All right, as per Kenton’s request, here is my opinion on the Who versus the Stones. (I do agree the Beatles are the best.)
Well, I think this would be a tough match. I really love both bands and find it tough to declare an outright winner. I think it could go either way depending on what evidence is put forward.
For example if you choose to look at the DVD “The Rolling Stones’ Rock and Roll Circus,” you’d probably give the nod to the Who right off the hop. The Who’s performance of “A Quick One While He’s Away” is astounding. It demolished any of the performances the Stones did on that DVD. I don’t know if this is true but I have heard that it’s the reason why the tour was canceled. It was like the Who turned into a locomotive traveling at top speed, jumping a ravine, doing a back flip in the air and then landing on the tracks on the other side before sliding into the station right on time. It’s insane. That band was tight!
One thing you do have to consider though was that the Stones were going through a pretty tough time. Rock and Roll Circus was filmed shortly before Brian Jones died. I don’t know how shortly and I’m not going to look it up right now. (If anyone wants me to I can, and I’ll post it later.)Anyway, the Stones were pretty close to breaking up. It took them a lot of takes to get the tracks down and they were running out of time. I think their deadline was like the next morning and they were filming all night doing take after take, and they just couldn’t get it right. I think they even gave up by the end and kind of did a cop out version of “Salt of the Earth” where Keith and Mick are sitting in the audience singing the song. Anyway, that’s not important. I mean it still turned out okay. I mean I love that DVD, before I move on I’m going to mention the Dirty Mac and Taj Mahal, look them up or just buy the DVD, it’s like 20 bucks and well worth it.
Okay, back to the debate. The Stones do have some wicked live stuff. There is Ladies and Gentlemen for example. I’m not going to talk too much about it because it already has its own post. To sum it up, it’s a feature length concert back to front, and it’s really, really good. So I think that makes up for the Who showing up the Stones on their own circus-concert-variety-show-thinger. So I’d say that puts us at about even.
I figure I might as well touch on live albums, I don’t know for sure but I think the Stones have more. I kind of mentioned it above, and I’ll make it more clear here. The research on this post is a little loose. I’m just going by my prior knowledge. I could look this stuff up, but I’m tired and it’s late. Like I said before if anyone wants me to check this stuff and do follow up later just leave a comment in the comment section below. (That sounds familiar.) Anyway, I’m sure you can find plenty of live bootlegs by both the Stones and the Who. There is the one bootleg of the Stones, “Live in Brussels,” that I have to mention though. It is insane. Then the Who have “Live at Leeds,” which was actually released. And the Stones have “Get Yer Ya-Ya’s out!” Both of those are really good.
So I feel that we’re still neck-and-neck. So lets look at there studio recordings. Now I’m not going to go into serious detail, mainly because this is already pretty long and I want to go to bed, but I also want to post this tonight. So I’m going to try and wrap it up quickly. (Again I can do a more in depth follow up if you want.)Both bands have great catalogues, two of the best in rock and roll history. Personally I think the Stones’ is a little bit better, but not by much.
After all that I still don’t really feel, like there is a clear winner. I personally like the Stones a tiny bit better, but that’s really for my own reasons, and it’s such a close call that I can hardly choose. It really comes down to when I watch A Quick One, then I’m all okay the Who has it, but when I listen to Sticky Fingers, its’ hard not so give the nod to the Stones. So here I am nearly 800 words later and I didn’t give you a clear answer. I’m sorry.
No comments:
Post a Comment