Beatles vs. Stones

mapman

I read McCartney is working with the Stones on an upcoming release.  Phew….no need to choose anymore…

I heard that his contribution is limited to playing bass on one track.

Depends on my mood.

Most often played on my system are The White Album, Abbey Road, Let It Be, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers and Exile.

A much easier question to answer would be who I favor between Paul and John.

I prefer John.

Don't ask me to choose between Keef and M. Taylor, though; that's impossible

The Doors. No question.

Rockpile. Their Paul was Nick Lowe, their John Dave Edmunds. I saw both The Beatles and Rockpile live ("only" 15 years apart ;-), and Rockpile were by far the better band. So are NRBQ, Los Lobos, and plenty of others (Marty Stuart And His Fabulous Superlatives. When Norman Maslov---"Mazzy" of the YouTube Vinyl Community, a serious die-hard Beatles fanatic. His Beatles collection is larger than many people’s entire record collections---starts to talk about Marty & his band, he almost hyperventilates).

This continuing idolization of 1960’s Pop/Rock groups mystifies me. They made some fine music, but that was a LONG time ago. Others have made music just as good---if not better---since then. And some music at least as good was made before their time. There was nothing magical about the 1960’s. Except the mushrooms ;-) .

The Stones only flaw was that they are not the Beatles. The Stones are great, and the Beatles are legend, never will there be a group of their ilk again.