Beatles vs. Stones

Enjoyed them both, and too different from each other for me to be able to rank them in my head.  Sweet vs. tart. Tune-smiths vs rockers. In any case, I enjoyed and still enjoy Bowie more than either of them. But yeah, it was an important decision to make back in the day.

The Stones explored the darker regions of my being. The Beatles had tons of song-writing ability but often seemed to be wagging their fingers at me.

@onhwy61 Thanks for setting it straight for me! 'Preciate it.

@cd318 Yeah, I have to agree that, at their best, the Beach Boys’ recordings are things of absolute loveliness. As fine as anything ever put to vinyl.

@onhwy61 I’m taking everything you say in the post above as gospel. Thanks for setting me straight! As a matter of fact I did indeed see McCartney on stage alongside Plant, Page and the rest of Led Zep when I saw them at the Rose Palace (or was it the Shrine Exhibition Hall?) in ’69.

I’m not so much into provenance, originality or other scholarly aspects of art & music as I am with the sheer emotional involvement a goodly piece of art or music can send my way. Yeah, it’s always nice to have your cerebral cortex tickled, but baser instincts have always ruled the day for me.

Then again, how many repetitions of  the One-Four-Five chord progression can a fella’ take?

@larsman The way I see it, I can't be sure the Stones were inspired enough by Sgt. Pepper to do Satanic Majesties, were doing it as a friendly tit-for-tat, or were given just a tiny bit of pressure from their record company. In any case, the Stones were pretty obviously out of their element with Satanic Majesties. It had its stretches of fun and a few moments of good music but it is certainly one of their less successful efforts.