Sir Stewart Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Your opinion is so wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan > Please Please Me or With the Beatles Not by much, but that's how I see it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JerseyMike Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 think Highway 61 and Help/Rubber Soul are the only times they released albums in the same year and Dylan beat them. The amazing thing is the influence the artists had on each of those records! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gobias Industries Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Maybe. Still, early Beatles albums > Dylan albums from same time period, and late Beatles albums > Dylan from same time period. I think Highway 61 and Help/Rubber Soul are the only times they released albums in the same year and Dylan beat them. Even with my dialogue I still think Beatles >>> Dylan. It's just that Dylan made the whole thinking thing popular. That doesn't necessarily mean he put out better material. I even like Help/Rubber Soul a lot more than Highway 61, just because I think Help! is the second best Beatles song. Ever. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan > Please Please Me or With the Beatles Not by much, but that's how I see it. Boy that's probably the toughest one for me. I might agree. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gobias Industries Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I am tempted to start a "Rank the Beatles: I dare you!" thread with all this talk. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 do elaborate. that is not my intention at all. of course The Beatles are one of the most important bands ever. i'm not trying to say they weren't. i'm just saying that as a band, as a group of musicians in a room playing, The Band was better and I enjoy them more. and songs? Whispering Pines, King Harvest, Rockin' Chair, Across The Great Divide, Unfaithful Servant, Up On Cripple Creek, The Weight, We Can Talk, In A Station, The Rumor, Stage Fright, Sleeping, All La Glory, The Shape I'm In, Caledonia Mission, Lonesome Suzie, When You Awake, The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down, The W.S. Walcott Medicine Show, Rag Mama Rag, Strawberry Wine, Katie's Been Gone, etc.forgot one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
embiggen Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 again with "The Band." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Minor Threat's better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Adam2 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Thats just not true. Sorry. EVERY BAND STARTS THEIR SESSIONS BY PLAYING LIVE IN THE STUDIO. Its called "basics". Then they go back and start re-tooling whatever they want to fix or change. The Band did A LOT of this on "Big Pink" and especially on "The Band". John Simon himself said that they were recorded mostly live, with added things such as horns, maybe some vocals, and other minimal overdubs. I guess you, someone who was not present at the recording sessions, know more about them than someone who was. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 John Simon himself said that they were recorded mostly live, with added things such as horns, maybe some vocals, and other minimal overdubs. I guess you, someone who was not present at the recording sessions, know more about them than someone who was.Most bands record in this manner. The Band were not special in this regard. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JerseyMike Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 John Simon himself said that they were recorded mostly live, with added things such as horns, maybe some vocals, and other minimal overdubs. I guess you, someone who was not present at the recording sessions, know more about them than someone who was. Thats not exactly "live" is it? In fact, it sounds like the exact approach the Beatles (and almost every band on the planet earth)used on all of their recordings, making your original point mute and obsolete. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
markosis Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I hate arguing about music. Its as redundant as arguing about religion or politics...it means something totally different to each individual soul. And it doesn't matter anyway, because The Band was better Why? None of The Beatles had such an awesome beard. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 RU Crazy? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JerseyMike Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Although Garth's beard is by far and away the greatest beard in rock history, John and George had some pretty good beards for a while! And in the end, you don't count how many hits you've had, or how many gold records are on your wall...you just sit back and stroke your beard! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Paul's is the greatest beard in rock history (admittedly, that pic doesn't do it justice). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
markosis Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I'm glad I started a sensible debate. There's NO WAY Paul's beard is cooler than Garth's. Even Levon's got Paul beat: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gobias Industries Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 If we're really comparing facial hair, Martin Van Buren's mutton chops >>>>> all. I still think Paul's is the best beard. It's manly yet is still legit classy. I'm a fan of classy beards. Anyone can pull off a rough beard, you just don't shave, but it's hella hard to maintain a beard as classy as McCartney's. Speaking of great rock beards: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 If we're really comparing facial hair, Martin Van Buren's mutton chops >>>>> all. Seriously, if we're going old school, then Ambrose Burnside must be mentioned. I mean, c'mon, sideburns were named for the guy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Seriously, if we're going old school, then Ambrose Burnside must be mentioned. I mean, c'mon, sideburns were named for the guy.Tough to argue with that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Adam2 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Thats not exactly "live" is it? In fact, it sounds like the exact approach the Beatles (and almost every band on the planet earth)used on all of their recordings, making your original point mute and obsolete. I'm not saying that The Band recorded 100% live and got everything perfect that way. I'm saying that their early recordings are mostly unadultered performances sometimes augmented by minimal overdubs. I guess I forgot that raw, "live-in-the-studio" feel Revolver, Sgt. Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour have... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gobias Industries Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Seriously, if we're going old school, then Ambrose Burnside must be mentioned. I mean, c'mon, sideburns were named for the guy. touch Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Tough to argue with that.Except that dude couldn't write a song to save his life. Have you heard "Fredericksburg (More Like 'Deadricksburg)"? Pure crap, that. I'm not saying that The Band recorded 100% live and got everything perfect that way. I'm saying that their early recordings are mostly unadultered performances sometimes augmented by minimal overdubs. I guess I forgot that raw, "live-in-the-studio" feel Revolver, Sgt. Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour have...And Revolver, Sgt. Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour aren't the Beatles' early recordings. In fact, the whole point of those albums - the second two especially - was to see what they could do with different techniques in the studio, and to attempt to record those songs straight to tape would have completely defeated the purpose. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
froggie Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 Speaking of great rock beards: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gobias Industries Posted September 25, 2007 Share Posted September 25, 2007 I'm not saying that The Band recorded 100% live and got everything perfect that way. I'm saying that their early recordings are mostly unadultered performances sometimes augmented by minimal overdubs. I guess I forgot that raw, "live-in-the-studio" feel Revolver, Sgt. Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour have... Wrong era, buddy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.