Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
My top 10 Rolling Stones songs
Comments
-
Yes, that's much better. You've got to be a pretty shitty band of that era for me not to be a slut and have a listen.BearsWiin said:
fixedYellowSnow said:
Some Girls was '78 but you're about right on the number of years since last relevance- i.e., 1981 (Tatto You), so 36 years. I wonder how different their legacy might be if they had hung it up in the early 80's due to Mick or Keith dying or something. They has something like 19 or 20 albums between 1964 and 1981 and only about 3 to 4 of these aren't "essential".bananasnblondes said:
I like the stones, but I agree that they get a lot of extra credit just for being the Cal Ripkens of rock. People say " they're still going strong 50 years later."Mosster47 said:
Great analogy. They really were shit. They had a couple of decent tracks, but when you have twenty albums you're going to have a few toe tappers by default.ThomasFremont said:Most overrated band of all time.
Like DMB for Boomers.
Well, not really. They haven't put out anything halfway decent in about 35 years (I think Some Girls was around '83). Even in their prime, their albums usually had a couple hits along but a lot of unmemorable tracks.
They certainly had a lot of great songs, but their batting average is significantly lower than their contemporaries due to how much material they have released.
One thing that's always cracked my shit up about arguing music here, is how many folks there are that love, say, Led Zeppelin and The Who, but fucking hate the Stones and the Beatles. I love them ALL. I literally own fucking Zep, Stones, Beatles, Who, Bowie, Neil Young, Kinks, Dylan, Sabbath, AC DC, Creedence, Allman Brothers, Floyd, Skynyrd, Dead, Stooges, Velvet Underground, et al, album that was ever released.
I've even given Styx a second look do to DDY getting some of those songs stuck in my head.
Call me Classic Rock Slut. -
So you don't have Moves Like Jagger?YellowSnow said:
Yes, that's much better. You've got to be a pretty shitty band of that era for me not to be a slut and have a listen.BearsWiin said:
fixedYellowSnow said:
Some Girls was '78 but you're about right on the number of years since last relevance- i.e., 1981 (Tatto You), so 36 years. I wonder how different their legacy might be if they had hung it up in the early 80's due to Mick or Keith dying or something. They has something like 19 or 20 albums between 1964 and 1981 and only about 3 to 4 of these aren't "essential".bananasnblondes said:
I like the stones, but I agree that they get a lot of extra credit just for being the Cal Ripkens of rock. People say " they're still going strong 50 years later."Mosster47 said:
Great analogy. They really were shit. They had a couple of decent tracks, but when you have twenty albums you're going to have a few toe tappers by default.ThomasFremont said:Most overrated band of all time.
Like DMB for Boomers.
Well, not really. They haven't put out anything halfway decent in about 35 years (I think Some Girls was around '83). Even in their prime, their albums usually had a couple hits along but a lot of unmemorable tracks.
They certainly had a lot of great songs, but their batting average is significantly lower than their contemporaries due to how much material they have released.
One thing that's always cracked my shit up about arguing music here, is how many folks there are that love, say, Led Zeppelin and The Who, but fucking hate the Stones and the Beatles. I love them ALL. I literally own fucking Zep, Stones, Beatles, Who, Bowie, Neil Young, Kinks, Dylan, Sabbath, AC DC, Creedence, Allman Brothers, Floyd, Skynyrd, Dead, Stooges, Velvet Underground, et al, album that was ever released.
I've even given Styx a second look do to DDY getting some of those songs stuck in my head.
Call me Classic Rock Slut.
Wood smash, btw. The second she turned legal age and today.
-
Some Girls was '78 but you're about right on the number of years since last relevance- i.e., 1981 (Tatto You), so 36 years. I wonder how different their legacy might be if they had hung it up in the early 80's due to Mick or Keith dying or something. They has something like 19 or 20 albums between 1964 and 1981 and only about 3 to 4 of these aren't "essential".
I thought Keith died along time ago - watching stones videos was got me to like zombies - Keith being the lead zombie player
One thing that's always cracked my shit up about arguing music here, is how many folks there are that love, say, Led Zeppelin and The Who, but fucking hate the Stones and the Beatles. I love them ALL. I literally own fucking Zep, Stones, Beatles, Who, Bowie, Neil Young, Kinks, Dylan, Sabbath, AC DC, Creedence, Allman Brothers, Floyd, Skynyrd, Dead, Stooges, Velvet Underground, et al, album that was ever released.
I've even given Styx a second look do to DDY getting some of those songs stuck in my head.
Call me Classic Rock Superiority asshole guy.
-
CLASSIC ROCK SUPERIORITY ASSHOLE GUY...
Nice try - but you are still "Rowing Fag"
÷÷÷==÷÷==
Today my wife introduced me to a female co-worker saying "this is my husband"
I said "Actually I'm her gay brother....I'm a Eurofag soccer player..."
That's taking HH into the real world !!!
-
I concur that the Beatles are the most overrated band in the history of bands.RaceBannon said:I don't have a single Stones song on my playlist if that helps. Or Beatles
-
That would be U2, but you were closePurpleThrobber said:
I concur that the Beatles are the most overrated band in the history of bands.RaceBannon said:I don't have a single Stones song on my playlist if that helps. Or Beatles
The judges would also have accepted REM and Oasis -
If you look at what preceded them, aside from maybe Elvis, they brought something completely new to the landscape. Right place, right time.PurpleThrobber said:
I concur that the Beatles are the most overrated band in the history of bands.RaceBannon said:I don't have a single Stones song on my playlist if that helps. Or Beatles
-
This has already been decided by a fellow rowing fag - i.e., BearsWin. Moving forward, I am to be referred to as Classic Rock Slut, in these types of discussions.tenndawg said:CLASSIC ROCK SUPERIORITY ASSHOLE GUY...
Nice try - but you are still "Rowing Fag"
÷÷÷==÷÷==
Today my wife introduced me to a female co-worker saying "this is my husband"
I said "Actually I'm her gay brother....I'm a Eurofag soccer player..."
That's taking HH into the real world !!! -
I once thought this article had a pretty decent list. Might not agree with all of the selections and I think it's possible to believe a band to be overrated and still like some of their songs. This is generally how I feel about the U2's, Pearl Jams, Tom Petty's, etc of the world.BearsWiin said:
That would be U2, but you were closePurpleThrobber said:
I concur that the Beatles are the most overrated band in the history of bands.RaceBannon said:I don't have a single Stones song on my playlist if that helps. Or Beatles
The judges would also have accepted REM and Oasis
http://www.laweekly.com/music/top-20-worst-bands-of-all-time-the-complete-list-2403868
-
And the purple throbber wins another thread...PurpleThrobber said:
So you don't have Moves Like Jagger?YellowSnow said:
Yes, that's much better. You've got to be a pretty shitty band of that era for me not to be a slut and have a listen.BearsWiin said:
fixedYellowSnow said:
Some Girls was '78 but you're about right on the number of years since last relevance- i.e., 1981 (Tatto You), so 36 years. I wonder how different their legacy might be if they had hung it up in the early 80's due to Mick or Keith dying or something. They has something like 19 or 20 albums between 1964 and 1981 and only about 3 to 4 of these aren't "essential".bananasnblondes said:
I like the stones, but I agree that they get a lot of extra credit just for being the Cal Ripkens of rock. People say " they're still going strong 50 years later."Mosster47 said:
Great analogy. They really were shit. They had a couple of decent tracks, but when you have twenty albums you're going to have a few toe tappers by default.ThomasFremont said:Most overrated band of all time.
Like DMB for Boomers.
Well, not really. They haven't put out anything halfway decent in about 35 years (I think Some Girls was around '83). Even in their prime, their albums usually had a couple hits along but a lot of unmemorable tracks.
They certainly had a lot of great songs, but their batting average is significantly lower than their contemporaries due to how much material they have released.
One thing that's always cracked my shit up about arguing music here, is how many folks there are that love, say, Led Zeppelin and The Who, but fucking hate the Stones and the Beatles. I love them ALL. I literally own fucking Zep, Stones, Beatles, Who, Bowie, Neil Young, Kinks, Dylan, Sabbath, AC DC, Creedence, Allman Brothers, Floyd, Skynyrd, Dead, Stooges, Velvet Underground, et al, album that was ever released.
I've even given Styx a second look do to DDY getting some of those songs stuck in my head.
Call me Classic Rock Slut.
Wood smash, btw. The second she turned legal age and today.
