you dare to compare john with paul, obviously john is way better than him! but yeah, the beatles are more talented in all their carrer, but im talking about the song, because im giving my opinion to this video and is about this particularly song, and if there's one video where they compare the talented of the who with beatles, the decision will be hard, but beatles will winpaul got a wonderful voice,but dont fit with helter shelker. :D
@SuperStray27 do you know anything about music? anyone with even the slightest brains in their heads knows the who rocked way harder than the beatles... listen to songs like won't get fooled again and the whole live at leeds album and refrain from making comments that make you look like an IDIOT in the future...
oh wow you played the "i'm a musical genius card" grow up and face the facts. when the beatles played helter skelter it was the loudest thing ever. by the time the who played "won't get fooled again", they were just one in the crowd of hundreds who were playing as loud as they could, probably as an inspiration from the beatles. I like The Who's music but how can you compare wimpy shit like "i can see for miles with the raw power of "helter skelter" in a contest of volume?
@SuperStray27 i can compare them because "i can see for miles" sounds much louder and harder than "helter skelter"... give both of those a listen and then waste my time by talking shit!
ok. i thought that HS was about 9 times louder and harder than ICSFM but after listening to both I conclude that HS is in fact about 10 times louder. Look, I'm not saying which one you should like better I'm just saying that it can almost not be disputed how much louder and harder the beatles' song was and still is compared to ICSFM. Just look at the origin alone: McCartney was disappointed with how tame ICSFM was so he wrote HS to blow it out of the water---mission accomplished!
@SuperStray27 actually, when mccartney heard "i can see for miles", he concluded that it was the loudest, rawest, dirtiest and grittiest song of 1967... therefore, he felt jealous and wanted to top it with something even louder, rawer, dirtier and grittier... and, so arose "helter skelter"...
here's what really happened: McCartney read a review for "i can see for miles" that claimed it was "the loudest, rawest, dirtiest and grittiest song". When he listened to it, he was extremely disappointed with it because the review had made it sound much more powerful. He then wrote the song "Helter Skelter" which he believed was more what the review should have describing....
I srsly think Mccartney was smokin somethin that day he heard I can see for miles it doesn't rly sound like a loud song though it is written awesome :T
Helter Skelter lyrically doesn't say anything but is loud, however, Miles speaks to the cosmic universe and reaching out to the other person whether they were receptive or not at that time.
helter skelter is heavier and louder and more rockish.. i can see foor miles sucks. everything about does. the who fans sorry but the beatles are better and will top the who at anything. it's true.
@NascarGoose yes it does helter skelter makes it look like crap so you can shove it. screw off. im obviously not the idiot so keep whatever you have to say keep it to yourself. the beatles are so much better. my opinion has nothing to do with you.
Ok so they were talkin loudness well helter skelter is deffinatly heavier and darker and if you calling i can see... heavy sounding then no the who has a lot more heavier sounding songs like Bargain for example but in tearms of loudness and raunchiness helter skelter and like on guy said i can see for mile is a whole lot more complex than helter skelter is
Helter Skelter is a great song that was terribly recorded/mastered. Aside from the vocals, they way it was recorded takes out almost all of the punch.
Umm no, Helter Skelter sucks. Just cuz it's a Beatles song, doesn't mean it's God, lol. I Can See For Miles structurally is more complex than Helter. The tension rises slowly and slowly untll it bursts in the end. Besides, you have Moon and Townshend going at it the whole song. Helter Skelter is just some loud, ANNOYING guitar with screaming and shouting. The drums on that track aren't that great. He's just hitting the drums harder. You can't go wrong w/ The Who on the hard rock side of things.
I'll pretend that you didn't just say that Harrison somehow, kicks PT's ass at windmilling. I've never seen Harrison do that. Pete perfected it.
Also, on your other comment you said that the two respective bassists (McCartney and Entwistle) tied in the talent department. I'm sorry, but when you have the ability to play multiple notes AT ONCE, and play along the fretboard w/ amazing speed, then idk how J.E isn't the best. Paul played a lot of cute melodies, but he isn't as good as J.E
@JasonBonitati Learn how to read dumb ass... "I said Harrison kicked townshends windmilling ass..." I didnt say that Harrison windmilled, I said that Harrison was a better all around player... And McCartney plays more than just "cute melodies"... Most of his bass lines are more complex than Entswistle So Yes the bass players are equal and the only advantage the who had was moon....
So what, I made a mistake. And besides, PT was a better guitarist than George. Pete did more for the guitar than what did George, that's for sure. But that's another argument. What I want to focus on is how you somehow think Paul was better than John. Umm no, not really. Like I said, John could play multiple notes at once, with rapid speed. Look at John's live work in concerts, he is fucking AMAZING. Please, give me a break. Paul was good, but he's not even CLOSE to John!!
@JasonBonitati PPYT wasnt nearly as good as George Harrison. Harrison was a great guitarist plus an amazing slide guitarist. McCartney is a great bass player.
Paul's bass work is more meticulously thought out and precise, and Paul would spend hours in the studio trying to get the right sound off his bass by doing all kinds of weird shit to it. John's bass parts are faster though, and thus he was more impressive to hear live (My Generation bass solos?) and sound more impressive than McCartney is/was. Also Townsend > Harrison, both live and in the studio, no doubt. The Ringo/Moon argument is completely different, but live, Moon owns.
Oh, and also, please give me an example of Paul's ''amazing'' bass work...
Give me specific examples.
And like I said before, check out any tracks from the album Live at Leeds by The Who and listen to the bass. And if you're still not convinced, check out the isolated bass on any track from the album Who's Next. Someone posted it on Youtube.
@JasonBonitati Paul is the best popbassist of all time. I mean, listen to songs such as Rain, Hey Bulldog, Something. But still, Entwistle is a better bassist. When it comes to rock.
Helter Skelter is louder than I Can See for Miles, but every other Who song is louder than every other Beatles song. Like Helter Skelter, love I Can See for Miles.
Helter Skelter is alot heavier. Could barely hear the guitar in the Who song, vocals overpowered the song. Helter Skelter was mixed just right. The thing I like about Paul's vocals is how he could sing soft stuff like "Hey Jude" and "The Long and winding road" but yet at the same time had the power to sing "Sgt Pepper" and "Helter Skelter" The vocals sounded sort of soft on the Who song IMO
former beatlemaniac here... but I have to say "I Can See for Miles" tops "Helter Skelter." Helter Skelter is a more raucous, loud and chaotic, BUT "I Can See for Miles" is more hard hitting: better lyrically, more carefully crafted, and leaves more of a profound impression on my psyche. So louder where it really counts.
Studio wise, the beatles rocked the who, the beatles were force unreckonded with, but live wise, oh boy, hahah, the beatles couldn't even touch the who, ringo was a good drummer, but he couldn't touch keith, paul was a good bassist, couldn't even get near john, when you put the greatest bassist and drummer in your rhythm section, your going to have one hell of a live performance.
@havepie i agree beatles songs are AMAZING but on stage.... they were bit borring... the who realy rocked the fucking world when they were on stage :D
Also, Pete was obviously making a point. I mean, The Who had songs from their early years which were more standard loud like Helter Skelter was. He was saying this was the loudest specifically because people would not necessarily think that way immediately! Paul TOTALLY missed that, probably because he hadn't even listened to the song when he read the interview. When Pete was saying Miles was louder than My Generation, that was a thoughtful intelligent comment.
Miles is the better and louder song. Obviously The Who had produced more conventionally hard and loud music, I mean it characterized their early career, My Generation, Anyway Anyhow Anywhere, but shouting doesn't make a song loud or hard, and that's how McCartney tried to achieve it. It sounds loud, not like it's trying to be loud. Less is more if you use it right, and The Who could sure do that.
I love Helter Skelter because it's so raw and loud and in your face. It's like theres barely any polishing done it where as with The Who it's not raw, and it's not really that loud.
Helter Skelter is the heaviest song ever made by the Beatles. I think The Who were not as heavier as this song at that time, maybe Hendrix and Cream were the only ones who produced real Hard Rock then.
Both songs are really good. I still have this big amount of excitement in me from listening to 'i can see for miles'
and the fact that the original recording of 'helter skelter' lasted 27 minutes is impressive, they only stopped because their drummer really needed to stop.
I think George Harrison needs more credit as a guitarist, he was really experimental with the notes, and he was the first to use the backwards guitar solo effect.
i say Helter Skelter is louder... more feedback, more distortion, the lyrics don't really make sense (on purpose)... more anarchic than "I Can See For Miles".
"...Skelter" is fun and interesting, but "...Miles" is amazing, so horribly underrated a single as is the album it came off of.
I prefer "I Can See For Miles" by The Who. One of my favourite songs.
riff88m 3 months ago
It's a Tie
nirvanafan91ify 3 months ago
Comment removed
nirvanafan91ify 3 months ago
It's kind of hard to choose, I mean I like I Can See For Miles better, and The Beatles are my favorite band. Helter Skelter is heavier, but I Can See For Miles has better lyrics and is more catchy, I love both songs, but I gotta say I Can See For Miles is better.
darthmoop 6 months ago
Well Clearly Beatles is Loder But I Can See For Miles is My Fav Who Song George Was A Great Guitarist and i think Pete was too but George was more heavy on the song Helter Skelter John Enwistle Was A Great Bassist no Doubt i prefer him Paul Was Great too but John was better KEITH MOON IS THHEEE GREATEST DRUMMER THERE EVER WAS SO NO CONTEST MOONIE WINS BUT seeing as ringo was not drumming on this i can understand why the drumming was a little weird..they were both great The Greatest Band Ever <3
MrsHarrison21Xxx 6 months ago
THE WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
PastenFelipe 6 months ago
Which song is louder? It seems like Helter Scelter is recorded with a higher volume, my opinion.
If both songs were played life, then I put my money on The Who.
Both are great songs though.
DeKleikop 7 months ago
George was better, and I love Townsend.
I have no preference and respect all of their collaborative work and single ventures.
Pete would be the first to tell you that Harrison had it down... he paid his dues, and Pete was playing "catch up".
But, they really never were playing against each other to see who was "King".
Hell, in their days Eric was God!
(And, may still be.)
wdchefdave56 8 months ago
wow George Harrison's leads on Helter skelter destroy Townshend's on I can see for miles.... honestly i think Harrison was just a all around better lead guitarist...
BL80488 8 months ago
"Helter Skelter" is louder, I really like that raw, raunchy sound it has. "I Can See for Miles" is nice mellow song.
xtiffrulezd00dx 8 months ago
From the title, I was expecting a remix of the two songs into one. Words can't express my disappointment. :( It would have been awesome, though…
mudkipNDS 8 months ago
the beatles cant touch the who. sub-par guitar playing, terrible drumming, and average bass. Also, the songs the wrote were simple and had no meaning other than drugs. The Who on the other hand were the best, instrumentally, and wrote epic songs all with hidden meanings. They also were a much better live band. No comparison.
abt7217tc 9 months ago
@abt7217tc Harrison was a better Guitarist, sub par??? thats bull shit. Ringos drumming was never terrible, pauls was when ringo guit during the white album, and McCartney was one of the most melodic base players ever(listen to rain, old brown shoe, Octopuses Garden, Something, as well as their live at the BBC recordings.) Lennon/McCartney and harrison wrote some of the greatest songs of all time, THe whos claim to fame is tommy and maybe whos next. Every beatles album was an achievement
BL80488 8 months ago
Basically, if it weren't for the Beatles, there'd be no Who and other bands that followed, the Beatles laid the foundations of the 'modern era' and when they split they took the blueprint with them!! End of!
menacetosociety100 9 months ago
I was first and foremost a Beatles fan, but I always thought that Helter Skelter was just one of those things they knock up to fill a space on the album. I can see for miles and miles was miles and miles better than Helter Skelter. I was never a great fan of the who but I couldn't deny that miles and miles was a GREAT track.
KennyBennyRabbit 9 months ago
The Who win this one, better band and better song. And I take issue with those who state that the Beatles were far better songwriters. No one wrote songs like Peter Townshend and John Entwhistle was an incredible songwriter in his own right. The Who were able to far better translate their songs from studio to stage and Townshends incredible songwriting was truly ahead of its time.
Soulman785 9 months ago
Kieth moons drumming is sooo much better in i can see for miles.....tho i know kieth moon and ringo were good friends..ringos a good song writer but with ALL DUE respect a half ass drummer!!!
ConquerTHEgreat221 10 months ago
Eh I love both bands a ton, but I think the I Can See For Miles wins this because Helter Skelter wasn't the type of song that The Beatles typically played and it wasn't there style. The Who, however, played lots of songs in the same style as I Can See For Miles and they are far more comfortable with that style, unlike The Beatles.
legolean2 11 months ago
I never even really think of The Beatles and The Who as rivals.
The two bands were brilliant doing their thing and they are eight of the nicest and funniest lads anyone could meet :)
Love them both!
DaniJpGrNl 11 months ago
i know that black sabbath was influenced alot by the beatles, and that the beatles wanted to write a heaveyer song than i can see for miles, but black sabbath took of the idea of making songs as heavey and scary as they could possibly be to a totaly new level high above bolth the who and the beatles, which underminded that they came after bolth bands.
guitarstuffplace 1 year ago
@guitarstuffplace black sabbath were different again, not all music or rock fans liked that very heavy sound,they were different again but no better, to heavy rock fans mabbe,but to most no.
TheMightOfTheEnglish 1 year ago
i can see for miles and miles rules!!! well nobody can compare the who and the beatles cause they're two different bands.... they both rock! but the who is a little bit heavier than the beatles, that's the difference.
ystrianka 1 year ago
"Helter Skelter" makes "I Can See For Miles" sound like bubble gum.
53moreHP 1 year ago
@53moreHP Well if it wasent for "I can see for miles" then there might not have been "Helt Skelter" i also like how "I can see for miles" sounds alot darker. I say "I can see for miles" is better. Long live Who!!!1
MannyRamone1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@53moreHP Well if it wasent for "I can see for miles" then there might not have been "Helt Skelter" i also like how "I can see for miles" sounds alot darker. I say "I can see for miles" is better. Long live Who!!!
MannyRamone1 1 year ago
@53moreHP i can see for miles , it is what it says, miles better :o)
TheMightOfTheEnglish 1 year ago
why is it better,im a beatles fan and a who fan,but daltry is a better rock vocalist, moon was a better drummer,entwhistle,one of the best bass players ever,and townsend a better lead guitarist,superior live, no one can take or better the beatles songwriting ability,but other bands had better musicians,better individuals,which as a beatles fan to,was a reality.
TheMightOfTheEnglish 1 year ago
@TheMightOfTheEnglish Yeah,that thought came to me a while ago.But for me,in terms of genius,The Beatles just miles ahead.They might not have the best drummer,guitarist,vocalist or bassist but somehow they have the BEST combination of what's needed to be a legendary band.One thing that appeals to me is that The Beatles experimenting a lot with music after 1966 and that leads the way for other band.
ej36055 10 months ago
@ej36055 for song writing ,no one can match the beatles,as a live band ,the beatles gave up playing live because no one could hear them for the screaming,every beatles song does sounds so much different,another thing many bands couldnt do,they did pve the way ,and were a one off ,and if there was a league table would be at the top,,mabbe its because of over exposure ,and youve heared the songs so many times,just havent got the wow factor when you listen to them play
TheMightOfTheEnglish 10 months ago
Does it really matter..?
ThreeDaysSasuke 1 year ago
i love the Who so much but of course, the Beatles do it pretty good......i still like I can see for miles more
ultramagnus58 1 year ago
shit! chorus in i can see for miles sounds like first beatles songs: miles and miles and miles
perrotelocosimon 1 year ago
Dead plastic baby dolls... no more babies in the future, avatars? haha. Isn't it ironic?! What is happening now?? Don't follow, let me follow... it is the between the illusion of fate and choice... every Planck's fraction, but I cannot read at that speed, maybe y'all can????
Joke9972 1 year ago
Dead plastic baby dolls... no more babies in the future, avatars? haha. Isn't it ironic?! What is happening now?? Don't follow, let me follow...
Joke9972 1 year ago
Actually, it's not considered the loudest, but the heaviest. From what I recall, Pete Townshend believed that they had the heaviest song ever written and Paul McCartney responded. While it's impossible to tell which song is louder (because its based on how loud you have the volume or how loud the song recording you have is), I think 'I Can See For Miles' is much heavier. There's just so much sound being poured in and every second has a new note butting in. Helter Skelter just sounds jumbled.
MajorMoses1 1 year ago
I Can See for Miles and The Who are far better!!
romeopalote 1 year ago
The Who did well with there song the retaliation of the Beatles Heitlter Skelter is great exept the Beatles win thow because it was new and much harder then i can see for miles plus it was the first metal song ever they say so this one goes to the Beatles
TheDoorsthunder 1 year ago
I've never liked I Can See for Miles all that much, really. Actually, I was surprised when I discovered this connection, because I'd never thought of it as very loud at all.
Anyway, I'd say Helter Skelter is definitely louder, and I suppose it's because it was meant to be. The Who were just doing what they normally did, whereas The Beatles were making a special effort to be experimental.
monkeymaestro 1 year ago
@monkeymaestro the beatles are the masters, the who is very good, but i like the beatles better, the who is still in my top bands though
mrsixpackattack 1 year ago
It really depends on my mood. Sometimes I prefer Helter Skelter, and sometimes I prefer I Can See For Miles. Both are great songs.
superacecombat 1 year ago
I love, actually adore, both bands and i can't tell which one's better... but I can see for miles ispired Helter Skelter!!! and yes, The Who are way louder!!!
nonoetseb 1 year ago
@nonoetseb preferably long tall sally..
TheMicasa99 1 year ago
the beatles
wdhughes 1 year ago
There is no comparison at all. The Who were obviously louder than The Beatles.
Helter Skelter would not even have happened without I Can See For Miles.
The reason is sounds so gritty is because it was out of their comfort zone. I Can See For Miles sounds much more smoother as The Who played like this all the time. Whereas The Beatles were a pop band. Songs like My Generation and Anyway Anyhow Anywhere were on the go when The Beatles were still singing about Holding Hands and 8 Days A Week
evertonio 1 year ago
@evertonio Actually they were singing about having an affair with someone and burning down their house in anger. And do I even have to mention Tomorrow Never Knows... Actually The Beatles were rocking hard before the who. Go look up The Beatles Live At the Star club. They're both great bands but you got your info a little bit wrong.
TheMicasa99 1 year ago
@TheMicasa99 Live at The Star Club is nothing more than The Beatles singing other peoples songs bar 2 of them.
Tomorrow Never Knows was a year after My Generation and Anyway Anyhow Anywhere, So my info is still correct mate.
evertonio 1 year ago
@evertonio your right, the beatles still rock though. the beatles arent just pop, theyre rock pop
mrsixpackattack 1 year ago
I don't get why people compare the who to the beatles, the truth hurts that the who are better. the who also lasted longer than the beatles did
Nirvana1852 1 year ago
helter skelter is louder... i like i can see for miles better but helter skelter is still a good song. i love both bands!
zoeruls 1 year ago
IMO
Helter was an anomaly for the Beatles, great song but not a typical Beatles song. The Who had plenty of "loud" songs. I enjoy both bands, but I think Kieth Moon`s style was awesome compared to Ringo`s quirky(gay) hit from the left-side style, and odd fills.
But it is hard to compare these two bands, each had members that complemented each other's style, if you mixed the players up things would probably not have worked well. -i.e. Kieth in the Beatles? Maybe for Helter Skelter...
Exploduer 1 year ago
1.) 'Loud' is too ambiguous to mean anything.
2.) Helter Skelter is abrasive; Miles is sumptuous. The question now breaks off into two branches: -Which of these songs most thoroughly manifests its particular quality? -Is it better for a song to be abrasive or sumptuous?
3.) Answer 1: Miles. Answer 2: Sumptuous. A fortified victory for the Who. But also Pyrrhic victory. The Beatles are generally a much better band.
4.) Both songs are fantastic.
5.) Black Sabbath are terrible.
8531621 1 year ago
@8531621 balck sabbath are terribel are u outa ur mind?
SwanSong2156 1 year ago
I can see for miles! always ...
FynnDynamite 1 year ago
Helter Skelter all the way!!! Don't get me wrong, I love the song "I Can See For Miles" But The Beatles rule all!!! =]
RickyGervaisFreak 1 year ago
they're only compared because of the time they came out. the who was an all around louder band, the beatles were done when the who reached that really in your face loud level. try Helter Skelter and almost any live song by the who, and the who wins. no biasseding here, i love both bands
mullinator7 1 year ago
helter skelter. thats it man. the beatles literally made a song that was loud agressive and rude. it tops all...i can see for miles is great but compared to the primal riff and screaming of helter they do not even come close.
wolfmothaluva69 1 year ago
it's like a dullhead vs. a simpleminded, it makes no sense...
both song are great, only stupids do compare songs and bands!
leton53 1 year ago
its definately i can see for miles but i love the Who
ultramagnus58 1 year ago
I prefer Helter Skelter, of course, Beatles Forever .......
Pacolunasong 1 year ago 14
I Can See For Miles!!!!!
TheJasonvorhes 1 year ago
Paul McCartney is the fucking bomb! Helter skelter is genius songwriting. I Can't explain sounds a bit acoustic.
dubbly1 1 year ago
I Can See for Miles !
wildhorsestudios1421 1 year ago
Helter Skelter is louder, in my opinion. But, I can't pick which song is better, although Helter Skelter is getting old as I've listen to it SO MANY times, but I'm just coming back to The Who. All in all, I love The Beatles more, but The Who are my second favorite, not to far behind.
VOROX9 1 year ago
beatle rock foreva
Tiangisbarato 1 year ago
R.I.P. Moon the Loon and The Ox, and long live Roger and Pete!
batosai370 1 year ago
the Beatles ALWAYS win for me. always. I prefer Helter Skelter much much more ALTHOUGH I also love the Who. But it's always going to be the Beatles
mollehhhx 1 year ago
George Harrisons leads in Helter Skelter are better than Townshends in ICSFM. McCartney has a better voice and skelter has a better bass line... I will give the who the drums thought because moon was the best drummer of all time....
BL80488 1 year ago
I prefer I Can See For Miles, but I love Helter Skelter as well.
But it's also a bit of a biased opinion, because I do like The Who more....
BlackSabbathRockR19 1 year ago
HELTER SKELTERRRRRRRRRRR
silvi94thebest 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The winner is any song on the parinoid album, by black sabbath
It was only 2 years later and was harder than bolth of these bands combined
guitarstuffplace 1 year ago
@guitarstuffplace
Two years is a long time, especially in this era in which music was evolving and expanding at a very rapid pace.
Leaveitago 1 year ago 26
Dude get ur facts straight first off any member of Sabbath are nearly as good of writers as Townshene d When sabbath has an album on broadway than talk .. two years more like 4 Paranoid was released late 70 Miles release early 67 andd the Who were heavy as fuck in 65 while Ozzy was worshipping the beatles at the same time .. And Paranoid and volume 4 and Sabbath Bloody Sabbath .. In Fact the only real two great songs on that album are handi of doom and fairies wear boots
cjf799 1 year ago
@guitarstuffplace Compare Young Man Blues from Live at Leeds to...well, any other band really, and they'll all sound like a bunch of wimps. That song, and that album in general, is the best thing mankind's ever produced.
batosai370 1 year ago
@guitarstuffplace
Its a domino effect. If sabbath had been around 10 years earlier they'd be trying to out-rock Elvis and Chuck Berry. Which would probably sound alot like the Beatles or the Who. :)
johnmickle 1 year ago
@guitarstuffplace the winner is slip knot it was only 30 years later and was way harder. ;)
freespeech4u2 1 year ago
@freespeech4u2 YOU = FAG :)
theroach10 1 year ago
@theroach10 wow clever. I don't actully like slipknot if that's what you're getting at it was a joke.
freespeech4u2 1 year ago
@freespeech4u2 Wow, you tell horrible jokes. :)
theroach10 1 year ago
@theroach10 oh yes because YOU=FAG is comedic gem
freespeech4u2 1 year ago
@freespeech4u2 I wasn't trying to be funny. I was just pointing out the obvious.
theroach10 1 year ago
that's just silly. black sabbath is about twenty steps lower than either the who or the beatles. they made nice stupid music, not earth shattering profound music.
chillroom 1 year ago
@guitarstuffplace you mean any song from black sabbath's selftitled, it was released before paranoid
irondeth2 1 year ago
Both songs are as loud as the master and your speakers... Helter Skelter is a really good song but it's really no match for I Can See For Miles. ICSFM is just so clever musically and lyrically... It manages to be almost deadly catchy, without being simplistic at the same time. Just my opinion of course, as good as anyone else's.
CarryingNoCross 1 year ago
I think i can see for miles is much better. Its not as loud as helter skelter, but if u listen a gud quality version of the whos song, u mite actually be allowed to listen to all the instruments bein played. Seems like this member was a bit biased towards the Beatles when makin this video.. No offence
greetingsiamross 1 year ago
@greetingsiamross
Eh, not really, sorry. Though I can see how it may seem that way, with the cheesy Beatles intro I put in. And I wasn't intending for users to base their opinions off of the crappy Youtube-quality audio snippets here.
Leaveitago 1 year ago
I CAN SEE FOR MILES AND MILES AND MILES IS THE BEST!!!!!!!!! cause:
1ºThe who play it
2ºpete didnt copy anybody or saw or whatever
3ºjohn is playing the bass
4ºkeith is playing the drums
5º and yeah, helter skelter is much louder than i can..., but mccartney sounds like he was crying or dying and the song means nothing while the other song has a meaning, and the sound has no ryhthm, its a bad imitation of the who :D
by the way i love both bands!! hehe
ystrianka 1 year ago
@ystrianka George Harrison played better leads and McCartney, Lennon, and Harrison sang better. Bass players tie and the who gets the best drumming spot due to Kieth Moon but all in all the beatles were more talented.
BL80488 1 year ago
Comment removed
ystrianka 1 year ago
@BL80488 you're right, i'm a beatles fan. by the way dont you dare to compare john with paul, obviously john is way better than him! but yeah, the beatles are more talented in all their carrer, but im talking about the song, because im giving my opinion to this video and is about this particularly song, and if there's one video where they compare the talented of the who with beatles, the decision will be hard, but beatles will winpaul got a wonderful voice,but dont fit with helter shelker. :D
ystrianka 1 year ago
Aw, I thought it was going to be a mash-up. Now I'm sad.
FetaCheese222 1 year ago
wow "I can see for miles" is even in competition with "Helter Skelter"? haha obviously The Beatles rocked harder
SuperStray27 1 year ago
@SuperStray27 do you know anything about music? anyone with even the slightest brains in their heads knows the who rocked way harder than the beatles... listen to songs like won't get fooled again and the whole live at leeds album and refrain from making comments that make you look like an IDIOT in the future...
rajbeast 1 year ago
@rajbeast
oh wow you played the "i'm a musical genius card" grow up and face the facts. when the beatles played helter skelter it was the loudest thing ever. by the time the who played "won't get fooled again", they were just one in the crowd of hundreds who were playing as loud as they could, probably as an inspiration from the beatles. I like The Who's music but how can you compare wimpy shit like "i can see for miles with the raw power of "helter skelter" in a contest of volume?
SuperStray27 1 year ago
@SuperStray27 i can compare them because "i can see for miles" sounds much louder and harder than "helter skelter"... give both of those a listen and then waste my time by talking shit!
rajbeast 1 year ago
@rajbeast
ok. i thought that HS was about 9 times louder and harder than ICSFM but after listening to both I conclude that HS is in fact about 10 times louder. Look, I'm not saying which one you should like better I'm just saying that it can almost not be disputed how much louder and harder the beatles' song was and still is compared to ICSFM. Just look at the origin alone: McCartney was disappointed with how tame ICSFM was so he wrote HS to blow it out of the water---mission accomplished!
SuperStray27 1 year ago
@SuperStray27 actually, when mccartney heard "i can see for miles", he concluded that it was the loudest, rawest, dirtiest and grittiest song of 1967... therefore, he felt jealous and wanted to top it with something even louder, rawer, dirtier and grittier... and, so arose "helter skelter"...
rajbeast 1 year ago
@rajbeast
here's what really happened: McCartney read a review for "i can see for miles" that claimed it was "the loudest, rawest, dirtiest and grittiest song". When he listened to it, he was extremely disappointed with it because the review had made it sound much more powerful. He then wrote the song "Helter Skelter" which he believed was more what the review should have describing....
SuperStray27 1 year ago
I srsly think Mccartney was smokin somethin that day he heard I can see for miles it doesn't rly sound like a loud song though it is written awesome :T
unconsciousargentine 1 year ago
Helter Skelter lyrically doesn't say anything but is loud, however, Miles speaks to the cosmic universe and reaching out to the other person whether they were receptive or not at that time.
kittywalk1 1 year ago
Helter Skelter makes I Can See For Miles sound like a classical song from the 1600's played on a phonagraph on 0 volume.
swanniG2 1 year ago
Helter Skelter was louder.
I Can See for Miles was written better.
You just can't compare The Beatles and The Who.
Ianprower 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Let's put the song (not the band) in comparison:
Vocals: McCartney > Roger Roger didn't really develop his voice until late 69 early 70's.
Drums: Moon > Ringo EASILY
Bass: McCartney > Entwistle, although Entwistle is easily the greatest bassist of all time, his bass doesn't really come out in this song.
Guitar: Townshend > Harrison though Harrison's solo and sound comes close.
Lyrics: The Beatles > The Who
Overall: Helter Skelter > I Can See for Miles But remember, No HS if it wasnt for ICSFM
Riku654321 1 year ago
Comment removed
Riku654321 1 year ago
helter skelter is louder imo.the who & the beatles rule music!
yiolut243 1 year ago
i like helter skelter bit more :P
lolek113 1 year ago
Helter Skelter < I Can See For Miles.
NascarGoose 1 year ago
Yes they do have louder songs but this one was the loudest at that time.
08flemo08 1 year ago
how is I can see for miles the loudest Who song?
corkskrewclubhouse93 1 year ago
Which is louder?
Well I guess it all depends on the speakers at our homes...
pazthepenguin 1 year ago
The Who wrote a lot of songs way louder than "I Can See for Miles"...
wassupthesky 1 year ago
helter skelter is heavier and louder and more rockish.. i can see foor miles sucks. everything about does. the who fans sorry but the beatles are better and will top the who at anything. it's true.
peaceluvvingchica 1 year ago
@peaceluvvingchica
You are wrong in so many ways. I Can See For Miles does not suck. You are just an idiot with poore taste.
NascarGoose 1 year ago
@NascarGoose yes it does helter skelter makes it look like crap so you can shove it. screw off. im obviously not the idiot so keep whatever you have to say keep it to yourself. the beatles are so much better. my opinion has nothing to do with you.
peaceluvvingchica 1 year ago
@NascarGoose you are just an idiot who can't spell. ;-) i will win so don't even mess with me.
peaceluvvingchica 1 year ago
Helter Skelter is amazing. Nobody can touch The Beatles, though The Who is great.
Limited305 1 year ago 2
Hleter Skelter is louder but I can see for miles is waaaay better. still love em both though
keckman5 1 year ago 2
I love how everyone here doesn't want to answer the question. I choose "Helter Skelter"
DrSamuels305 1 year ago 2
I love them both.
360briggs 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So which song is "louder"?
DrSamuels305 1 year ago
they're both kinda heavy in their own ways.
givemeyourmoney909 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
So which song is "louder"?
DrSamuels305 1 year ago
charles manson preferred helter skelter over i can see for miles, so that proves the beatles are better.
gonzotoo 1 year ago
Ha ha!
oliverbayley1 1 year ago
@gonzotoo fuck charles manson and every guy that thinks he's alright. No joke, he is a fucking murderer and deserves to be rotting in prison.
spepper 1 year ago
but kieth moon is the better drummer
jasonmoore1900 1 year ago
i love both of them
jasonmoore1900 1 year ago
So which song is "louder"?
DrSamuels305 1 year ago
Ok so they were talkin loudness well helter skelter is deffinatly heavier and darker and if you calling i can see... heavy sounding then no the who has a lot more heavier sounding songs like Bargain for example but in tearms of loudness and raunchiness helter skelter and like on guy said i can see for mile is a whole lot more complex than helter skelter is
VinylCentral 1 year ago
Like "i can see for miles" more... i mean helter is louder but ... you know
Lalariela 1 year ago
@JasonBonitani
if you truly under stood music you would realize helter skelter is way more melodic
and harmonic ,just a better written song.
weather you like the song is personal opinion
jaygillette71 1 year ago 2
Helter Skelter is a great song that was terribly recorded/mastered. Aside from the vocals, they way it was recorded takes out almost all of the punch.
ProjectBurncan 1 year ago
Who 65% Beatles 35%
OtherRb1419 1 year ago
Umm no, Helter Skelter sucks. Just cuz it's a Beatles song, doesn't mean it's God, lol. I Can See For Miles structurally is more complex than Helter. The tension rises slowly and slowly untll it bursts in the end. Besides, you have Moon and Townshend going at it the whole song. Helter Skelter is just some loud, ANNOYING guitar with screaming and shouting. The drums on that track aren't that great. He's just hitting the drums harder. You can't go wrong w/ The Who on the hard rock side of things.
JasonBonitati 1 year ago
@JasonBonitati George Harrison Kicks Townshends windmilling ass any day....
BL80488 1 year ago
@BL80488
I'll pretend that you didn't just say that Harrison somehow, kicks PT's ass at windmilling. I've never seen Harrison do that. Pete perfected it.
Also, on your other comment you said that the two respective bassists (McCartney and Entwistle) tied in the talent department. I'm sorry, but when you have the ability to play multiple notes AT ONCE, and play along the fretboard w/ amazing speed, then idk how J.E isn't the best. Paul played a lot of cute melodies, but he isn't as good as J.E
JasonBonitati 1 year ago
@JasonBonitati Learn how to read dumb ass... "I said Harrison kicked townshends windmilling ass..." I didnt say that Harrison windmilled, I said that Harrison was a better all around player... And McCartney plays more than just "cute melodies"... Most of his bass lines are more complex than Entswistle So Yes the bass players are equal and the only advantage the who had was moon....
BL80488 1 year ago
@BL80488
So what, I made a mistake. And besides, PT was a better guitarist than George. Pete did more for the guitar than what did George, that's for sure. But that's another argument. What I want to focus on is how you somehow think Paul was better than John. Umm no, not really. Like I said, John could play multiple notes at once, with rapid speed. Look at John's live work in concerts, he is fucking AMAZING. Please, give me a break. Paul was good, but he's not even CLOSE to John!!
JasonBonitati 1 year ago
@JasonBonitati PPYT wasnt nearly as good as George Harrison. Harrison was a great guitarist plus an amazing slide guitarist. McCartney is a great bass player.
BL80488 1 year ago
@BL80488 But Macca plays lead giutar on Helter Skelter. And John bass. :D
Skrotnisse275 1 year ago
Comment removed
JasonBonitati 1 year ago
@JasonBonitati
Paul's bass work is more meticulously thought out and precise, and Paul would spend hours in the studio trying to get the right sound off his bass by doing all kinds of weird shit to it. John's bass parts are faster though, and thus he was more impressive to hear live (My Generation bass solos?) and sound more impressive than McCartney is/was. Also Townsend > Harrison, both live and in the studio, no doubt. The Ringo/Moon argument is completely different, but live, Moon owns.
MadSkillz9407 1 year ago
Comment removed
JasonBonitati 1 year ago
@BL80488
Oh, and also, please give me an example of Paul's ''amazing'' bass work...
Give me specific examples.
And like I said before, check out any tracks from the album Live at Leeds by The Who and listen to the bass. And if you're still not convinced, check out the isolated bass on any track from the album Who's Next. Someone posted it on Youtube.
JasonBonitati 1 year ago
@JasonBonitati Paul is the best popbassist of all time. I mean, listen to songs such as Rain, Hey Bulldog, Something. But still, Entwistle is a better bassist. When it comes to rock.
Skrotnisse275 1 year ago
@BL80488 Lmaolmaolmao.
Trueness.
MadelinAro 1 year ago
i think the who is better, but i could decide better if the sound quality was better
ultramagnus58 1 year ago
Helter Skelter is louder than I Can See for Miles, but every other Who song is louder than every other Beatles song. Like Helter Skelter, love I Can See for Miles.
ProcompsognathusProd 1 year ago
Helter Skelter...100%
leonardoreyesgomez 1 year ago 16
Helter Skelter wins hands down!
sharkey4123 1 year ago 3
helter skelter way much
ibelieveinchaos 2 years ago 3
i am a who fan, but i like helter more. better melody for me.
mrADA 2 years ago 3
Helter Skelter is alot heavier. Could barely hear the guitar in the Who song, vocals overpowered the song. Helter Skelter was mixed just right. The thing I like about Paul's vocals is how he could sing soft stuff like "Hey Jude" and "The Long and winding road" but yet at the same time had the power to sing "Sgt Pepper" and "Helter Skelter" The vocals sounded sort of soft on the Who song IMO
mattsmusicstudio 2 years ago 2
former beatlemaniac here... but I have to say "I Can See for Miles" tops "Helter Skelter." Helter Skelter is a more raucous, loud and chaotic, BUT "I Can See for Miles" is more hard hitting: better lyrically, more carefully crafted, and leaves more of a profound impression on my psyche. So louder where it really counts.
strictlybass 2 years ago
the who loud and clear
1crazim 2 years ago
Helter Skelter
banzaillamas 2 years ago 4
Studio wise, the beatles rocked the who, the beatles were force unreckonded with, but live wise, oh boy, hahah, the beatles couldn't even touch the who, ringo was a good drummer, but he couldn't touch keith, paul was a good bassist, couldn't even get near john, when you put the greatest bassist and drummer in your rhythm section, your going to have one hell of a live performance.
havepie 2 years ago 10
@havepie i agree beatles songs are AMAZING but on stage.... they were bit borring... the who realy rocked the fucking world when they were on stage :D
lolek113 1 year ago
@havepie The Who were *every bit* the band The Beatles were in the studio.
Bluesub6 1 year ago
@havepie you're totally RIGHT! :D
ystrianka 1 year ago
helter skelter ftw i can see for miles is not that loud or doesn't rock harder than helter skelter
kurtcobain628 2 years ago 3
Also, Pete was obviously making a point. I mean, The Who had songs from their early years which were more standard loud like Helter Skelter was. He was saying this was the loudest specifically because people would not necessarily think that way immediately! Paul TOTALLY missed that, probably because he hadn't even listened to the song when he read the interview. When Pete was saying Miles was louder than My Generation, that was a thoughtful intelligent comment.
firesoforion 2 years ago
Miles is the better and louder song. Obviously The Who had produced more conventionally hard and loud music, I mean it characterized their early career, My Generation, Anyway Anyhow Anywhere, but shouting doesn't make a song loud or hard, and that's how McCartney tried to achieve it. It sounds loud, not like it's trying to be loud. Less is more if you use it right, and The Who could sure do that.
firesoforion 2 years ago
but they didn´t
TripleHHH258 2 years ago
LOOK OUT HELTER!!!
haha, a million times helter
antolop78 2 years ago 3
Them Beeatles had...Lennon...the Who had..Pete anmd Moon
woodskier 2 years ago
HELTER SKELTER!!!!!!!! YEAAAAAAA
johnmusic27 2 years ago 2
helter skelter
RecognitionBand 2 years ago 2
helter skelter is better
Danielarts123 2 years ago 2
helter
LennMacca93 2 years ago
I love Helter Skelter because it's so raw and loud and in your face. It's like theres barely any polishing done it where as with The Who it's not raw, and it's not really that loud.
Marshallsg 2 years ago 2
Helter Skelter is louder, but I like Miles and Miles more, it's a more outstanding song of the band, though I think Roger sings a bit too tame.
immortelle3 2 years ago 2
Helter Skelter is the heaviest song ever made by the Beatles. I think The Who were not as heavier as this song at that time, maybe Hendrix and Cream were the only ones who produced real Hard Rock then.
michaelschenker1955 2 years ago
Both songs are really good. I still have this big amount of excitement in me from listening to 'i can see for miles'
and the fact that the original recording of 'helter skelter' lasted 27 minutes is impressive, they only stopped because their drummer really needed to stop.
I think George Harrison needs more credit as a guitarist, he was really experimental with the notes, and he was the first to use the backwards guitar solo effect.
scartissue94 2 years ago
i say Helter Skelter is louder... more feedback, more distortion, the lyrics don't really make sense (on purpose)... more anarchic than "I Can See For Miles".
"...Skelter" is fun and interesting, but "...Miles" is amazing, so horribly underrated a single as is the album it came off of.
Pete, wow.
astronomius 2 years ago 2
Helter Skelter is louder.
ridch07 2 years ago 3