PDA

View Full Version : Who would you rather be?



KTC
06-27-2009, 10:14 PM
The Beatles or The Rolling Stones?

scarletpeaches
06-27-2009, 10:15 PM
Barney the Dinosaur.

KTC
06-27-2009, 10:15 PM
I picked the Rolling Stones...because I have always been crazy about Mick. AND....I'd rather be on the outside of the Beatles looking in. I'd rather appreciate them than be them. I can mimic Mick crazy accurate like. (-;

scarletpeaches
06-27-2009, 10:16 PM
I'm one of those blasphemers who doesn't rate The Beatles. I could happily never hear any of their stuff ever again.

Plus, I own Mick Jagger's solo recordings.

KTC
06-27-2009, 10:16 PM
Barney the Dinosaur.

Get out of my Metric poll.

aadams73
06-27-2009, 10:17 PM
The Stones. Most of them are still alive. Except Keef. I don't know what he is.

KTC
06-27-2009, 10:17 PM
GIMME SHELTER (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqldwoDXHKg)

Adam
06-27-2009, 10:19 PM
The Beatles were meh.

I'd rather be a Rolling Stone any day. ;)

KTC
06-27-2009, 10:21 PM
The Beatles were meh.

I'd rather be a Rolling Stone any day. ;)

DOH!

Rediscover the Beatles. You'd be surprised what you missed. They constantly blow me away. Especially the white album, record one-side one. But, really...once I start listening, a lot of their music just floors me.

regdog
06-27-2009, 10:21 PM
Neither, since, I don't like either.

scarletpeaches
06-27-2009, 10:22 PM
We have listened. And we think 'meh'.

KTC
06-27-2009, 10:23 PM
We have listened. And we think 'meh'.

everybody is always so meh. you know what i say to that? meh.

Haggis
06-27-2009, 10:23 PM
New Christy Minstrels.

scarletpeaches
06-27-2009, 10:24 PM
everybody is always so meh. you know what i say to that? meh.

I maintain my right to feel 'meh'.

regdog
06-27-2009, 10:26 PM
We could say "Ni"

Siddow
06-27-2009, 10:28 PM
Stones.

They do own their own music, don't they? I've been thinking about the Beatles catalog since MJ died. I hope he willed it to Paul and Ringo.

spamwarrior
06-27-2009, 10:29 PM
Beatles.

Because the Stones are ugly, IMO ^__^

Otherwise, Eggplant.

Adam
06-27-2009, 10:31 PM
DOH!

Rediscover the Beatles. You'd be surprised what you missed. They constantly blow me away. Especially the white album, record one-side one. But, really...once I start listening, a lot of their music just floors me.


We have listened. And we think 'meh'.

Whut she said. ;)

brokenfingers
06-27-2009, 10:32 PM
Personally, I prefer the Rolling Beetles.

Ken
06-27-2009, 10:46 PM
... Beatles. Drummer in particular. Always wanted to play the drums, though I think my style would be more like Moon's.

Priene
06-27-2009, 11:29 PM
Difficult one. The Rolling Stones have a better long-term survival rate, but the extant Beatles don't all look like shrivelled plums.

I'm going for Freddie and the Dreamers.

Millicent M'Lady
06-27-2009, 11:37 PM
DOH!

Rediscover the Beatles. You'd be surprised what you missed. They constantly blow me away. Especially the white album, record one-side one. But, really...once I start listening, a lot of their music just floors me.

Revolver just has to be one of the best albums ever made. Tomorrow Never Knows- years ahead of its time.

Button
06-28-2009, 12:21 AM
*whines* But I don't wanna haveta be a boy!

Where's the She-Ra option? I'm for high-heel boots, gold cape and a big sword.

Vincent
06-28-2009, 12:33 AM
Gee, McCartney or Keith Richards...

Siddow
06-28-2009, 12:49 AM
Gee, McCartney or Keith Richards...

I'll just say...Heather.

rhymegirl
06-28-2009, 12:54 AM
Can I pick neither?

BigWords
06-28-2009, 01:16 AM
It's hard to listen to The Beatles with fresh ears after hearing the pastiche album by Oasis The Rutles.

KTC
06-28-2009, 01:19 AM
Can I pick neither?


There are only two options, m'lady. If you don't pick one of them you risk becoming Liza Minelli.

scarletpeaches
06-28-2009, 01:32 AM
There are only two options, m'lady. If you don't pick one of them you risk becoming Liza Minelli.

Be my Gest.

som1luvsmi
06-28-2009, 01:46 AM
The Beatles.

But only based on musicality. I wouldn't want to be a member from either band.

regdog
06-28-2009, 01:49 AM
There are only two options, m'lady. If you don't pick one of them you risk becoming Liza Minelli.


Be my Gest.

http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l117/regdog/smiley-sick007.gif

Susie
06-28-2009, 02:49 AM
Yoko Ono. :)

TerzaRima
06-28-2009, 03:42 AM
I'll just say...Heather.


You don't have a leg to stand on.

TerzaRima
06-28-2009, 03:45 AM
And, Beatles for sheer innovation. Without Lennon and McCartney, Noel Gallagher and the rest of Oasis would be wankers living in their mother's basement.

KTC
06-28-2009, 03:45 AM
Be my Gest.

be my Gest, put our service to the test!

scarletpeaches
06-28-2009, 03:45 AM
And, Beatles for sheer innovation. Without Lennon and McCartney, Noel Gallagher and the rest of Oasis would be wankers living in their mother's basement.

Which would be a good thing.

Jersey Chick
06-28-2009, 03:47 AM
The Stones.

I'll echo the meh for the Beatles...

KTC
06-28-2009, 03:47 AM
Yoko Ono. :)

You can be my Yoko Ono. You can follow me wherever I go. Be my, be my, be my Yoko Ono.

KTC
06-28-2009, 03:48 AM
Which would be a good thing.

I wish to Christ they were actually abortions. That would be even better.

thethinker42
06-28-2009, 03:52 AM
I'd rather do be 30 Seconds to Mars.

Pagey's_Girl
06-28-2009, 04:07 AM
I'd pick the Stones. "Honkey Tonk Woman" was the first song I ever learned to play on a guitar. :D

Susie
06-28-2009, 05:36 AM
You can be my Yoko Ono. You can follow me wherever I go. Be my, be my, be my Yoko Ono.


Aww, that's so nice, Kevin! :)

C.bronco
06-28-2009, 05:41 AM
Stones, no contest. Great poll Sir!

KTC
06-28-2009, 06:02 AM
Stones, no contest. Great poll Sir!

And to think...only a week ago they were mocking my pollage abilities.

Death Wizard
06-28-2009, 06:57 AM
They're both so awesome I can't choose between them.

BenPanced
06-28-2009, 07:06 AM
While I don't deny either's talent or place in music history, they're so ubiquitous there's probably some law requiring the "oldies" radio stations to play both at least once an hour.

Having said that, I choose Art of Noise. TRA-LA-LA!

rhymegirl
06-28-2009, 07:55 AM
There are only two options, m'lady. If you don't pick one of them you risk becoming Liza Minelli.

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j80/rhymegirl/liza.jpg

"Life is a Cabaret old chum, come to the Cabaret."

benbradley
06-28-2009, 08:49 AM
The Beatles. My vote tied it up, 11-11.

Never before have I been so tempted to make sockpuppets... <goes looking for a few proxy sites>

The Stones. Most of them are still alive. Except Keef. I don't know what he is.
Pete Best (http://www.petebest.com/) is still alive. With Paul and Ringo, that means most of the Beatles are still alive.

We have listened. And we think 'meh'.
You may have listened, but you haven't HEARD...

Priene
06-28-2009, 09:05 AM
Pete Best (http://www.petebest.com/) is still alive.

Stuart Sutcliffe is Mr Dead, though.

benbradley
06-28-2009, 09:42 AM
Turn us on, dead man...

aadams73
06-28-2009, 11:53 AM
Pete Best (http://www.petebest.com/) is still alive. With Paul and Ringo, that means most of the Beatles are still alive.


Nitpicker.

NeuroFizz
06-28-2009, 05:03 PM
This is actually an interesting poll for those who lived the history of the early 60's "British Invasion" of the U.S. or for those who have researched it. This was wrapped in the embryonic tunic of "long hair activism" where the male youths used hair length as one of several means of projecting the sense of rebellion and change. "Get a damn haircut" was the cry of the older generation, and kids everywhere were forced by their parents to cut their hair or punished for letting it get to long. I was almost removed from my acolyte position in my church for having hair that was a little too long (barely touching my ears and maybe my collar in the back).

Of the two major invasion bands circa 1963, the Beatles were chided for their long hair, which was neatly trimmed in amazingly even hair-helmets, and the Stones for hair that was more on the wild side. Beatles initially donned matching suits and sang sweet rhyming harmonies of She Loves You, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah. The Stones were more coarse cut in music and lyrics. So, my recollection--one was either a Beatles fan or a Rolling Stones fan, but not both (at least to the same degree). One represented the good boys and the other the bad boys.

I tired of the Beatle's early work very quickly and found better footing with the music of the Stones. And they are still my favorite group of all time.

poetinahat
06-28-2009, 05:06 PM
Dear Prudence.
(I'm actually just very hooked on this particular song right now.)

At their best, I think both groups were otherworldly, but you can find ordinary stuff in either oeuvre.

My favorite person of the lot was George Harrison. Otherwise, I'd like to have been Bob Weir.

benbradley
06-28-2009, 05:50 PM
And to think...only a week ago they were mocking my pollage abilities.
It's due all your practice at it and getting all your "bad polls" out of your system that led up to this. Congratulations!

Someone should start a thread in Goals and Accomplishments. KTC starts a great poll!

KTC
06-28-2009, 05:55 PM
I'm smiling on the inside.

benbradley
06-28-2009, 06:00 PM
I'll grant the Stones had at least one exquisite song, "Sympathy for the Devil" but I hear a "sameness" in so many of their songs, such as "Satisfaction" and "Start Me Up" which seem to have the same tempo and beat.

scarletpeaches
06-28-2009, 06:05 PM
I always said that about The Beatles. Their catalogue is one grey 'meh' to me.

Let the lynching begin.

Adam
06-28-2009, 06:08 PM
I always said that about The Beatles. Their catalogue is one grey 'meh' to me.

Let the lynching begin.

Ditto. :)

Come on peeps, I'm sure a lot of peeps agree, where're y'all hiding? :D

KTC
06-28-2009, 06:12 PM
I like virtually every Stones song and virtually every Beatles song. I'd rather get to watch the Beatles though, and be the Stones.

IF I WAS A DANCER, PART II (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37pRNKzpjcg)

KTC
06-28-2009, 06:14 PM
HAPPINESS IS A WARM GUN (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37pRNKzpjcg)


The Beatles are a drug opera. Trust me...on drugs, you would think they were divine madness. Some (Johnny) might even say they were bigger than God.

KTC
06-28-2009, 06:16 PM
GLASS ONION (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4IXpebAlUo)

KTC
06-28-2009, 06:17 PM
MS. RIGBY (ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0DB2Nh1J08)

wearing a face that she keeps in a jar by the door.

KTC
06-28-2009, 06:18 PM
Ballad of John and Yoko. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1pv2Bws2lQ)

scarletpeaches
06-28-2009, 06:19 PM
HAPPINESS IS A WARM GUN (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37pRNKzpjcg)


The Beatles are a drug opera. Trust me...on drugs, you would think they were divine madness. Some (Johnny) might even say they were bigger than God.

If you have to get high to appreciate them, what does that say about their music?

Now if you want to get wasted and listen to music, it's The Doors all the way, baby.

KTC
06-28-2009, 06:35 PM
If you have to get high to appreciate them, what does that say about their music?

Now if you want to get wasted and listen to music, it's The Doors all the way, baby.


You don't, moron...I'm just saying it makes it even more fantabulous.

I'm afraid that I'm going to have to insist that you like the Beatles.


PS: I love the DOORS big time. Especially LOVE STREET and PEACE FROG.

scarletpeaches
06-28-2009, 07:04 PM
"Pfft!" I say to your insistence. Now. Show me the way to the next whiskey bar.

KTC
06-28-2009, 07:07 PM
"Pfft!" I say to your insistence. Now. Show me the way to the next whiskey bar.

Weird. I was just singing that song!


What about Hyacinth House (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bwvon-YQtBk)?

Priene
06-28-2009, 10:41 PM
I always said that about The Beatles. Their catalogue is one grey 'meh' to me.

Seconded. They were an early-sixties Westlife.

And the Rolling Stones were a mockney Kasabian.

Cranky
06-28-2009, 10:51 PM
The Stones, no question. And I don't even like them that much, taken as a whole. Couple of songs I really enjoy, like Paint It Black, but otherwise, meh.

Death Wizard
06-29-2009, 04:47 AM
There's a difference between liking the Stones or Beatles in a "I listen to them every day sense" and arguing that the Stones and Beatles aren't huge. Both are top 10 all time in rock annals, and are massive influences both innovative, brilliant and remarkable. Few can stand against either of them.

Shadow_Ferret
06-29-2009, 05:06 AM
I picked the Stones. Better odds of still being alive. Beatles, your odds are 50/50.

poetinahat
06-29-2009, 06:44 AM
I think that, in terms of their influence, both the Beatles and the Stones suffer from being so heavily played, and from their time having passed. Same as, say, Louis Armstrong or even JS Bach. So they sound less than fantastic to newer audiences. What I mean:

1) We hear them everywhere, even in elevators, so they're woven into everyday life, every mundane event

2) We've heard all their songs hundreds of times by now, so they've lost freshness to our ears

3) Many other groups were influenced by them (or flat-out lifted their sounds), so their innovations now sound commonplace (see, for example, Oasis and The Verve). But compare them to their contemporaries, and again they sound unique.

4) Rock and Roll was the younger generation's music; any RnR band that's still going over forty years later is going to have a hard time sounding as new at shuffleboard age as they did as scrawny teens. Darn few acts - if any - stay cutting-edge that long. Or they change priorities - being new and different becomes less important; just writing good songs becomes more interesting. One could argue, say, that the Stones had a career as groundbreakers for, say, 10-15 years and have been on a victory tour ever since.

eta:
5) At least for me, a lot of music's appeal is the memories that I associate with particular songs. So, I might like a song all the more because it evokes a happy time in my life, or at least a time that I remember very fondly (even if the memory is better than the real thing actually was). Younger audiences won't have that; it's all at least one degree removed for them. "Gimme Shelter" would sound a lot different to me now if I'd been at Altamont.

Matera the Mad
06-29-2009, 08:46 AM
Had to be Stones. I can't stand Paul Baby-cheeks McCartney. Would rather puke gartersnakes than be 1/4 Paul.

Samantha's_Song
06-29-2009, 11:18 AM
The Rolling Stones - The Beatles music ia as boring as another singer's who's been in the news a lot lately.

KTC
11-14-2009, 02:02 AM
exhibit A

robeiae
11-14-2009, 02:06 AM
You're an exhibit.

KTC
11-14-2009, 02:11 AM
You're an exhibit.

and as long as we're calling spades spades, you're a man with too many vowels.

Angie
11-14-2009, 02:37 AM
And he smells funny.

robeiae
11-14-2009, 02:48 AM
And he smells funny.
It's because he's Canadian.

Angie
11-14-2009, 06:38 AM
It's because he's Canadian.

You're Canadian??

robeiae
11-14-2009, 06:44 AM
Either that or you're drunk...

Angie
11-14-2009, 06:53 AM
Anything's possible...