Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › The Kinks Are the Village Green Preservation Society = The Beatles
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Kinks Are the Village Green Preservation Society = The Beatles - Page 3

post #31 of 37
10/20/09 at 4:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by priest View Post
Thanks for the news pcf. Maybe you can tell us how the show strikes you?

On a basically related topic, has anyone read the article on Lemmy in the new Rolling Stone? He was apparently at the Cavern Club when the Beatles were beginning their residency there and is quoted as saying the Beatles were "hard men" from rough parts of Liverpool, which I never knew, or forgot if I did, and which is particularly interesting because they seem kind of non-threatening. The Stones of course seem much more threatening, but as everyone knows were upper middle class-ish.
I find it hard to imagine the Beatles being "Hard men" either even though they were poor.
I often think that the Stones' upper middle class background has been exaggerated a bit in recent years. Bill Wyman's father was a bricklayer and Charlie Watts is a lorry driver's son. Only Brain Jones truely came from a upper middle class background. I believe Keith Richard's parents were poor too. If you listen to how him and Mick Jagger talk, they don't sound posh at all.
The only thing I know and care about is that they make great music. Whether they are perceived as working class (before) or upper middle class,bohemian (now?)doesn't matter to me. Nor does it matter that they were heavily influenced by American black music, especially in the begining. I play their Forty Licks on my ipod all the time and love their MFSL vinyl box set. Glad to have a chance to talk to other Stones' fans here.

-Paul
Reply
post #32 of 37
10/20/09 at 6:31am
I really enjoyed this thread.....wanted to comment on the Beatles = Person A / The Stones = Person B.....

I agree it's easier for a Beatles fanatic to like The Stones than for a Stones fanatic to like the Beatles.......

Reason is simple:

The Beatles are far more versatile than the Stones. In the midst of an album like Revolver or The White Album the Beatles cover more genres than The Rolling Stones have in their 40 plus years of creating records. If you take a song like Get Off Of My Cloud, Let's Spend The Night Together, Jumping Jack Flash, Brown Sugar, Tumbling Dice, Miss You, Start Me Up, Love Is Strong...etc.....you will note from a purely compositional standpoint the Stones exhibit almost no growth whatsoever. The dabbled in some Beatles territory..... As Tears Go By was The Stones answer to Yesterday, which was an acoustic guitar ballad with Strings...The Stones grabbed the sitar after the Beatles introduced it to Pop music, the Stones created their own Sgt Pepper with Their Satanic Majesties request. It's not until Beggars Banquet that The Stones were out of the Beatles shadow regarding their albums.......The albums they released from 1968 to 1972 are their best work and I don't know anyone who disputes this.

But when it comes to The Beatles......they were just far more experimental and unique. And wouldn't you admit it's a little easier for the Saint (Beatles) to be tempted by Satan (Stones) than it is for the Satan to be tempted by the Saint?
I've been talking headphones with you for years. Now I can help you with your purchase:) Sales Specialist & Headphone Guru @ Headphones.com
Reply
post #33 of 37
10/21/09 at 2:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcf View Post
I find it hard to imagine the Beatles being "Hard men" either even though they were poor.
If Lemmy says you're a "hard man," you're pretty much hard in my book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pcf View Post
I often think that the Stones' upper middle class background has been exaggerated a bit in recent years.
I agree, which is why I used the "-ish" to qualify it. I don't know if any of them qualified as less than "middle class" though. Anyway, I think the point about the Beatles is the interesting one, if true.
Reply
post #34 of 37
10/21/09 at 12:07pm
Geez, it's too bad that y'all are using a Kinks thread to smack around the Stones. I'll just say this: We can't look at the way rock is perceived now—as cool entertainment—and transpose that to the '60s, when the idea of a counterculture with music at the forefront really meant something. I think that once the Stones hit their stride they cut the lifeline to the mainstream past in a way that the Beatles, or even Dylan, most certainly didn't, which is probably the biggest reason Mick & Keef were perceived as dangerous.

About the apparent narrow-mindedness of Stones fans: Yes, I remember very well those folks who dug the Stones to the exclusion of just about everything else back around the turn of the '80s, but I tend to think those folks were waiting for the rest of the field to catch up, which it eventually did and prompted the Stones to respond to it. It's amazing to me how compatible with "punk" Some Girls is. I can't imagine the Beatles rocking as hard, for as long, if they'd managed to stay together.
Reply
post #35 of 37
11/13/09 at 3:40pm

The most unsuccessful record of all time!

Not my words but Ray Davies'!
I went to see his concert in the Warfield, San Francisco with my wife last night. He was playing with a four piece band as well as the St James' church choir (St James church is in Muswell Hill London).
Towards the end of the evening, he proudly announced that he was going to play a few songs from " the most unsuccessful record of all time". Of course that record turned out to be The Kinks-The Village Green Preservation Society. He jokingly wave his fist also and said,"Now they think it's one of the most important records of all time). We all laughed.
Overall he put on a good show, first off it was just him with the guitarist playing some acoustic numbers, then came a four piece band and more Kinks' oldies. After the intermission the choir came on. It was fun to hear them singing backing vocal to "You really got me". He played mostly Kinks' classics with a little bit of his solo work. A lot of the songs were played in totally different arrangement too. For example "Dedicated Follower of Fashion" in Irish folk/country and western style.
The new albums- The Kinks Choral Collection By Ray Davies has six sings from Village Green and it's very enjoyable to listen to especially if you are a Kinks' fan.

Paul
Reply
post #36 of 37
11/14/09 at 4:23am
^ Thanks for remembering to post your impressions. Sounds like a great show, and he approached it like a true artist. Ie, give the fans mostly what they want, with a twist to keep things fresh and interesting.
Reply
post #37 of 37
11/14/09 at 4:31am
He put on a great show, especially for someone who is now 65 years old. I bought his new cd while I was there (as well as some T-shirts ) and am really enjoying it too.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › The Kinks Are the Village Green Preservation Society = The Beatles