-
The rivalry between two great 60's bands that would shape music forever
-
One of my favorite movie music scenes is this one in Amadeus, when Mozart’s rival Salieri comes upon Mozart’s work. I think many of the Beatles contemporaries like the Beach Boys, Elvis, Rolling Stones etc at the time had Salieri epiphany moments as the Beatles onslaught of hits after hits came on in the 60’s. When I hear Brian Wilson describe the Beatles music in such awe, I can’t help but see this scene in my mind. I am sure the same for many of the other artists from the Stones to Dylan too (of admiration of course rather than envy as others went on inspired to create great music themselves). The Beatles created music like no one ever heard before that would forever change the musical landscape.
-
Yes, Mozart was an extraordinary talent and no one comes close, except perhaps Beethoven, and he had to work hard for what came so easily to Mozart.
Great movie Jung, but remember it wasn’t a documentary. Much artistic licence was used and by all accounts Salieri got bit of a bum wrap!
-
Hi Howard. Interestingly in real life Antonio Salieri lead a remarkable musical career as a teacher too. Beethoven, Schubert, and Liszt being some of his esteemed pupils. Things weren’t as bleak for Salieri as the movie made it out to be.
-
Well now, this has got me to thinking, though both bands were established a tad before I came into existence… I now am wondering how this played out across Canada… Beatles VS. Stones?!…. Lol
-
Well Jacki, the Beatles gave some incredible shows in Canada. In Vancouver they played the then largest stadium, Empire Stadium, at the PNE, and all accounts are it was like that Shea stadium concert they did in Ne York. Just out of this world. It was Aug 22nd 1964 (I was 1), and they kicked off Canada doing the first Canadian concert in Vancouver. It was quite the event.
Now as for the Rolling Stones and Canada, there was that infamous incident in Toronto when Keith Richard’s was caught bringing across some banned muffins and was not allowed into Canada. 🙂 So it was a shaky Stones/Canada relationship. I think its all water under the bridge now and they often give incredible concerts here.
-
Hi Jung. You just can’t trust roadies with your luggage!
Certainly water under the bridge as it is a long time since the shaky relationship.
This will give you an idea of how things are going now.
“One of the greatest rock n’ roll bands in history, The Rolling Stones, kicked off Canada Day weekend celebrations on Saturday with an energetic, rowdy show at Canada Rocks. Tens of thousands of fans — 71,000 to be precise — descended upon Burl’s Creek in Oro-Medonte, Ont., for the day-long festival.
According to frontman, Mick Jagger, the show marked the band’s 35th in Ontario alone, and since April 23, 1965, The Rolling Stones have established a deep-rooted connection to Canada, frequently make a point of celebrating it.
From headlining Toronto’s biggest-ever charity event, SARSStock, in 2003, to recording multiple live albums across the nation — Love You Live (1975) and Light the Fuse (2012) — the four-piece have created a rich history in Canada and earned the hearts of millions.
Not only did Saturday night’s show mark the only Canadian stop on the critically acclaimed No Filter tour, but it saw the band’s return to Ontario for the first time in more than six years.
But this was more than just a concert. Sure, people got to hear some of their favourite Stones classics like Angie and Honky Tonk Woman, and watch a 75-year-old (almost 76!) Jagger parade around in a selection of his finest sequined jackets.
Some may have been there to relive their golden years too, but like it or not, this was bigger than just the Stones. This was a Canada Day celebration done right. A gathering of sorts, or a reunion, if you will.”
You may find this contribution from The Web interesting too, if not amusing.
“It was over 42 years ago (February 27th, 1977) that Keith Richards was arrested in Toronto for possession of heroin. Richards, who was in town to perform with the Rolling Stones at the El Mocambo Club for their upcoming concert album, Love You Live, was awakened by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who found five grams of cocaine and 22 grams of heroin in his room, among other substances. Richards was charged with “possession of cocaine and heroin with intent to traffic.”
Richards recalled being awoken by the officers smacking him conscious so that they could formally arrest him: [“That took them about two hours to drag me out — pow, pow. I woke up with, like, rosy cheeks. ‘Oh, he’s awake: You are under arrest!’ (Laughs) ‘Oh, great!’ I looked at the old lady and I said, ‘I’ll see you in about seven years, babe.'”]
Although Richards was eventually released on $25,000 bail, due to the trafficking charge, he faced a minimum seven-year prison term if found guilty. Richards, who due to his growing and public drug use had been on the wrong side of the law since 1967, was now facing the most serious criminal charge of his life.
He eventually received a suspended sentence after the court concluded that Richards did not bring the drugs into the country, but rather purchased them while in Canada.
During the trial later that year, a blind woman and die-hard Stones fan privately appealed to the judge and explained how Richards had always looked out for her when the band was on the road in Canada, making sure she was safe and cared for, and often helping find her a ride home after the shows.
Keith Richards credits the fan for single-handedly helping find a way to get him on the right side of the law: [“This chick went to the judge’s house in Toronto, personally, and she told him this simple story, y’know? And from there I think he figured out the way to get Canada and himself and myself off of the hook. And so I was sentenced to a concert for the blind — which I gladly did”
-
Thanks Howard for that insight into the Rolling Stones incident in Toronto. I thought it was closer to the 60’s but it looks like it was a little later in 1979. I guess a good deed by Keith Richards came around to save him later by what that one fan did by going to the judge. A Rolling Stones concert tour is a huge deal in Canada. They are loved indeed.
The Beatles Aug 22nd 1964 concert in Vancouver was a huge deal, probably as big an event as hosting the Olympics. However, the city never had such a huge and exciting event before and did not know how to maintain control over the overly enthusiastic crowd. The Concert had to be stopped halfway into the show because of a riot which was too bad. The Beatles never returned to Vancouver. It must be the overly oxygenated west coast air or the glacial run off waters from the Rockies, as Vancouverites find it hard to contain their enthusiasm sometimes, hence 2 Stanley Cup riots when the team got eliminated in the play offs etc.
-
-
My favorite song off the Beach Boys, Pet Sounds Album.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0W4KkBwgP7c&feature=share
My favorite song on Sargent Peppers, but it’s damn hard to choose one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usNsCeOV4GM
I feel MLTs brilliant “Nothing Is In Vain” has some similarities to this song in terms of the mood and structure like the ending.
-
For fun, here are some top underrated Beach Boys songs versus top underrated Beatles songs for comparison of their sounds. They are all so good in their own style.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaNc_5iTD3s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHwwyPWYPN0
-
Yes, but underrated by whom? Sometimes songs don’t rate for a reason. Fans have a way of working out which songs are the best, which songs are their favourites and which songs are merely par for the course.
I did purchase a copy of the Beatles’ “Twist and Shout (EP)”, which included the Lennon/McCartney composition “There’s A Place”. Now while I quite like this song, I don’t rate it amongst their best, as I suspect would most Beatles fans.
-
Underrated by the record label perhaps. They did not think it would sell, or did not fit the formula of what they think would make a hit, despite the merit of the song in it’s own right. Sometimes it could be just that there were 3 or 4 other even better songs on the album that became hits overshadowing that particular song.
-
Nice try Jung, but I’m not buying it. Lennon and McCartney had a huge say in which of their songs were released as singles. They didn’t release any from Sgt Peppers for a reason. ‘Penny Lane’ and ‘Strawberry Fields Forever’ we’re not included, even though they came out of the same recording sessions. The same went for many of the Rolling Stones albums.
The only time the record companies had a say was with the American companies, Capitol and London, who both chose to include single releases on albums. Of course there were always exceptions. For them the artistic preference of the artists took a back seat to the ‘money’!
Jagger/Richards and Lennon/McCartney new what their fans liked!
-
I’m not following what your point is Howard. You can have songs that become hits, and some songs that don’t. Doesnt mean necessarily songs that didn’t become hits are artistically inferior. That’s how a song can be underrated. Perhaps you don’t believe something can be underrated. That is fine as there are some who do. There is no wrong or right answer.
-
My point Jung is “underrated by whom”? Whoever originally posted the videos you used, either felt some of his favourites weren’t as appreciated by the Beatles themselves, the record companies or most other fans and record purchasers. The Beatles and the Stones had a pretty good idea of what their best work was. This doesn’t mean they didn’t believe less popular songs had artistic merit.
I’m simply arguing that the original posters assumption that the selected songs were ‘underrated’ is only his opinion and we all have our particular favourites.
I would certainly hope that members don’t start arguing that any MLT originals are underrated. How would we know? It’s such a subjective concept.
Perhaps a better term than ‘underrated’ could be recognised. What do you think? I’m not dissing your post Jung, just the videos terminology! And I seriously don’t intend to spoil the ‘fun’. It is a good subject to elicit discussion, as you certainly have.
Remember Tomás did say Howard can be a bit prickly, but I know you’re up to the challenge Jung!
-
I think Howard it is easy to over analyze this. These are just a list of songs by both the Beach Boys and Beatles that are less known, but the poster felt deserved recognition and were real gems. Nothing more. That is how I saw it as, and heard some Beach Boys gems I haven’t heard in a while, and on the Beatles list there were two gems I really liked and agreed perhaps dont get the recognition in the hits charts as it deserved. If I Needed Someone and I’m looking through You that I also felt are awesome songs that are not as well known.
-
Analyse is what I do Jung and your use of the term ‘deserved recognition’ is getting closer to the point I was making that the songs in question were lesser known for a reason.
The video poster should have simply stated they felt these songs deserved more recognition than they got, rather than suggesting they were making a universally accepted fact.
A better option might be to argue which better known songs are not as worthy as these. As for gems, to a fanatical fan, anything can qualify.
-
-
Here is an interesting article about which band was the bigger rival to the Beatles. The Beach Boys or Rolling Stones.
The Beach Boys had greater influence on the Beatles, whereas the Stones had longevity that worked in its favor the article makes a point. An interesting point of view.
-
You have chosen Lance LaSalles’ Quora response, just one opinion of many. Yes, the Beach Boys had huge early commercial success due to their domination with bubblegum pop prior to the British Invasion. However they were soon forced to improve their act with the added competition and this eventually drove Brian Wilson to insanity.
I intend to further this discussion in a more appropriate Topic, something we had already commenced previously. However, regarding your ‘underrated’ post, I think you’ll find that there are many of these types of subjects posted on the web as they are ‘clickbait’. Posted to attract attention. Just ask Tomás!
-
Yes it is one opinion, but a good one in my opinion Howard. The Rolling Stones never had an overwhelming impact -mania kind of impact with their music like the Beach Boys or the Beatles had. They flourished in absence of Brian Wilson after 1967, and Beatles break up in 1970. Really for the Beatles the Beach Boys were a real rival when they first arrived, as well as Bob Dylan. The Rolling Stones were never really a rival for the Beatles as they did not inspire them to the extent Brian Wilson and Bob Dylan did. The Rolling Stones were always in the Beatles shadow while the Beatles were together, trying to create an image of anit-beatles for themselves. Just look at the Rolling Stones Magazines greatest album of all time list. The top 5 are 3 Beatles albums, Beach Boys Pet Sounds at #2 (pretty good for a Bubble Gum band), and Bob Dylan. Rolling Stones is way down at #7, not even in contention. Artistically the Beatles never payed attention to the Rolling Stones musical creativity as much as they did Bob Dylan and Brian Wilson.
If Brian didn’t drop out in 1967 and continued his creative trajectory, and the Beatles did not break up but continued through the 70’s, the Rolling Stones would not be held in as much praise by his fans as today. They flourished as much as they did in the absence of the Beatles, and probably Brain Wilson as well. Musically I don’t think Jagger/Richards were ever at the same level as McCartney/Lennon, nor Wilson, nor Dylan. All my opinion of course.
-
“Beach Boys Pet Sounds at #2 (pretty good for a Bubble Gum band)”
Jung, Brian left his Bubble Gum band behind to record ‘Pet Sounds’. It was a collaboration totally devoid of his band, apart from their overdubbed vocals when the record was done. Most of the Beach Boys didn’t even like the album as they didn’t understand it and it deviated from their proven commercial formula. The record company was just as concerned!
Brian new his band wasn’t up to the standard he wanted or the standard of his competitors. As for the rivalry with the Beatles, it is greatly overstated. The rivalry was mainly in Brian’s head. His music inspired Paul McCartney but it didn’t drive him like the Beatles’ music did Brian. This was a passion that he could never win, given his inferior band and song writing collaborators within the band.
As for the Stones, there was never any real rivalry between them and the Beatles and their music was very different and suited different audiences, unlike with the Beach Boys. The rivalry, as I’ve advised earlier, was engineered by their manager Oldham for recognition purposes. We are raking over old coals here, but I’ll have more to say about it in the relevant Topic.
-
Log in to reply.
