Quote:
|
Originally Posted by evollove
Which one?
Here's a comparison to chew on: Stones vs VU. Bad boy posturing ("all my friends are junkies") vs real world observation (see: "Heroin"). Teenagers vs adults. Product vs art.
Jagger has had 50+ years to write something as powerful as "Candy Says" and he's never once risen to the challenge. Loser.
|
Well said.
I have nothing against the stones. I've seen them several times, between Voodoo Lounge and the time they toured with Cheryl Crowe (shiver). I LOVE early Stones. I think "Play with Fire" is one of the best songs of all time. But I don't give much of a shit about anything after 1972.
Velvets > Stones. They're the Beatles from some warped alternate reality, and everything I love pretty much came from Lou and John, or John and Paul.
But my personal '60s hierarchy goes like this:
1. Velvet Underground
2. Beatles
3. Kinks
4. Dylan
5. Stones
I don't think anyone really compares to the Velvets or the Beatles OR Dylan, as in there will never be another of any of those groups. But the Stomes? There have been soooo many. Every decade has a Stones of its own and every decade has had the fucking Stones. They've been shit for 40 years longer than the Beatles even existed. It's hard to talk about them like they compare. Ditto for Velvets.
Dylan vs. Stones is an interesting one, since they've been around for about the same amount of time. Still, Dylan takes it.