Something About The Beatles

145: Something About The Rolling Stones (and The Beatles)

Written by

Us

in

,

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 2:06:35 — 289.7MB)

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

At last: SATB takes on a long-requested topic, comparing and contrasting two of the biggest acts out of the UK during the 1960s. Quantifying art is a fool’s errand, yet here we are because we can’t help ourselves. The conversation takes this article by Michael Salfino as a starting point, along with our Bill Wyman’s recent piece on the membership of the Rock ‘n’ Roll Hall of Fame. These accomplished journalists join me and Ben Rowling in a conversation tracing the respective internal band dynamics and the arc of their respective artistry into the decades that followed.

Check out Bill’s work here:

http://www.vulture.com/author/bill-wyman/

Check out Michael’s work here:
https://www.pastemagazine.com/writers?name=michael+salfino

Mashups courtesy of BDJ – hear his work here:
https://bdj.podomatic.com/
Twitter: @MichaelSalfino 
Bill Wyman: @hitsville 

Comments

17 responses to “145: Something About The Rolling Stones (and The Beatles)”

  1. Rob Geurtsen

    Cool show, this is good stuff… an interesting conversation that focusses on the music, which I prefer, the image nonsense really doesn’t matter… I like the attention that the Stones music gets, that is necessary on the Beatles’ related podcast and informative…

    Reply
  2. Rob Geurtsen

    Too bad of course but the characterization of Lennon in the late sixties, hits home. I bet the re-issue of the White album will not reveal anything at all about the situation.

    Reply
  3. Rob Geurtsen

    Robert… if the birthday party of Mick Jagger was on his birthday, then the recording of ‘Hey Jude’ had not yet started – beginning 29th of July which was on a Monday… Mick’s party could have been a few days after the real day, during the weekend, but it is hard to believe McCartney already had an acetate of the new single available.

    Reply
    1. Us

      Except that Jagger’s birthday was celebrated after the fact that year, timed to coincide with the opening of the Club Vesuvio. According to Lennonology, this likely happened on August 6, 1968 – after the final mix of “Hey Jude.”

      Reply
  4. RobW

    Great show! I don’t agree with some things though especially that Mr. Wyman says…”Keith was a loser partner in the 70’s” I don’t thonk so! He might have been on heroin but they did EXILE in 1972, considered a Richards dominated album and came up with gems throuout the decade. It was when Mick did his solo bit in the 80’s that it fell flat!
    also I don’t agree at all the Stones were more recording innovators than the Beatles…Strawberry Fields is waaaaay more innovative than Street Fightin’ Man.Despite putting an acoustic through a over
    Loaded cassette player! Laughed like hell at the YOKO bit! Love it!

    Reply
  5. RobW

    Another point is that the Stones used many outside musicians who were part of the RnR Rhythm section that became integral parts of the songs!even singers like Merry Clayton on Gimme Shelter and Nicky Hopkins was really in the Stones for awhile! The Beatles never did that, it was all them except or guitar solos on While My Guitar…on the “RnR” instruments. By the way you have shortchanged George Harrison too, his songwriting and singing has no counterpart in the Stones.

    Reply
  6. James

    The Beatles deliver their last great album in 68, the Stones their first(listening to Abby Road next to Let it Bleed and Sticky Fingers highlights how the Beatles lost their spine).

    The Beatles cut their teeth for years in clubs—Hamburg etc, the Stones cut their teeth on the world stage.

    No mention of George Martin? Ry Cooder showing Keith the open tuning? Graham Parsons?

    Reply
  7. Robert

    The whole Beatles vs Stones thing is a media fabrication. Fact is that according to RIAA sales Beatles number 1 and Stones number 13. 166 million to about 65 million. Eagles are the Beatles biggest rival in terms of sales. Don’t get me wrong-Stones are great, Sticky Fingers, Out of our Heads etc great albums, Stones had great impact but to buy into a false narrative is a bit sad. This show was a tad disappointing as I didn’t really learn anything. It would have been better to compare Chuck Berry covers between the bands? Not sure, but this format didn’t work.

    Reply
    1. James

      Agreed. An episode could be done on undoing the false narrative. I was hoping you were going to carry on comparing Ritchie and Charlie. THAT could be a cool episode, I think. A look at John and Keith as rhythm guitarists could be good too.

      Reply
  8. James Allen

    Excellent discussion! I like the round-table format for things like this, and although you drifted off the main point from time to time (lots of time devoted to the Stones output after The Beatles broke up, but an interesting notion was brought up that perhaps because of The Beatles absence the competitive pressure was off which resulted in some of their best work) it was still engrossing. I especially like Bill’s recounting of how Mick had to keep things going during the 70’s with Keith. I mean, what a contrast to Paul who thought he had it bad with an acid casualty like John.

    Anyway, great show again, and I hope you get these guys back for similar discussions.

    Reply
  9. David M

    Interesting podcast, even though I disagreed with some of the opinions. Stones rated 15th most important band of all time or something? That’s a bit ridiculous, they have to be in the top 5, or maybe even in the top 2! A post 80s Stones album that I like very much is Voodoo Lounge, could be cut down to make a brilliant 40 minute record.

    McCartney’s last great album? Chaos and Creation in the Backyard. One of his top 3 post Beatles in my opinion, give it another listen with an open mind. Way ahead of the extremely patchy Flowers in the Dirt (as is Flaming Pie), Egypt Station isn’t too shabby either, something of a miracle for a 76 yr old.

    Reply
  10. Marto

    When one podcast on the Who and on the Kinks? With this kind of approach could be great. TKATVGPS is also 50 this month. There I left it.

    Reply
  11. Juan

    Something About The Beach Boys when?

    Reply
  12. Louis Pacifico

    Great show ????

    Reply
  13. Graham Wong

    Of course, Mark Lewisohn’s work on The Beatles’ history is outstandaing, but is there anything like that for The Rolling Stones? Whenever I look for Stones histories, I find a lot of personal memoirs but no histories that are considered definitive.

    Reply
  14. Graham Wong

    At one point, you were all talking about how the Stones made so little from individual venues that they had to tour so much.

    How were the Beatles able to stop touring? What arrangements were they able to make?

    To this day I can’t think of another major act that didn’t tour incessantly.

    Reply
  15. Dimitri

    I’ve been on a binge of your podcasts – fantastic job. I’m not just a Beatles fan but a music obsessive overall so these episodes about other artists (Hendrix, Bowie, The Rolling Stones etc) are a treat. Really well done.

    One of your guests here sounds uncannily like…Albert Goldman. It’s unsettling.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts