[Howard]

Wow! “Weird Al” Yankovic is back!

[Howard]

Well, Tomas, it’s probably a while since I’ve had one of those moments, but tonight I had a close experience with a Lady Beatle. Accompanied by an accomplished backing band we were taken through a variety of Beatles songs, commencing with ‘Sgt. Peppers’, followed by ‘Come Together’ and including interpretations of the likes of ‘Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds’ and Eleanor Rigby’. A wonderful Beatle night! This lady’s grandmother was born in Liverpool.

Now she may not have been the MLT, but unfortunately, MLT are not touring Australia at the moment.

[Howard]

Hi Jacki. We are all related, so you and I are also related. It just depends on how far back you want to go!

[Howard]

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”

 

[Howard]

Good points about billboard Tomás. Strange about ‘Imagine’ as it is often rated the greatest song of all time. Both Rod and Ron have always had similar haircuts, which may influence Jacki’s view.

Once, back in the seventies when Ron was invited to Groucho Marx’s, he knocked on the door and when Grouch opened it, he said “that’s the most ridiculous haircut I’ve ever seen. What are you, a man or a chicken.”

On the subject of his hair, Ron has had major surgery for cancer where part of his lungs were removed. He had refused chemotherapy as he didn’t want to lose his hair. That’s rock and roll for you! The sprightly dad gave up smoking before his new arrivals Gracie and Alice were born on May 30, 2016, and his lung problem was picked up during a routine scan.

As for any resemblance to Richards, I think you must be looking at the wrong pictures as there is no resemblance to Keith. Both Ron and Rod share the same Rooster hairstyle and prominent nose. Jacki is correct in this regard. But they are definitely not blood relations. Just good band mates since the sixties!

[Howard]

Hi Jacki. I don’t  know where you got that information. They are not related but have been friends since the sixties.

When Ron Wood played bass with the Jeff Beck Group in Feb 1967, Rod Stewart was the singer. They left in 1969 to join former ‘Small Faces’ members, Ronnie Lane (bass), Ian McLagan (organ), and Kenny Jones (drums), to form ‘The Faces’. Wood switched to guitar.

On 21 December 2012, Wood married Sally Humphreys, the owner of a theatre production company, 31 years his junior. Their twin girls, named Gracie Jane and Alice Rose, were born on Monday 30 May 2016, just before Ronnie Wood’s 69th birthday on 1 June 2016. Rod Stewart was asked to be the godfather of one of the twins.

They have been good mates from the mid sixties but are not related!

Jeff Beck was one of three top guitarists to play with the Yardbirds in the sixties. The other two were Eric Clapton and Jimmy Page. Page was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame twice; once as a member of the Yardbirds (1992) and once as a member of Led Zeppelin (1995).

In 2000, Eric Clapton was Inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame for the third time, this time as a solo artist. He was earlier inducted as a member of the bands Cream and the Yardbirds.

In March 1965, Beck was recruited by the Yardbirds to succeed Eric Clapton on the recommendation of fellow session musician Jimmy Page, who had been their initial choice. The Yardbirds recorded most of their Top 40 hit songs during Beck’s short but significant 20-month tenure with the band.

In his autobiography, Nick Mason recalls that during 1967 Pink Floyd had wanted to recruit Beck to be its guitarist after the departure of Syd Barrett but “None of us had the nerve to ask him.” In 1969, following the death of Brian Jones, Beck was approached about joining the Rolling Stones.

Jeff Beck has been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame twice: as a member of The Yardbirds (1992) and as a solo artist (2009).

I hope this has helped to clarify things for you. Rock and Roll has an interesting and rich history. Cheers, Howard.

[Howard]

And yes Tomás, those Argentinians are a wild bunch and fanatical Stones fans. Must be all that hot, passionate Spanish blood! As for what’s going on with that Ed Sheeran thing, I understand he is quite good and very popular, but I’m probably much too old to understand why!

On the subject of South America, I recently finished watching the Bolívar series on Netflix. What an amazing character. I guess you are aware of his extraordinary efforts in leading the drive for independence from the Spanish for Panama, Colombia, Ecuador,  Venezuela and Peru. He was also instrumental in having Bolivia created from northern Peru (and  named after him).

One thing that people probably forget is that in the sixties, not everybody had access to record players and albums were more expensive (relative to incomes), and we are talking about a smaller market, population wise, so the Beatles phenomenon needs to be considered in that context when comparing with today’s statistics.

[Howard]

Yes Jung. They have left an amazing legacy that is being recognised and enhanced by groups like the MLT. I have no doubt they will still be remembered in 100 years time, alongside the likes of Mozart and Beethoven. Due to their business model and independence, MLT May never enter the billboard charts, but I have no doubt that their extraordinary talent, music and art (videos etcetera), will one day be discovered and appropriately recognised .

It’s obvious that in this club, there is as much love for them as there is for the Beatles. I can’t wait for their next release, and in particular, their next album of originals!

[Howard]

I agree with you about the Stones best period. I also agree acts like The Monkees and PR and The Raiders definitely shouldn’t be there. Probably the best thing the Monkees had going for them was big money backing and excellent song writers (Tommy Boyce and Bobby Hart, Neil Diamond and Goffin/King). Didn’t know Steppenwolf were not inducted. Seems strange if acts like Karen Carpenter and the Association are. Steppenwolf’s Monster album is a beauty, in particular the first track, “Monster/Suicide/America”. I hadn’t heard them until 1975 when I bought this album.

 

 

[Howard]

Yep, if Americans took to Freddie and the Dreamers, they’d take to just about anything. Didn’t really take to the Kinks though but loved The Dave Clark Five!

Yes, no doubt about the numbers and I well understand and appreciate the Beatles universal appeal and greatness. Still, some people like apples and some people prefer oranges and although sometimes a pointer, as I stated, commercial success isn’t the definitive proof of how good a group is or why people may prefer them.

I think that using some of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame’s criteria is a better method for the sake of this argument and explains why some very popular and commercially successful acts haven’t been accepted.

I have heard a couple of American DJs debating why Paul Revere and the Raiders were never accepted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. Popular and very successful in the States but I guess just too vaudeville for the Hall of Fame.

Now I don’t expect to change anybody’s views and don’t want to as I accept that this club will always have dedicated and passionate Beatles fans, including me. Maybe it’s my schizoid tendencies that have me wavering sometimes!

[Howard]

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!

[Howard]

Hi Richard. Yes, ‘Won’t You Listen Now‘ is a wonderful video and such a sweet song. As for Mona’s crush, I’m sure you meant his sister plays for the Austrian Women’s Team. The Australian Women’s Team is quite good, but it would be nice to have her join them!

[Howard]

Hi Michael. This is my second attempt at a response as my original post was lost to the ether when I clicked on the submit button.

That’s a very impressive set of statistics and you are obviously a very passionate Beatles fan. Definitely nothing wrong with that and you’re certainly a member of the right club. However, you would be well aware of the phrase, “Lies, damned lies, and statistics”! Determining record units sold is not easy and there are different criteria for counting the numbers, including the particular country. However, as you indicate, no one comes close to the Beatles for total units sold.

Following is just one example of the statistics.

• To ensure the highest level of fact checking and editorial control, this list sources sales figures to news organizations and highly regarded music industry related organizations such as MTV, VH1, Billboard and Rolling Stone.
• The figures of total certified units within the tables below are based on certified units of albums, singles (including digital downloads) and videos.

On the table provided, we find the following numbers:

Beatles: Total available certified units: 278 million and Claimed: 600 million

Stones: Total available certified units: 99.3 million.

However, sources claim anything from 200 to 250 million Stones units sold.

Now I’m sure you would have to agree that commercial success doesn’t necessarily equate to quality or worthiness. According to the BBC, the Bay City Rollers sold 120 million records. Now that would dwarf the record sales of many excellent groups, including the MLT. This is one of the reasons that  Michael Salfino used some of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame’s criteria—honorees must have “demonstrat[ed] unquestionable musical excellence and talent” and “had a significant impact on the development, evolution and preservation of rock & roll”—and some other factors that help quantify greatness.  You will notice commercial success isn’t one of the criteria.

According to certified numbers from The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), with 183 million certified album sales, no artist compares to The Beatles. You can add the numbers of industry giants Zeppelin and the Stones together and, at 178 million, the two bands still come up short of The Beatles. The nearest competitor (Garth Brooks, 148 million), stands at 35 million sales short of that number. And that’s not even counting the No. 1 singles the Fab Four released over the years.

I’m pleased to see so many people have been coming to the defence of the Beatles, as I expected. However, I would just add the following. Look at the RIAA certifications for albums, and the Stones are tied with Aerosmith.

Now as big as Aerosmith have been, there has never been a minute where they were as overall-BIG as the Rolling Stones. Among groups, only the Beatles or Led Zeppelin qualify. That’s why the Stones can still sell out 70,000 seat football stadiums and nobody else can. Other old acts like Aerosmith can’t, and modern superstars like Beyonce can’t. They are the only ones who can book and sell out multiple football stadium dates in the USA.

[Howard]

Good point Dave! I have to say that Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick & Tich are favourites of mine. In fact, one of the very first records I remember buying (second hand), was their “Bend It” single in the mid-sixties.”Bend It!” was a big hit in Europe, including a Number One in Germany. To obtain a bouzouki sound on the recording, an electrified mandolin was used. The song was inspired by music from the film soundtrack of Zorba The Greek. The British music magazine NME commented that dozens of US radio stations had banned the record because the lyrics were considered too suggestive. The group responded by recording a new version in London with a different set of words, which was rush-released in the US, as the original single was withdrawn from sale.

Later in the sixties, I also purchased the Dave Clark Five’s Greatest Hits and in the seventies, it was Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick & Tich’s Greatest Hits.

An interesting fact about the group, vocalist Dave Dee, an ex-policeman, was at the scene of the motoring accident that took the life of the American rock and roller Eddie Cochran and injured Gene Vincent in April 1960.

The reason they weren’t successful in the US is probably that their record companies, US labels, Fontana and Imperial Records, failed to secure them a US tour or TV appearances. Fontana set up just two appearances on national US TV programs. In contrast, Dave Clark, who was probably the worst rock drummer of all time, had a real skill at self-promotion and Americans of the time were really into their almost vaudeville type performances. Just my opinion and apologies in advance if I have just offended any DC5 fans!

Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick & Tich really liked to dress up colourfully and I have no doubt their live performances would have been a treat. They were fortunate in having two great songwriters in Ken Howard and Alan Blaikley. As well as their number 1 hit, “The Legend of Xanadu”,  these two also wrote the hit song “Have I The Right” for The Honeycombs, who were fairly unique at the time for featuring a female drummer (Honey Lantree), who, dare I say it, could have held her own against Dave Clark. Not sure how she would have stacked up against the very talented Mona though!

 

[Howard]

I like this review by Michael Salfino from May 23, 2018, who uses categories like innovation, durability, and diversity, to make the age-old rock debate into a best-of-five series.

“The Beatles vs. The Rolling Stones. The debate has been raging for decades, and it will never die. The two iconic British invaders are inextricably linked in history, influencing and rivaling each other in near equal measure. The Beatles may be the most celebrated rock band ever, but the Stones are the “Greatest Rock ‘n Roll Band in the World.” It’s like a battle of champions in sports, but without any rules or a scoreboard. So let’s approach this as if it were a sports series—an old-school, best-of-five, winner take all.

What are the categories to represent the games in this series? Using some of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame’s criteria—honorees must have “demonstrat[ed] unquestionable musical excellence and talent” and “had a significant impact on the development, evolution and preservation of rock & roll”—and some other factors that help quantify greatness, we came up with the following:

Innovation: Pioneering achievements that paved the way for others to follow. Doors the band opened that perhaps otherwise would have remained closed.

Inspiration: The number and quality of the groups that are deemed by music historians and critics to have built their sonic landscape upon their foundation. This, of course, is highly subjective, so for a neutral arbiter we turned to the internet music database AllMusic.com, whose editors determine for every recording artist the other artists or groups they “had a direct musical influence on, or were an inspiration to.”

Best Peak Work: When they were both at their best, who was better? It’s the inverse of durability.

Durability: it’s not just peak performance that matters in assessing the importance of an artist but how their art withstands the test of time.

Diversity: Having a sound is important but a measure of greatness is the breadth of their catalogue and not just a single or even a handful of signature characteristics.

OK, enough with the preamble and rules. let’s get this show rocking.

INNOVATION
This seems to be a slam dunk for The Beatles. Just their studio innovations alone could fill a book. They had the crudest instruments to create their sonic masterpieces, but in the spirit of how Isaac Newton invented integral calculus to prove the laws of gravity, The Beatles pushed their engineers and producers to pioneer double-tracking, backmasking, feedback, multi-tracking audio loops, stereo, overdubbing, distortion and on and on. Nearly every modern stereo recording technique grew from The Beatles’ innovation. They also were the first studio band, first to print lyrics on an album, first to popularize non-pop/hit (meaning FM) radio, pioneers of the rock concept album (even though their label, EMI, hurt the concept by stripping Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band of two key songs: “Penny Lane” and “Strawberry Fields Forever”), and the first to create a single with two “A” sides. They recorded the first satellite television broadcast, performed the first stadium show, made the first music video. And this doubtlessly leaves much out.

So, easy win for the Fab Four, right? Not so fast. The Stones pioneered home-recording and the use of a mobile recording rig, developed a trademark logo that didn’t even include their name, reveled in being punks and rebels, did rock’s first unplugged (basically) album (“Beggar’s Banquet”), were the first group without their name on a record (in 1964), first to incorporate modern design into their record sleeves (with the 3D on Their Satanic Majesty’s Request and the zipper on Sticky Fingers), staged the first festival show headlined by a single group (OK it ended badly, but still), released the first rock live album to receive the same acclaim as studio efforts (Get Yer Ya-Ya’s Out), were at least arguably the first band to play into cyberspace, and had their own list of studio innovations though mostly for the type of instruments used (electric pianos, marimbas).

The Beatles win here but it’s not a shutout.

INSPIRATION
It’s hard to even imagine rock ‘n’ roll without The Beatles. Jimmy Page said, “If it hadn’t been for the Beatles, there wouldn’t be anyone like (Led Zeppelin) around.” Even Keith Richards said, “The Beatles were the first to actually find that middle path between the artistic and the intellectual and at the same time still be on the street.” Every group in rock history is on at least one of those roads, all paved by the Liverpudlians. So it’s no surprise The Beatles have more than twice as many groups listed among those they “influenced,” either “directly” or substantively, as The Rolling Stones: 211, according to AllMusic, to the Stones’ 87. Let’s more closely examine the top 10 for each.

Beatles: 10cc, Badfinger, Bee Gees, Cheap Trick, David Bowie, Donovan, Electric Light Orchestra, Harry Nilsson, Oasis, Supertramp, The Byrds.
Rolling Stones: AC/DC, Aerosmith, Faces, Flamin’ Groovies, New York Dolls, Royal Trux, The Black Crowes, ZZ Top, Billy Squier, David Bowie.

You can argue that either way, I suspect. In fact you can say the Stones list is more top-heavy. But if you ask, say, Bob Dylan, he’‘ll give it to The Beatles. “We were driving through Colorado, we had the radio on, and eight of the Top 10 songs were Beatles songs…’I Wanna Hold Your Hand,’ all those early ones. They were doing things nobody was doing. Their chords were outrageous, just outrageous, and their harmonies made it all valid… I knew they were pointing the direction of where music had to go.”

Dylan never said anything similar about the Stones. And Dylan gets the final word. Things are not looking too good for the “Greatest Rock Band in the World.”

BEST PEAK WORK
The Stones have, of course, outlived The Beatles by five decades, but their peak periods are nearly parallel. Even the worst Beatles albums are very good. If you go track-by-track and grade every cut on a 100-point scale and average them (I did this once), the best Beatles album grades out as A Hard Day’s Night. (Of course, your mileage may vary.) If you are a Paul person (or don’t really know it), you’ll say Revolver. If John is your bag, you probably love Rubber Soul the best. If you want groundbreaking rock permanence, fine, Sgt. Pepper. Eclecticism, The White Album. Harmonic beauty and studio sophistication, Abbey Road.

But I’m giving this game to The Rolling Stones. Sticky Fingers is flawless, consistently brilliant without any let up, diverse in mastering pop rock, hard rock, jazz-rock, country-rock (which this album pretty much invents) and confessional rock (“Moonlight Mile”). It’s arguably the greatest album ever made. It also features the best band lineup—with Mick Taylor replacing the late Brian Jones on guitar—ever. And while The Beatles have always been underrated players (especially McCartney’s bass playing), you can’t get better than Taylor and Keith Richards on guitar. Plus Charlie Watts finally figured out how to be a rock drummer on Sticky Fingers (it only took him about seven years). Look, you can fight me, you can bite me, you can bloody me, but even spinning it today on a turntable, this album “destroys your notion of circular time.”

DURABILITY
Now we have a series. Two games to one. Someone had to be up two games to one and it happens to be The Beatles. The Stones are in this! But durability? This does not sound promising.

The Beatles were only a band for eight years, but they’ve maintained a hold on every generation that followed. Is it so shocking that the two best-selling vinyl LPs in 2017 overall (not just back catalogue) were Sgt. Pepper and Abbey Road? No Stones album charted. Yes, the 50th-anniversary reissue of Sgt. Pepper obviously helped. But what explains Abbey Road?

Furthermore, The Beatles notched their 32nd Top 10 album in any sales in 2016 with Live at the Hollywood Bowl, which peaked at No. 7. Their catalogue is worth more than the GDP of most countries. But The Stones have enjoyed 37 Top 10 albums after adding Blue and Lonesome, a covers LP, in late 2016, which peaked at No. 4. This came more than 10 years after their last studio release, A Bigger Bang, which sold only 9,000 more copies in its first week of release.

Fifty-six years since forming, the Stones are still playing to sold-out crowds in the world’s biggest venues (like, right now). Keith Richards is not just merely still alive. How can anyone get the edge over The Rolling Stones in durability? Just staying together, especially Jagger and Richards, for more than half a century is mind-boggling, especially when you consider that The Beatles couldn’t even last a decade together.

I feel I can guarantee that people will be playing Beatles music for as long as we survive as a species. I’m a little less certain of that when it comes to the Stones. So we’re going to have to call this: tie.

DIVERSITY
The Stones can’t win but they can tie. This is a fair category since the Beatles had a seven-year recording career and just 213 original songs they actually released in their time. The Stones have been recording for exactly 213 years.

The Beatles’ evolution over a relatively brief recording career is the most earth-shattering in the history of rock ‘n’ roll. It’s nearly impossible to even fathom that the group that released “I Wanna Hold Your Hand” in 1964 could in just three years record “Strawberry Fields Forever” and “A Day in the Life.” That “Hey Jude” and “Revolution” could be on the same single is as insane now as the day in 1968 when Jagger and Richards heard the acetate in a London club and realized that the ground they thought they’d made up with “Jumpin’ Jack Flash” was lost. Drown in your beers, boys.

The Beatles are unfair. They have the two greatest songwriters in rock history (oh, add “writing your own songs” to The Beatles’ innovations), plus George Harrison. All of them could write words and music, and all were endlessly searching and seeking new experiences so their progress was sure to be immense. The Stones are no slouches here. But they’ve always been more in tune with processing popular sounds and making them their own rather than really expanding their pallet. “Miss You” is a great Stones disco song, but it’s a “Stones disco song.” The same is true when they explore blues, soul and country. They have a signature sound that trademarks whatever they do. The defining characteristic of The Beatles, perhaps, is that, in the final analysis, they really don’t have a signature sound. That is perhaps what it means to be “Beatlesesque.”

It’s a closely contested series, but when the buzzer sounds it’s The Beatles (Innovation, Inspiration, Diversity) over The Stones (Best Peak Work—no small achievement—and the push on Durability). Stay tuned for the rematch.