Why listen to a bunch of white brits when you can listen to a black american? or even better a bunch of white americans called the sonics that do the most badass version of this song
@Yellyist Your boyfriend's probably a closet fag, like Lennon. It's always those who scream the most about faggots that secretly are them. Lennon fucked his manager Epstein in Spain in '63, then flew into a rage whenever someone suggested he was gay, like at Paul's 21st birthday. Meanwhile those with vast more performance imagination to camp it up, yet have twenty children with women who they actually fuck, like Mick, influence Bowie, Tyler, and every other frontman.Enjoy your fake relationship.
@steveconn Lennon did not have a sexual relationship with Brian Epstein. You`re a god damn liar. I know that Lennon talked about their vacation together, but he stated in interview after interview that nothing sexually happened. Well i told him that you called him a fag. He`s a U.S. marine. And he deserves to be treated with respect. But again. What can be expected from an asshole like yourself who jokes about his mothers illness on youtube? You`re nothing but a lowlife, and a lousy son!
@Yellyist LENNON'S A US MARINE?!? LOL YOU'RE SUCH A FUCKING IDIOT!! He was never in the marines - he just wore that jacket on talk shows. I could give more quotes Lennon said pointing to his closet gayness, like when he told Yoko he liked her because she looked like a man, but I won't waste my time on such a profoundly stupid piece of shit such as yourself. Next tell us the Beatles were sailors because they lived on a Yellow Submarine. What a dumbass! :)
@steveconn hmm... someone doesn't like the Beatles. why would think they're are gay all of them have wife .yes i know some gays have wife's,but i don' t understand how that has any thing to do with the music.It is the music and the person voice that makes the band good not if they're gay or not
@1bowsertahu The Stones and the Beatles are two different bands. I love the beatles, and i like the Stones. But it`s not cool to come in here and see retards badmouth the beatles, and beatle members like John, Paul and George and compare them to trash. They deserve an answer, and i gave it to them. They think they`re so cool because the Stones played a couple of blues songs,and they look down on the beatles for sticking to pop and rock ignoring the fact that the stones is a pop/rock band too!
@1bowsertahu of course. The beatles had some bad moments, but not many. There were probably only a handful really lousy beatles songs. The rest was perfect. i will list my top ten worst beatles songs. 1. Revolution #9 2. Why don`t we do it in the road 3. Long long long 4.Blue jay way 5. The word 6. wild honey pie 7. run for your life 8. Wait 9. Baby you`re a rich man 10. Flying. Apart from those, i think they were pretty much flawless.
@Yellyist What about those that were boyband tripe like If I Fell and From Me To You, or John's self-indulgent, drugged-out bores like on Dear Prudence, I'm So Tired, or Dig It? Flawless is too generous for those.
@Yellyist why did u list "wait" and "the word" as ur top 10 worst beatle songs. i thought those 2 songs were great. the rest of the songs u listed were lousy.
Why the hell are people arguing about who are better? It's the fucking Beatles, and the fucking Stones. They're two of the greatest bands ever. They both fucking rock.
and how many no.1 albums has Mick released as a solo artist? None! George had two no.1 albums, including the massive "All things must pass" who sold more than "sticky fingers" "exile on main st" and "Let it bleed" combined. Even Ringo sold two millions of his 1973 "Ringo" album, and had two no.1 hits. How many no.1 hits has Charlie Watts had?
Personally, I like Richards' voice a lot: his solo stuff and his thang with The Expensive Winos is balls-out dark and dirty. Regarding Rollover Beethoven, I think it's a pretty crap vehicle for both Beatles and Stones; Chuck Berry nails it with his usual sardonic approach. As well he should.
@steveconn Check out The Beatles live at hollywood bowl. George sings pretty well there. And btw. George was not the lead singer of the Beatles. you cannot compare George to Mick in any way. Other than that George was probably a better songwriter. How many "while my guitar gently weeps" or "Something" or "Here comes the sun" did Mick write on his own?? None.
@Yellyist No, Mick didn't write any boring lite-FM songs like George, just kick-ass rock n' roll like Jumpin Jack Flash, Sympathy for the Devil, and You Can't Always Get What You Want. You got me there.
@steveconn Bullshit. those songs i mentioned are conisdered to be among the beatles best songs. And Mick Jagger wore makeup, dressed up like a woman and danced like a fucking fag. None of the beatles did any of that. John Lennon said to the Rolling Stone magazine that Mich was jealous of the beatles, and tried to copy them which is what the Stones did in the 60`s. Beatles released pepper, Stones released majestic, Beatles released All you need is love, Stones released We love you.
@Yellyist I know, the Beatles were too boring to be entertaining onstage except by smiling and bouncing up and down like dashboard bobbleheads, while Jagger was frontman supreme who influenced everyone from Bowie to Mercury to...anyone interesting.Yeah, John just said that stuff because by then he had thrown his career away on Yoko and the Stones were continuing on as a world-conquerers. Beatles copied:Paul started piano songs after Ruby Tuesday, black guy on Let It Be after Stones had one, etc.
@steveconn How come George outsold the Stones with his debut album "All things must pass" if the Stones were the world-conqueres? As far as the Unites States goes, "All things must pass" outsold "Let it bleed" "Sticky fingers" and "Exile on main street" combined. Paul McCartney had 9 no.1 hits post beatles. That`s one more than the Stones. And there were piano on "good day sunshine" from 1966, one year before "Ruby tuesday" Billy Preston worked with Beatles before he worked with the Stones.
@Yellyist I was talking about John's jealousy over the Stones still existing while his group was over, not about Paul and George, dipshit. And all those Stones albums you mentioned went #1 anyway. Good Day Sunshine came out six months before Tuesday, and does not have Ruby's piano ballad style that Paul would use on Jude, Let It Be, etc. The Stones used a black guy, Rocky Dijon, on their Dec '68 Rock and Roll Circus Special, a month before the Beatles brought in Billy Preston for Let It Be.
@steveconn Your arguments are bullshit. The Stones stole the melody to "the singer not the song" from the beatles "Not a second time" And what about their "parody" of Sgt. Peppers?? or their version of "all you need is love" "we love you" It`s clear to anybody that they were trying to be the beatles. They even hired Billy Preston after he was one "Get back" and "let it be" John was totally right. Mick wanted to be a beatle! "Let it bleed" was never a U.S. no.1 album at all by the way.
@Yellyist You're right - the matching suits the Stones wore until '67, the cute chipmunk harmonies, the smiling, toe-tapping songs about holding hands and being nice to each other like Satisfaction and Thumb, Mick barely moving onstage, the complete lack of blues roots in the Stones sound - you could hardly tell the groups apart! The Stones were totally trying to be the Beatles! And John and Yoko were way better than the Beatles! Okay, do I sound crazier than you yet, or are you still winning?
@steveconn Yoko didn`t contribute to any of the things i mentioned. And you`re totally clueless about the Beatles when you dismiss them as a shit band who only wrote songs about holding hands etc. They released "i`m a loser" in 1964, and "Help" and "you`ve got to hide your love away" in 1965. 1966 produced gems like "Eleanor Rigby" "She said she said" "Rain" "For no one" "Tomorrow never knows" who is much more advanced than any of the songs the Stones were doing at the time.
@stevec Why would John be jealous of the stones when he had been a beatle?? Come on man. They outsold the Stones 5 or 6 times. And both john and Paul were each more talented than the whole rolling stones combined. Paul could play every instrument on earth, and John wrote songs that only mick could dream about writing. Can you imagine Mick writing something like "Cold Turkey" or "instant karma" or an album like "plastic ono band"?? Again.Keith was the only real talented songwriter in the stones
@Yellyist It`s not about winning. It`s about setting the record straight. The Beatles had three extremely good songwriters. The stones had one. Each of the members of the Beatles went on to have very successful solo carees. Even Ringo sold millions. How many did Charlie sell? And Beatles wrote rock songs better than anybody. "Helter skelter" Sgt. Pepper" Back in the USSR" "Revolution" kicked ass.
@Yellyist All the Beatles wrote extremely bland "glad/sad" pop songs until Dylan inspired them to write slightly less bland pop songs (and when Lennon was baked enough to write gibberish songs like Walrus and Come Together). The Beatles only had successful solo careers because everyone knew they weren't getting back together as the Beatles, so they bought whatever came out. Helter is the sound of a lightweight trying to sound hard - just noise. USSR like the Beach Boys and Revolution just bleery
@steveconn Bullshit. Beatles rocked better than anybody. They did "Long tall sally" better than Little Richard and "Rock and roll music" better than Chuck Berry. Paul wrote "I saw her standing there" when he was a teenager which is a fantastic rock song. I love their early stuff. "All my loving" is a gem, "I want to hold your hand" is fantastic, "A hard days night" is wonderful. The Beatles were writing good quality stuff before the Stones had written anything.
@steveconn I`ve already pointed out where the Stones stole from the Beatles. "The singer not the song" is "Not a second time" from with the beatles. Their satanic majestic request is sgt pepper. "We love you" is "All you need is love" and what about Billy Preston?? He was on "Let it be" before the Stones hired him. I could go on and on. Mick would show up at the Dakota back in the 70`s and John refused to see him. John was a real rocker. He didn`t do any fag dancing. he sang "Yer blues" instead!
@Yellyist Paul wanted strings on Yesterday after hearing Marianne Faithfull's '64 version of Jagger's "As Tears Go By"; the riff for Daytripper is a watered-down copy of Satisfaction; the harpsichord on "Mr Kite" was used two years after the Stones used it on "Play With Fire;" the accordian on "Rocky Raccoon" came a year after the Stones on "Backstreet Girl." Plus the melody of Lady Madonna was a rip of Bad Penny Blues, and John and George were both successfully sued for music plagiarism. LOL!
@BL80488 He`s a troll. His arguments are bullshit. I personally think Satisfaction is way better than Day tripper, but that`s a matter of taste. Satisfaction is a great song, and it was mainly written by Keith. i like the a-side to day tripper, we can work it out. That`s a great song were john and paul worked well together. John wrote the middle eight and Paul wrote the rest.
@steveconn Where did you learn than Paul wanted strings on "Yesterday" He wanted a full band on yesterday, but George Martin suggested that Paul did it by himself along with a string quartet. "As tears goes by" which i personally think is a very good song had nothing to do with the strings on yesterday. Paul claims to have written it back in 1964 before "as tears goes by" was released.
@steveconn he co-wrote that with keith.. Paul wrote "Blackbird" all alone. Paul wrote "Hey Jude" alone too... Jagger isn`t capable of writing quality like that.
@Yellyist i think Jagger wrote crap like "Fool to cry" and "emotional rescue" alone. Even Ringo wrote better songs than that. "It don`t come easy" outranks them both!
@Yellyist Mick wrote verses, Keith chorus. But yeah,rhyming 'bad' and 'sad' on Hey Jude takes a special kind of songwriting genius,like maybe Big Bird on Sesame Street. Jagger lines like "Killed the Czar and his ministers/Anastasia screamed in vain" on Sympathy and "She was practiced at the art of deception/I could tell by her blood stained hands" on You Can't Always simply destroy McCartney in terms of intelligence and sophistication. Paul wrote good children's songs, though - perfect for you.
@steveconn Whatever... You`re a sad figure.. It`s incredible that i have to explain to anybody that "Hey Jude" is a classic, and that it took a genius to write it. But i don`t care. Paul McCartney is an icon and a genius to everyone else than you. I`ve never heard a single person in my lifetime say otherwise. Paul wrote Hey jude for Johns son Julian after jonn had left cynthia for Yoko. The tune is fantastic, and the words are moving.
@Yellyist I don't go by handed down cliches, I go by the obvious, and it's obvious Hey Jude is a fucking retarded barney the dinosaur song for people who have the psychological depth of a six year old. "Don't make it bad," duh, clap hands together, yay, happy times. You're obviously afraid of leaving behind coloring books and kindegarten. You and Paul have a ball.
@steveconn you seem to like clishes as long as it`s written by the Stones. What about "As tears goes by" The lyrics are really wonderful aren`t they? This is the evening of the day, i sit and watch the children play... Wow... Amazing. They should get a Nobel prize for that. The Beatles were writing "i`m a loser" when they were playing around with that one! So much for children songs. You`re a hypocrit!
@Yellyist You make no sense. I never claimed Mick was a genius for writing the lyrics to As Tears Go By the way you did Paul for Hey Jude. I just said that Mick's Sympathy and You Can't lyrics are leagues above Jude's simplistic lyrics, which they obviously are.
And don't talk about my mother on my vids, asshole, or I'll kill you. Being a pussy Beatles fan will only protect you to a limit.
@steveconn You`ll kill me?? You opened the door man. I was commenting on your little standup show where you made fun of your mother having an stroke. i would NEVER do that to my mother. And the joke about Libya was fucking tasteless. Don`t joke about your mother like you did. I would never have said anything about your mother if it hadn`t been for that joke you made on her behalf.
@steveconn Ok, well you pick on beatles for bad lyrics, and bring up "Hey Jude" as an example because Paul wrote it to Johns song Julian and is therefore in your eyes a kid song. Well, you seem to ignore the beatles songs that has great lyrics like "The fool on the hill" "Eleanor Rigby" "For no one" "Help" "Across the universe" "in my life" "Nowhere man" etc.. Even Bob Dylan said that Eleanor Ribgy has great lyrics, and Paul wrote them!
@steveconn Well, he`s fucked more men too! Btw, i`m not into girls, i`m into boys. And my boyfriend says hello! I`m actually a girl. If you thought i was a boy you made a mistake.
@steveconn My fiance told me to tell you to go fuck yourself. Girley music? what`s that? I dance to Rihanna and Lady ga ga, i listen to the beatles.I`m sure you like to join in with mick`s fag dancing.Maybe you should post a video of yourself fagdancing to micks crap songs.."Emotional rescue" would be a great song for you It`s just as bad as you are. Even the worst piece of shit Paul did with wings is better than Mick`s disco period.I think Keith agrees. Micks fag songs just don`t do it for me!
@steveconn Paul wrote gems like "Maybe i`m amazed" "The fool on the hill" "Let it be" "the long and winding road" "Eleanor Rigby" "Here, there and everywhere" "For no one" "Yesterday" "We can work it out" "got to get you into my life" He`s a genius. you`re a liar when you claim that the strings on Yesterday was inspired by the Stones. Not much of a beatles expert. I know all there is to know about the Stones. I`ve read Keiths book, and Bill Wymans books. i know what i`m talking about, you don`t
@Yellyist Yes, Paul was good at churning out one pointless fluffy pop song after another. We get it. And the strings for Yesterday coming from the Stones story came from Ian MacDonald's Revolution In The Head, the most acclaimed book about the Beatles ever written, you stupid piece of shit. The end.
@steveconn I`ve never heard about that book, and i`ve read almost everything there is to read about the Beatles. you`ve read one book about the beatles. Wow congratulations. Why do you study a band you hate?? That`s pretty pathetic. I kinda like the Stones, that`s why i study them. You seem to have nothing but disgust for the beatles. And Hey Jude was a song to Julian Lennon who was a child you fucking dipshit. And it`s one of the biggest selling songs of the beatles, and outsold "Satisfaction"
@Yellyist I liked the Beatles as a teen, before I got laid and got a job. Anybody who has done either finds the Beatles to be silly kids stuff after that. Fits you perfectly.
@Yellyist Paul sounds like a chipmunk on the verge of sneezing when he rocks and John just has that boring howl everytime. Jagger has so much more style (and his solo "Just Another Night" went number #1 in the 80's, btw). John was insecure in the face of a performer so much more entertaining than him, so resorted to third-grade comments about faggy dancing - what a deep genius! No wonder you worship him. Deep thinkers think alike
@steveconn Even little Richard was impressed with Paul`s take on "long tall sally" He even sang it better than Richard. Paul is a way better singer than Jagger, come on. Paul is GOD. He was a great bassist, and could play every instrument on earth. He plays every single instrument on his grammy nominated 2005 album "chaos and creation in the back yard" He plays everything on his 1970 classic "Maybe i`m amazed" I see you`re no McCartney fan. Well i worship him more than John. Paul rocks!!
@steveconn And not even Freddie Mercury danced like a fucking fag even though he was one. i like the Stones. I`ve even seen them in concert. But Keith is the heart and soul of the stones, not Mick. he even accepted a knighthood. I know Paul did too, but come on. One of the Rolling Stones??!! Keith would tell them to go fuck themselves if they had offered him the same. Keith wrote "Satisfaction" "Ruby tuesday" and "angie" Mick is not capable of writing quality like that. Even George is better!
@Yellyist Mick wrote the lyrics to Sympathy, whose lines like "who killed the Kennedys/you and me" is more powerful than bland lyrics like "the world needs sweeping" and "you know I believe and how." Okay, you're afraid of white people who dance to those scary negro rhythms - we get it. The Stones without Mick would just be another guitarist slumping over his guitar, even Keith has said so. Mick just stole the 2011 Grammys w/ his energy; the Beatles live were as exciting as wax dummies.
I would have to disagree. Though George does a great job, he doesn't have the same distorted guitar tone or attitude behind the playing. I am a little biased though, since keith richards is a personal hero of mine
@thestatictrees Are you really going to compare someone of Harrisons level to Richards? Harrison's leads on every beatles song were way ahead of what richards was producing at the same time. Harrison's voice also sounds better in that he sings it more fluidly. Richards fumbles his way through this song. Compare the live versions of Roll over beethoven.
@alienhuman Exactly. The Beatles, until Abbey Road, were a total pop band. The Rolling Stones were the more bad boy actual serious rockin' dirty music group. The Beatles were for the 13 year old girls, while the Stones were for the 18-21 year old girls haha xD
can we just listen to this without all the shit spewing from this helterskelher guy? i mean really, theres no comparison (sp?) to the rolling stones and the beatles...theyre both just bands (great bands)
@BL80488 Coyness Is Not An Attractive Feature In Grown Men
Both the Beatles and The Stones took their share of drugs. Well, Keith Richards probably took your share as well, but I digress…
Nevertheless, the coyness of the Beatles about the drug use was very far from endearing and smacked (pun intended) of a fear of losing their cuddly, family friendly image.
The Stones never allowed such concerns to get in the way of industrial quantity drug mis-use.
@BL80488 The Beatles Wrote The Worst Song Ever…Official
In 2004, a BBC released poll voted Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da the worst song ever. That’s because it is. Although Octopuses’ Garden runs it close…and Hello, Goodbye isn’t exactly the work of genius either.
@BL80488 The Stones, of course, are still going. While, admittedly, they haven’t done anything worthwhile in the last twenty years, they continued growing as a band way after The Beatles split and put out great album after great album well into the 1970s and even one (Tattoo You) in the 80s as well.
The Beatles lasted about six years, giving us a few good albums and lots of great singles. And then, well, they just gave up because they couldn’t really be bothered anymore. Listen to ‘Let It Be’ and you’ll hear the sound of a band who can’t be bothered
The Beatles may have been a fairly good live band, but they threw a strop somewhere around 1965 because the screaming was too loud and they couldn’t hear themselves properly.
The Stones would have just bought bigger amps. Let’s face it, from the footage available, it’s clear that The Beatles weren’t anywhere near in the Stones league as a live band. The Stones were, probably even still are, the greatest live act in rock n’ roll.
The Stones recorded ‘Beggars Banquet’, ‘Sticky Fingers’, ‘Exile on Main Street’, ‘Goats Head Soup’ in succession.
The Beatles made only one really consistent album – ‘Sargeant Peppers..’. The rest were pretty ropey (Let It Be, The White Album, Revolver…some good, some bad on all).
While The Stones are responsible for the execrable ‘Satanic Majesties Request’, there is nowhere near the level of self-indulgent rubbish as that churned out by The Beatles.
‘The White Album’, for example, is four good songs plus an hour of tiresome half-written rubbish, like ‘Why Don’t We Do It In The Road’.
Is this really the work of the best band in the world ever? Nope…it’s just rubbish from a bunch of self-indulgent millionaires.
When you’re five or six years old, ‘Yellow Submarine’, ‘When I’m Sixty Four’, ‘Here Comes The Sun’ and the like are fantastic songs. In pretty much the same way as ‘Mary Had A Little Lamb’ is fantastic poetry.
The fact is, though, that The Beatles novelty songs are, frankly, embarrassing. They’re generally awful music hall pastiche with – in far too many cases – the tone deaf Ringo singing.
The Stones avoided this trap and thank God for that.
Ringo Starr is an amiable, likeable scouser. Unfortunately, what he is not is a good drummer. In fact, he wasn’t even the best drummer in The Beatles.
I’ve heard all the revisionist nonsense about Ringo’s abilities over the last few years, but that’s all it is: nonsense.
By contrast, Charlie Watts is a fantastic drummer. His minimalist style in The Rolling Stones often hides his natural jazz style, but what he does in the Stones is always, always perfect.
I'd pick Harrison over Richards any day cuz Harrison could also sing, not trying to say Keith couldn't but I think Harrison just simply played better and sang alot better.
@bseenmedia2 No he didn't...in fact he made fun of the Beatles version...loser...I'll ask him next time I see him at the Blueberry Hill, He plays there once a month...
Prestonpiemincher, man you can't say anything about Harrison he was fucking sick as well as Keith is and the beatles aren't crap they actually wrote the song I wanna be your man on a napkin for these lads. Rollingstones performed it first though. Im not trying to say the stones aren't good or anything cuz their fucking sick but you know you can't say anything about a legendary band or a legendary guitarist like Harrison cuz they were bad ass.
Are you kidding? Everyone's kidding right? This Rolling Stones version blows away the Beatles version. Did anyone hear George Harrison desperately trying to play the solo? He took about 30 takes just to achieve the fumble finger solo he "pulls off". Lennon's rhythm guitar is impeccable but he's no Brian Jones (who plays rhythm in this version)...
@schampz only because as solo artists they wouldnt have a chance.All four beatles were sucessfull after the beatles split. Id love to see Richards, Jagger, Watts, & Wyman attempt it seeing that mick is the only one with a decent singing voice...
@BL80488 Starr doesn't have much of a singing voice. Richards actually could sing, and Wyman did sing one song...but it was all up the ass on effects (In Another Land) so you can't really tell, and Watts has never sung.
@xDeadMisfitsx Richards voice is not anywhere near that of Harrison, McCartney and Lennon. I consider ringos voice to be better than Richard's The only rolling stone that would maybe have a chance at a sucessful solo career is Jagger.
@BL80488 Well, Mick has released many solo albums. All of them has flopped big time. All of the Beatles sold millions after the beatles. Even Ringo had a platinum album and big no.1 hits on his own. George outsold "Let it bleed" "Sticky fingers" and "Exile on main st" combined with his 1970 debut album "All things must pass" And you`re wrong about Keith. He`s the only real talented songwriter in the Stones. Keith wrote "Ruby Tuesday" by himself, and he was the main writer of "Satisfaction"
@xDeadMisfitsx Ringo is the lead singer on "With a little help from my friends" i think he sings pretty well on that one. He`s also the lead singer on "Yellow submarine" and "Octupus`s garden" which he wrote.
@teolanusse91 Thats your opinion, I say the truth, the Betales is way more better than this andI can snap my fingers and stomp my feet to it than this version!
Why listen to a bunch of white brits when you can listen to a black american? or even better a bunch of white americans called the sonics that do the most badass version of this song
FleshHungryFiend 22 hours ago
Very rare photograph of Cyril and Alexis with Jagger, presumably at the Ealing club. Who is on stand up bass?
broadband0118 1 week ago
Fabulous Five!!!
SnaKeEXx 1 week ago
why people arguing over stupid shit just enjoy the music
stoneyshow 3 weeks ago 2
BTW, go Obama/Biden 2012!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist Your boyfriend's probably a closet fag, like Lennon. It's always those who scream the most about faggots that secretly are them. Lennon fucked his manager Epstein in Spain in '63, then flew into a rage whenever someone suggested he was gay, like at Paul's 21st birthday. Meanwhile those with vast more performance imagination to camp it up, yet have twenty children with women who they actually fuck, like Mick, influence Bowie, Tyler, and every other frontman.Enjoy your fake relationship.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Lennon did not have a sexual relationship with Brian Epstein. You`re a god damn liar. I know that Lennon talked about their vacation together, but he stated in interview after interview that nothing sexually happened. Well i told him that you called him a fag. He`s a U.S. marine. And he deserves to be treated with respect. But again. What can be expected from an asshole like yourself who jokes about his mothers illness on youtube? You`re nothing but a lowlife, and a lousy son!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist LENNON'S A US MARINE?!? LOL YOU'RE SUCH A FUCKING IDIOT!! He was never in the marines - he just wore that jacket on talk shows. I could give more quotes Lennon said pointing to his closet gayness, like when he told Yoko he liked her because she looked like a man, but I won't waste my time on such a profoundly stupid piece of shit such as yourself. Next tell us the Beatles were sailors because they lived on a Yellow Submarine. What a dumbass! :)
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn hmm... someone doesn't like the Beatles. why would think they're are gay all of them have wife .yes i know some gays have wife's,but i don' t understand how that has any thing to do with the music.It is the music and the person voice that makes the band good not if they're gay or not
lcawesome5 1 month ago
@lcawesome5 You have to read better. I said Lennon was closet-gay, after other person said Jagger was gay.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn I`ve never said that Lennon was a U.S. Marine. I was talking about my boyfriend you stupid halfwit.
Yellyist 2 weeks ago
@Yellyist Who gives a fuck - that discussion was a month ago, you retarded slowpoke.
steveconn 2 weeks ago
Look now, The Beatles and The Rolling Stones were friends, why can't we just accept that they are equals?
1bowsertahu 1 month ago
@1bowsertahu The Stones and the Beatles are two different bands. I love the beatles, and i like the Stones. But it`s not cool to come in here and see retards badmouth the beatles, and beatle members like John, Paul and George and compare them to trash. They deserve an answer, and i gave it to them. They think they`re so cool because the Stones played a couple of blues songs,and they look down on the beatles for sticking to pop and rock ignoring the fact that the stones is a pop/rock band too!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist They're different yes, but what they do differently, they are very good at. The Beatles have their goods and bads as do The Stones.
1bowsertahu 1 month ago
@1bowsertahu of course. The beatles had some bad moments, but not many. There were probably only a handful really lousy beatles songs. The rest was perfect. i will list my top ten worst beatles songs. 1. Revolution #9 2. Why don`t we do it in the road 3. Long long long 4.Blue jay way 5. The word 6. wild honey pie 7. run for your life 8. Wait 9. Baby you`re a rich man 10. Flying. Apart from those, i think they were pretty much flawless.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist What about those that were boyband tripe like If I Fell and From Me To You, or John's self-indulgent, drugged-out bores like on Dear Prudence, I'm So Tired, or Dig It? Flawless is too generous for those.
steveconn 1 month ago
@Yellyist why did u list "wait" and "the word" as ur top 10 worst beatle songs. i thought those 2 songs were great. the rest of the songs u listed were lousy.
MrCoolguy1632 2 weeks ago
@MrCoolguy1632 Cause i think they`re lousy. That`s it.
Yellyist 2 weeks ago
People are still arguing about Stones VS Beatles? It's been like 40 years. Let it go!
BatmanOneOhOne 1 month ago
Why the hell are people arguing about who are better? It's the fucking Beatles, and the fucking Stones. They're two of the greatest bands ever. They both fucking rock.
BFBCFTW 1 month ago
and how many no.1 albums has Mick released as a solo artist? None! George had two no.1 albums, including the massive "All things must pass" who sold more than "sticky fingers" "exile on main st" and "Let it bleed" combined. Even Ringo sold two millions of his 1973 "Ringo" album, and had two no.1 hits. How many no.1 hits has Charlie Watts had?
Yellyist 1 month ago
Gues that Mick doesn't like the blue suede shoes from George
Amsterdamjordaan 1 month ago
Where the heck didja find this? Is it "out there"??? Thanx.
ensconse 2 months ago
forget the beatles version AND the stones version... Chuck Berry leaves them both for dead
theMyTys 2 months ago
I like both the Beatles' version and the Stones'. Oh crap, I forgot to troll....
Ryan0253 3 months ago
beatles 4eva
mrbeng111 3 months ago
The thing about the stones is, when they're crap, they're bloody awful, but when they're good, THEY ARE SERIOUSLY ROCKIN. There's no inbetween.
MichaelPalinFan2008 3 months ago
Terrific! Thanks for digging this up!
Boyd58 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It was Rolling Stone's tribute to the beatles..that's what counts!!!
ibuhawa 3 months ago
Mick sang it more rocking, George sang it so sweet.. I love them all...
sabretoothxyz 4 months ago
@BL80488
Personally, I like Richards' voice a lot: his solo stuff and his thang with The Expensive Winos is balls-out dark and dirty. Regarding Rollover Beethoven, I think it's a pretty crap vehicle for both Beatles and Stones; Chuck Berry nails it with his usual sardonic approach. As well he should.
MrCoalescent 4 months ago
the beatles are better
Jojomielnik 4 months ago
This is a gem. Thank you!
Bwahzehdezooner 4 months ago
Fuckin Mick, what a fuckin rocker.
dezertfox4323 4 months ago
I like it a bit slower..
Tyngweert 4 months ago
George sounds like an accountant compared to Jagger's scalding delivery.
steveconn 5 months ago 4
@steveconn There`s no need to put down George Harrison asshole!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist There is if he sounds like a castrated chipmunk compared to this shithead!
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Check out The Beatles live at hollywood bowl. George sings pretty well there. And btw. George was not the lead singer of the Beatles. you cannot compare George to Mick in any way. Other than that George was probably a better songwriter. How many "while my guitar gently weeps" or "Something" or "Here comes the sun" did Mick write on his own?? None.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist No, Mick didn't write any boring lite-FM songs like George, just kick-ass rock n' roll like Jumpin Jack Flash, Sympathy for the Devil, and You Can't Always Get What You Want. You got me there.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Bullshit. those songs i mentioned are conisdered to be among the beatles best songs. And Mick Jagger wore makeup, dressed up like a woman and danced like a fucking fag. None of the beatles did any of that. John Lennon said to the Rolling Stone magazine that Mich was jealous of the beatles, and tried to copy them which is what the Stones did in the 60`s. Beatles released pepper, Stones released majestic, Beatles released All you need is love, Stones released We love you.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist I know, the Beatles were too boring to be entertaining onstage except by smiling and bouncing up and down like dashboard bobbleheads, while Jagger was frontman supreme who influenced everyone from Bowie to Mercury to...anyone interesting.Yeah, John just said that stuff because by then he had thrown his career away on Yoko and the Stones were continuing on as a world-conquerers. Beatles copied:Paul started piano songs after Ruby Tuesday, black guy on Let It Be after Stones had one, etc.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn How come George outsold the Stones with his debut album "All things must pass" if the Stones were the world-conqueres? As far as the Unites States goes, "All things must pass" outsold "Let it bleed" "Sticky fingers" and "Exile on main street" combined. Paul McCartney had 9 no.1 hits post beatles. That`s one more than the Stones. And there were piano on "good day sunshine" from 1966, one year before "Ruby tuesday" Billy Preston worked with Beatles before he worked with the Stones.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist I was talking about John's jealousy over the Stones still existing while his group was over, not about Paul and George, dipshit. And all those Stones albums you mentioned went #1 anyway. Good Day Sunshine came out six months before Tuesday, and does not have Ruby's piano ballad style that Paul would use on Jude, Let It Be, etc. The Stones used a black guy, Rocky Dijon, on their Dec '68 Rock and Roll Circus Special, a month before the Beatles brought in Billy Preston for Let It Be.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Your arguments are bullshit. The Stones stole the melody to "the singer not the song" from the beatles "Not a second time" And what about their "parody" of Sgt. Peppers?? or their version of "all you need is love" "we love you" It`s clear to anybody that they were trying to be the beatles. They even hired Billy Preston after he was one "Get back" and "let it be" John was totally right. Mick wanted to be a beatle! "Let it bleed" was never a U.S. no.1 album at all by the way.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist You're right - the matching suits the Stones wore until '67, the cute chipmunk harmonies, the smiling, toe-tapping songs about holding hands and being nice to each other like Satisfaction and Thumb, Mick barely moving onstage, the complete lack of blues roots in the Stones sound - you could hardly tell the groups apart! The Stones were totally trying to be the Beatles! And John and Yoko were way better than the Beatles! Okay, do I sound crazier than you yet, or are you still winning?
steveconn 1 month ago
Comment removed
Yellyist 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@steveconn Yoko didn`t contribute to any of the things i mentioned. And you`re totally clueless about the Beatles when you dismiss them as a shit band who only wrote songs about holding hands etc. They released "i`m a loser" in 1964, and "Help" and "you`ve got to hide your love away" in 1965. 1966 produced gems like "Eleanor Rigby" "She said she said" "Rain" "For no one" "Tomorrow never knows" who is much more advanced than any of the songs the Stones were doing at the time.
Yellyist 1 month ago
Comment removed
Yellyist 1 month ago
Comment removed
Yellyist 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stevec Why would John be jealous of the stones when he had been a beatle?? Come on man. They outsold the Stones 5 or 6 times. And both john and Paul were each more talented than the whole rolling stones combined. Paul could play every instrument on earth, and John wrote songs that only mick could dream about writing. Can you imagine Mick writing something like "Cold Turkey" or "instant karma" or an album like "plastic ono band"?? Again.Keith was the only real talented songwriter in the stones
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist It`s not about winning. It`s about setting the record straight. The Beatles had three extremely good songwriters. The stones had one. Each of the members of the Beatles went on to have very successful solo carees. Even Ringo sold millions. How many did Charlie sell? And Beatles wrote rock songs better than anybody. "Helter skelter" Sgt. Pepper" Back in the USSR" "Revolution" kicked ass.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist All the Beatles wrote extremely bland "glad/sad" pop songs until Dylan inspired them to write slightly less bland pop songs (and when Lennon was baked enough to write gibberish songs like Walrus and Come Together). The Beatles only had successful solo careers because everyone knew they weren't getting back together as the Beatles, so they bought whatever came out. Helter is the sound of a lightweight trying to sound hard - just noise. USSR like the Beach Boys and Revolution just bleery
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Bullshit. Beatles rocked better than anybody. They did "Long tall sally" better than Little Richard and "Rock and roll music" better than Chuck Berry. Paul wrote "I saw her standing there" when he was a teenager which is a fantastic rock song. I love their early stuff. "All my loving" is a gem, "I want to hold your hand" is fantastic, "A hard days night" is wonderful. The Beatles were writing good quality stuff before the Stones had written anything.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist And by saying the Stones were trying to copy the Beatles, you indeed are winning the crazy contest, which is what I meant.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn I`ve already pointed out where the Stones stole from the Beatles. "The singer not the song" is "Not a second time" from with the beatles. Their satanic majestic request is sgt pepper. "We love you" is "All you need is love" and what about Billy Preston?? He was on "Let it be" before the Stones hired him. I could go on and on. Mick would show up at the Dakota back in the 70`s and John refused to see him. John was a real rocker. He didn`t do any fag dancing. he sang "Yer blues" instead!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist Paul wanted strings on Yesterday after hearing Marianne Faithfull's '64 version of Jagger's "As Tears Go By"; the riff for Daytripper is a watered-down copy of Satisfaction; the harpsichord on "Mr Kite" was used two years after the Stones used it on "Play With Fire;" the accordian on "Rocky Raccoon" came a year after the Stones on "Backstreet Girl." Plus the melody of Lady Madonna was a rip of Bad Penny Blues, and John and George were both successfully sued for music plagiarism. LOL!
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Daytripper was not a watered down version of satisfaction, Daytripper is a much more sophisticated riff and a better song by the way.
BL80488 1 month ago
@BL80488 He`s a troll. His arguments are bullshit. I personally think Satisfaction is way better than Day tripper, but that`s a matter of taste. Satisfaction is a great song, and it was mainly written by Keith. i like the a-side to day tripper, we can work it out. That`s a great song were john and paul worked well together. John wrote the middle eight and Paul wrote the rest.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@steveconn Where did you learn than Paul wanted strings on "Yesterday" He wanted a full band on yesterday, but George Martin suggested that Paul did it by himself along with a string quartet. "As tears goes by" which i personally think is a very good song had nothing to do with the strings on yesterday. Paul claims to have written it back in 1964 before "as tears goes by" was released.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist I'm sure he does. Everyone knows Paul is a gooey sap artist who even John thought wrote songs for grannies.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn I`d like to see Mick Jagger write something like Blackbird or Eleanor Rigby..
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist He wrote Wild Horses, which makes both those songs sound like kindegarten nap time tunes.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn he co-wrote that with keith.. Paul wrote "Blackbird" all alone. Paul wrote "Hey Jude" alone too... Jagger isn`t capable of writing quality like that.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist i think Jagger wrote crap like "Fool to cry" and "emotional rescue" alone. Even Ringo wrote better songs than that. "It don`t come easy" outranks them both!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist Mick wrote verses, Keith chorus. But yeah,rhyming 'bad' and 'sad' on Hey Jude takes a special kind of songwriting genius,like maybe Big Bird on Sesame Street. Jagger lines like "Killed the Czar and his ministers/Anastasia screamed in vain" on Sympathy and "She was practiced at the art of deception/I could tell by her blood stained hands" on You Can't Always simply destroy McCartney in terms of intelligence and sophistication. Paul wrote good children's songs, though - perfect for you.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Whatever... You`re a sad figure.. It`s incredible that i have to explain to anybody that "Hey Jude" is a classic, and that it took a genius to write it. But i don`t care. Paul McCartney is an icon and a genius to everyone else than you. I`ve never heard a single person in my lifetime say otherwise. Paul wrote Hey jude for Johns son Julian after jonn had left cynthia for Yoko. The tune is fantastic, and the words are moving.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist I don't go by handed down cliches, I go by the obvious, and it's obvious Hey Jude is a fucking retarded barney the dinosaur song for people who have the psychological depth of a six year old. "Don't make it bad," duh, clap hands together, yay, happy times. You're obviously afraid of leaving behind coloring books and kindegarten. You and Paul have a ball.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn you seem to like clishes as long as it`s written by the Stones. What about "As tears goes by" The lyrics are really wonderful aren`t they? This is the evening of the day, i sit and watch the children play... Wow... Amazing. They should get a Nobel prize for that. The Beatles were writing "i`m a loser" when they were playing around with that one! So much for children songs. You`re a hypocrit!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist You make no sense. I never claimed Mick was a genius for writing the lyrics to As Tears Go By the way you did Paul for Hey Jude. I just said that Mick's Sympathy and You Can't lyrics are leagues above Jude's simplistic lyrics, which they obviously are.
And don't talk about my mother on my vids, asshole, or I'll kill you. Being a pussy Beatles fan will only protect you to a limit.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn You`ll kill me?? You opened the door man. I was commenting on your little standup show where you made fun of your mother having an stroke. i would NEVER do that to my mother. And the joke about Libya was fucking tasteless. Don`t joke about your mother like you did. I would never have said anything about your mother if it hadn`t been for that joke you made on her behalf.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist Go away, nobody Beatles fan. You bore me. Get some ice cream and sing some happy Paul songs!
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Ok, well you pick on beatles for bad lyrics, and bring up "Hey Jude" as an example because Paul wrote it to Johns song Julian and is therefore in your eyes a kid song. Well, you seem to ignore the beatles songs that has great lyrics like "The fool on the hill" "Eleanor Rigby" "For no one" "Help" "Across the universe" "in my life" "Nowhere man" etc.. Even Bob Dylan said that Eleanor Ribgy has great lyrics, and Paul wrote them!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist Great, Paul wrote one smart song, and seven hundred kiddie ones. Well done!
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn i sit and watch the children play... Well, keep watching Mick sing kiddie songs dressed up like a woman with his fag dancing, enjoy!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist He's fucked more women than all the Beatles combined. Maybe you can fuck one before you pass away. Good luck!
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Well, he`s fucked more men too! Btw, i`m not into girls, i`m into boys. And my boyfriend says hello! I`m actually a girl. If you thought i was a boy you made a mistake.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist Oh of course. The Beatles is girley music, makes perfect sense! Too bad you're afraid of dancing, you must be really boring to party with!
steveconn 1 month ago
Comment removed
Yellyist 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@steveconn My fiance told me to tell you to go fuck yourself. Girley music? what`s that? I dance to Rihanna and Lady ga ga, i listen to the beatles.I`m sure you like to join in with mick`s fag dancing.Maybe you should post a video of yourself fagdancing to micks crap songs.."Emotional rescue" would be a great song for you It`s just as bad as you are. Even the worst piece of shit Paul did with wings is better than Mick`s disco period.I think Keith agrees. Micks fag songs just don`t do it for me!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@steveconn Paul wrote gems like "Maybe i`m amazed" "The fool on the hill" "Let it be" "the long and winding road" "Eleanor Rigby" "Here, there and everywhere" "For no one" "Yesterday" "We can work it out" "got to get you into my life" He`s a genius. you`re a liar when you claim that the strings on Yesterday was inspired by the Stones. Not much of a beatles expert. I know all there is to know about the Stones. I`ve read Keiths book, and Bill Wymans books. i know what i`m talking about, you don`t
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist Yes, Paul was good at churning out one pointless fluffy pop song after another. We get it. And the strings for Yesterday coming from the Stones story came from Ian MacDonald's Revolution In The Head, the most acclaimed book about the Beatles ever written, you stupid piece of shit. The end.
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn I`ve never heard about that book, and i`ve read almost everything there is to read about the Beatles. you`ve read one book about the beatles. Wow congratulations. Why do you study a band you hate?? That`s pretty pathetic. I kinda like the Stones, that`s why i study them. You seem to have nothing but disgust for the beatles. And Hey Jude was a song to Julian Lennon who was a child you fucking dipshit. And it`s one of the biggest selling songs of the beatles, and outsold "Satisfaction"
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist I liked the Beatles as a teen, before I got laid and got a job. Anybody who has done either finds the Beatles to be silly kids stuff after that. Fits you perfectly.
steveconn 1 month ago
@Yellyist Paul sounds like a chipmunk on the verge of sneezing when he rocks and John just has that boring howl everytime. Jagger has so much more style (and his solo "Just Another Night" went number #1 in the 80's, btw). John was insecure in the face of a performer so much more entertaining than him, so resorted to third-grade comments about faggy dancing - what a deep genius! No wonder you worship him. Deep thinkers think alike
steveconn 1 month ago
@steveconn Even little Richard was impressed with Paul`s take on "long tall sally" He even sang it better than Richard. Paul is a way better singer than Jagger, come on. Paul is GOD. He was a great bassist, and could play every instrument on earth. He plays every single instrument on his grammy nominated 2005 album "chaos and creation in the back yard" He plays everything on his 1970 classic "Maybe i`m amazed" I see you`re no McCartney fan. Well i worship him more than John. Paul rocks!!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@steveconn And not even Freddie Mercury danced like a fucking fag even though he was one. i like the Stones. I`ve even seen them in concert. But Keith is the heart and soul of the stones, not Mick. he even accepted a knighthood. I know Paul did too, but come on. One of the Rolling Stones??!! Keith would tell them to go fuck themselves if they had offered him the same. Keith wrote "Satisfaction" "Ruby tuesday" and "angie" Mick is not capable of writing quality like that. Even George is better!
Yellyist 1 month ago
@Yellyist Mick wrote the lyrics to Sympathy, whose lines like "who killed the Kennedys/you and me" is more powerful than bland lyrics like "the world needs sweeping" and "you know I believe and how." Okay, you're afraid of white people who dance to those scary negro rhythms - we get it. The Stones without Mick would just be another guitarist slumping over his guitar, even Keith has said so. Mick just stole the 2011 Grammys w/ his energy; the Beatles live were as exciting as wax dummies.
steveconn 1 month ago
georgie was alot better, he had a much better singing voice and hes bloody gorgeous! ;)
makeupcookie 5 months ago
I would have to disagree. Though George does a great job, he doesn't have the same distorted guitar tone or attitude behind the playing. I am a little biased though, since keith richards is a personal hero of mine
thestatictrees 5 months ago
@thestatictrees Are you really going to compare someone of Harrisons level to Richards? Harrison's leads on every beatles song were way ahead of what richards was producing at the same time. Harrison's voice also sounds better in that he sings it more fluidly. Richards fumbles his way through this song. Compare the live versions of Roll over beethoven.
BL80488 4 months ago
ELO version waaaaaaaaaaaaayyy better
bbhijazi 5 months ago
Wow there doing lots of Chuck Berry song's arent they?
pancaikmix45 5 months ago
Beatles / Stones ... Apples / Oranges. The Beatles were a pop group at this time in history and the Stones were already a Rock Band.
alienhuman 6 months ago
@alienhuman Exactly. The Beatles, until Abbey Road, were a total pop band. The Rolling Stones were the more bad boy actual serious rockin' dirty music group. The Beatles were for the 13 year old girls, while the Stones were for the 18-21 year old girls haha xD
xDeadMisfitsx 5 months ago
Great versión, better than beatles. yeah
tkblatronchag1l 7 months ago
can we just listen to this without all the shit spewing from this helterskelher guy? i mean really, theres no comparison (sp?) to the rolling stones and the beatles...theyre both just bands (great bands)
tauntingfrenchman1 7 months ago
where can i get this? is this a bootleg?
silverbulletalchemis 8 months ago
@BL80488 Coyness Is Not An Attractive Feature In Grown Men
Both the Beatles and The Stones took their share of drugs. Well, Keith Richards probably took your share as well, but I digress…
Nevertheless, the coyness of the Beatles about the drug use was very far from endearing and smacked (pun intended) of a fear of losing their cuddly, family friendly image.
The Stones never allowed such concerns to get in the way of industrial quantity drug mis-use.
hellterskelher 8 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@BL80488 The Beatles Wrote The Worst Song Ever…Official
In 2004, a BBC released poll voted Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da the worst song ever. That’s because it is. Although Octopuses’ Garden runs it close…and Hello, Goodbye isn’t exactly the work of genius either.
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 The Stones, of course, are still going. While, admittedly, they haven’t done anything worthwhile in the last twenty years, they continued growing as a band way after The Beatles split and put out great album after great album well into the 1970s and even one (Tattoo You) in the 80s as well.
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 OK, We Give Up
The Beatles lasted about six years, giving us a few good albums and lots of great singles. And then, well, they just gave up because they couldn’t really be bothered anymore. Listen to ‘Let It Be’ and you’ll hear the sound of a band who can’t be bothered
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 In The Studio…No One Can Hear You Scream
The Beatles may have been a fairly good live band, but they threw a strop somewhere around 1965 because the screaming was too loud and they couldn’t hear themselves properly.
The Stones would have just bought bigger amps. Let’s face it, from the footage available, it’s clear that The Beatles weren’t anywhere near in the Stones league as a live band. The Stones were, probably even still are, the greatest live act in rock n’ roll.
hellterskelher 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BL80488 That George Martin Was Good, Wasn’t He
Let’s face it. Lennon and McCartney were good with a melody, but certainly weren’t the musical geniuses everyone thinks.
A large percentage of the arrangements and innovative instrumentation was down to their producer, George Martin.
Strip away a lot of that stuff and many of the songs don’t stand up anywhere near as well as the best of The Stones.
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 Where Did They Hide The Good Albums
The Stones recorded ‘Beggars Banquet’, ‘Sticky Fingers’, ‘Exile on Main Street’, ‘Goats Head Soup’ in succession.
The Beatles made only one really consistent album – ‘Sargeant Peppers..’. The rest were pretty ropey (Let It Be, The White Album, Revolver…some good, some bad on all).
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 Self-Indulgent Rubbish
While The Stones are responsible for the execrable ‘Satanic Majesties Request’, there is nowhere near the level of self-indulgent rubbish as that churned out by The Beatles.
‘The White Album’, for example, is four good songs plus an hour of tiresome half-written rubbish, like ‘Why Don’t We Do It In The Road’.
Is this really the work of the best band in the world ever? Nope…it’s just rubbish from a bunch of self-indulgent millionaires.
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 The Novelty Songs
When you’re five or six years old, ‘Yellow Submarine’, ‘When I’m Sixty Four’, ‘Here Comes The Sun’ and the like are fantastic songs. In pretty much the same way as ‘Mary Had A Little Lamb’ is fantastic poetry.
The fact is, though, that The Beatles novelty songs are, frankly, embarrassing. They’re generally awful music hall pastiche with – in far too many cases – the tone deaf Ringo singing.
The Stones avoided this trap and thank God for that.
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 The Drummer
Ringo Starr is an amiable, likeable scouser. Unfortunately, what he is not is a good drummer. In fact, he wasn’t even the best drummer in The Beatles.
I’ve heard all the revisionist nonsense about Ringo’s abilities over the last few years, but that’s all it is: nonsense.
By contrast, Charlie Watts is a fantastic drummer. His minimalist style in The Rolling Stones often hides his natural jazz style, but what he does in the Stones is always, always perfect.
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 From I Can’t Get No Satisfaction :
“When I’m watchin’ my TV
And a man comes on to tell me
How white my shirts can be
But he can’t be a man ’cause he doesn’t smoke
The same cigarrettes as me”
Lots more great
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 By contrast, The Rolling Stones were pretty accomplished lyricists. Here’s a few excerpts:
From Salt of The Earth :
“Raise your glass to the hard working people
Let’s drink to the uncounted heads
Let’s think of the wavering millions
Who need leaders but get gamblers instead”
hellterskelher 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BL80488 From Strawberry Fields Forever:
“No one I think is in my tree,
I mean it must be high or low.
That is you can’t you know tune in.
But it’s all right.
That is I think it’s not too bad. “
There’s much worse than this
hellterskelher 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BL80488 The Lyrics
The one thing that rarely gets mentioned about The Beatles is their lyrics. This is because, with only one or two exceptions, they are awful.
Here’s a few excerpts:
From Hello, Goodbye:
“You say goodbye and I say hello, hello, hello.
I don’t know why you say goodbye when I say hello, hello, hello.
I don’t why you say goodbye when I say hello.”
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 The Stones looked cooler
What’s this got to do with music? Everything. Keith and Mick were just cool – McCartney was a lovable, cheeky Scouser and Ringo was even worse.
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@BL80488 go fuck yerselve ya prick THE ROLLING STONES are better than that 40 year ago trash called the beatles LESS 2 dead beats no mop tops today
hellterskelher 8 months ago
Keith plays it better than that dead beat harrison
hellterskelher 8 months ago
@oskarloga La verdad que sí.
tkblatronchag1l 8 months ago
Harrison a better guitar player than Richards????? No Fu**ing way!!! I am not dissing George but please!!!! That is ludicrous!
slewstones 8 months ago
Fuck the Beatles!!!!!!
173rdbobby1967 10 months ago
john lennon was right, the stones are always trying to be like the beatles. the stones dont even come close to the beatles
xtaylorxgang93 10 months ago 2
@xtaylorxgang93
A vapid comment!
stercoraniste333 9 months ago
Oh nd TRBUFF, Harrison didnt play it sloppy at all he plays it as clean as Chuck Berry.
wewillbugyou 11 months ago 2
I'd pick Harrison over Richards any day cuz Harrison could also sing, not trying to say Keith couldn't but I think Harrison just simply played better and sang alot better.
wewillbugyou 11 months ago 2
Harrison played this sloppily. Keith plays it as clean as Chuck.
TRBUFF 11 months ago
I can settle this debate. Chuck Berry preferred The Beatles version. End of debate. Thank you.
bseenmedia2 1 year ago 4
@bseenmedia2 No he didn't...in fact he made fun of the Beatles version...loser...I'll ask him next time I see him at the Blueberry Hill, He plays there once a month...
kenpacha75 11 months ago
I'm a big Beatles fan but this version is much better....
132Reinier 1 year ago
Excuse me, Chuck Berry
wewillbugyou 1 year ago
And headbangingliam, this song was actually written by chuck barry
wewillbugyou 1 year ago
Prestonpiemincher, man you can't say anything about Harrison he was fucking sick as well as Keith is and the beatles aren't crap they actually wrote the song I wanna be your man on a napkin for these lads. Rollingstones performed it first though. Im not trying to say the stones aren't good or anything cuz their fucking sick but you know you can't say anything about a legendary band or a legendary guitarist like Harrison cuz they were bad ass.
wewillbugyou 1 year ago
The Stones always played so clean in the early days. It sounds so clean.
IdolHans 1 year ago
@IdolHans Clean? Just listen to Poison Ivy and Money, a perfect example of the early raw Stones sound!
robin14669 11 months ago
This sounds good regardless of what George did on the Anthology album.
IdolHans 1 year ago
amazing mick´s voice
soundshunter 1 year ago
@headbangingLiam go fuck yourselve LORDBUD IS CORRECT
Prestonpiemincher 1 year ago
Harrison is CRAP so is the beatles turds ROLLING STONES PLAY WAYYYYY BETTER
Prestonpiemincher 1 year ago
were do you have that second picture from?
barendenzijnfilmpjes 1 year ago
Are you kidding? Everyone's kidding right? This Rolling Stones version blows away the Beatles version. Did anyone hear George Harrison desperately trying to play the solo? He took about 30 takes just to achieve the fumble finger solo he "pulls off". Lennon's rhythm guitar is impeccable but he's no Brian Jones (who plays rhythm in this version)...
Lordbud 1 year ago
@Lordbud are you kidding? the beatles are amazing, they own this song, even if its a cover, i love the stones too, so im not biast.
HeadbangingLiam 1 year ago
disagree.this much nastier and more soulful.beatles could'nt hold a candle to the stones as far as a blues band.
nyg1954 1 year ago
@nyg1954 This version by the Stones still sounds merseybeat and for your information The Beatles version way more better!!
1979cl1 1 year ago
This one is better than the beatles version.
Because the tempo is faster.
mrsoccerboy91 1 year ago
@mrsoccerboy91 I disagree with you, The Beatles version is more harder than this one.
1979cl1 1 year ago
Excellent.
Keith could certainly do Chuck Berry.
Interesting bass line as well.
Was Bill on this session?
GravityBoy72 1 year ago
Keith kindof looks like George Harrison at 0:50
blutocampbell 1 year ago
Mick wasn't a great singer early on but he had the energy. Before '65 or so he sounded more like a snotty kid than a blues or rock singer.
journeythruthepast 1 year ago
this is much better than the beatles one.... it still have the r&b tihng chuck gives to his songs... beatles transform it into a pop song
teolanusse91 1 year ago
@teolanusse91
True, that's because both Charlie and Bill have jazz experience, which gives them a looser swing.
gibb253 1 year ago 14
@teolanusse91 Harrison sings it better and Plays it better.
BL80488 1 year ago 39
@BL80488 This versión is great too.
tkblatronchag1l 8 months ago
@BL80488 And Chuck sings and plays it even better.
PinkertonStudsworth 7 months ago 3
@BL80488 But the Stones still kicking ass today
schampz 4 months ago 2
@schampz only because as solo artists they wouldnt have a chance.All four beatles were sucessfull after the beatles split. Id love to see Richards, Jagger, Watts, & Wyman attempt it seeing that mick is the only one with a decent singing voice...
BL80488 4 months ago
@BL80488 Starr doesn't have much of a singing voice. Richards actually could sing, and Wyman did sing one song...but it was all up the ass on effects (In Another Land) so you can't really tell, and Watts has never sung.
xDeadMisfitsx 3 months ago
@xDeadMisfitsx Richards voice is not anywhere near that of Harrison, McCartney and Lennon. I consider ringos voice to be better than Richard's The only rolling stone that would maybe have a chance at a sucessful solo career is Jagger.
BL80488 3 months ago
@BL80488 Well, that's due to your bias opinion. It doesn't really matter though, ALL Beatles fans have biased opinions.
xDeadMisfitsx 3 months ago
@xDeadMisfitsx ALL Rolling Stones fans are biased aswell
BL80488 3 months ago
@BL80488 Well, Mick has released many solo albums. All of them has flopped big time. All of the Beatles sold millions after the beatles. Even Ringo had a platinum album and big no.1 hits on his own. George outsold "Let it bleed" "Sticky fingers" and "Exile on main st" combined with his 1970 debut album "All things must pass" And you`re wrong about Keith. He`s the only real talented songwriter in the Stones. Keith wrote "Ruby Tuesday" by himself, and he was the main writer of "Satisfaction"
Yellyist 1 month ago
@xDeadMisfitsx Beatles > Stones. Nothing else matters!
Gabrielleiteoliveira 2 months ago
@Gabrielleiteoliveira Too bad it's not true. Beatles like Barney the Dinosaur compared to the Stones.
steveconn 1 month ago
@xDeadMisfitsx Ringo is the lead singer on "With a little help from my friends" i think he sings pretty well on that one. He`s also the lead singer on "Yellow submarine" and "Octupus`s garden" which he wrote.
Yellyist 1 month ago
@schampz Paul and Ringo too you know...
joriszsz 4 months ago
@teolanusse91 Thats your opinion, I say the truth, the Betales is way more better than this andI can snap my fingers and stomp my feet to it than this version!
1979cl1 1 year ago
para mi igual que la version de the beatles,e inferior a la de chuck verry
Skywolf092 1 year ago
really cool pics, thanks
ifeelallright 1 year ago
Wow - never heard that before - great stuff!
richranger