I'm with Lunch, I don't usually start music conversations with my friends. Because when I do, I always end up showing off my knowledge and collection and end up acting like a jerk. So I have a few friends that have similar tastes to me who I talk music with all the time, but other people who I know not to bother discussing music with.

What'd you introduce him to?

NP: Lamb of God - Laid to Rest

[QUOTE=Lunch]You shove your music down our throats too. I hate the Rolling Stones now.[/QUOTE]
/knows that thats not a joke or sarcasm
:upset:

[QUOTE=J-Man]What'd you introduce him to?

NP: Lamb of God - Laid to Rest[/QUOTE]
Who moi?

It was mostly a joke, but the Rolling Stones are getting on my nerves a little more when you constantly talk about them.

Why don't you start a thread on them?

[QUOTE=Jacaranda]/knows that thats not a joke or sarcasm
:upset:


Who moi?[/QUOTE]
Yea you.

NP: Lamb of God - Now You've Got Something to Die For

[QUOTE=Lunch]It was mostly a joke, but the Rolling Stones are getting on my nerves a little more when you constantly talk about them.

Why don't you start a thread on them?[/QUOTE]
I hardly ever bring them up when I do end up talking about them, and I've backed off of talking about them because I don't want to seem like too much of a retard.

There are like 4 people on MX who like them, that I'm aware of. It'd die.

[QUOTE]Yea you.[/QUOTE]
Um, the Beatles, CoB, the Dead, the Byrds, Tomahawk, the Stones, Of Montreal, Iron Maiden are the big ones. But he is a huge Beatles fan now after I loaned him all my albums from those artists he sorta branched out on his own, he loves Bob Dylan and Nick Drake now days.

vvvvv
<----
[QUOTE=Jac-this crappy name doesn't even need a joke-aranda]Blue Jay Way is a sweet song.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=That same idiot]I'm shove my music down my friend's throats[/QUOTE]
Nice grammar n00b

You know I kid of course :p

BTW, I <3 the Stones :)

[QUOTE=Jacaranda]I hardly ever bring them up when I do end up talking about them, and I've backed off of talking about them because I don't want to seem like too much of a retard.

There are like 4 people on MX who like them, that I'm aware of. It'd die.[/QUOTE]

There was a period where you constantly brought them up in this thread whenever you could. Not that I really care, but I think you could keep a thread on them alive anyway so you don't have to overlap their discussion into threads like this one.

[QUOTE]vvvvv
<----[/QUOTE]
I'm missing any sort of referance from your User Title or User name or Avatar. Help me out?
[QUOTE]There was a period where you constantly brought them up in this thread whenever you could. Not that I really care, but I think you could keep a thread on them alive anyway so you don't have to overlap their discussion into threads like this one.[/QUOTE]
:) Oh ya... heh. There was a thread not long ago about them, it lasted like 6 hours then died. I don't really care enough to keep bumping it. I talked about them enough for awhile.

[QUOTE=Jacaranda]I'm missing any sort of referance from your User Title or User name or Avatar. Help me out?[/QUOTE]
There's a fog upon L.A.
And my friends have lost their way
"We'll be over soon," they said
Now they've lost themselves instead

Please don't be long, please don't you be very long
Please don't be long for I may be asleep

Well it only goes to show
And I told them where to go
Ask a policeman on the street
There's so many there to meet

Please don't be long, please don't you be very long
Please don't be long for I may be asleep

Now it's past my bed I know
And I'd really like to go
Soon will be the breath of day
Sitting here in Blue Jay Way

Please don't be long, please don't you be very long
Please don't be long for I may be asleep
Please don't be long ,please don't you be very long
Please don't be long
Please don't be long, please don't you be very long
Please don't be long
Please don't be long, please don't you be very long
Please don't be long

Don't be long, don't be long, don't be long
Don't be long, don't be long, don't be long

[QUOTE=Lunch]There was a period where you constantly brought them up in this thread whenever you could. Not that I really care, but I think you could keep a thread on them alive anyway so you don't have to overlap their discussion into threads like this one.[/QUOTE]
Sometimes people can't think of anything to talk about, so they talk about what they have strong knowledge in.

[QUOTE=BigTrav415]/roaiwejrlyrics[/QUOTE]
/googles
Ah yes! Blue Jay Way. I'm no good with reading lyrics and figuring out songs.

Erg, I just went to look for [I]All Things Must Pass[/I] and mine is missing! Gah this sucks I don't have any of his albums on my iPod I thought I'd throw that one on but no can do.

[QUOTE=J-Man]Sometimes people can't think of anything to talk about, so they talk about what they have strong knowledge in.[/QUOTE]

That's fine. But this is the Beatles thread. It's used for discussing the Beatles. If a person can think of anything to talk about, they shouldn't post something they know about just to make conversation.

That wasn't directed at you, Jaracanda. That was all just a hypathetical.

[QUOTE=Lunch]If I'm driving then I'll play what I want [/QUOTE]

Same here. My friends don't like the Beatles (:eek:), so whenever their in my car I play the Beatles as loud as I can to try and get some good music into them. So far my attempts have not yeilded anything.

I never play my music out of spite, so we aren't really the same. I just jam.

[QUOTE=Magical_Mystery_Tour]Same here. My friends don't like the Beatles (:eek:), so whenever their in my car I play the Beatles as loud as I can to try and get some good music into them. So far my attempts have not yeilded anything.[/QUOTE]
I know. My frends like Disturbed and Mudvayne but make fun of me for liking The Beatles, Pink Floyd, and Radiohead.

[QUOTE=Godzilla1969]I know. My frends like Disturbed and Mudvayne but make fun of me for liking The Beatles, Pink Floyd, and Radiohead.[/QUOTE]
...oh my god... that was so funny... so perfectly hilarious... I, I just don't know... if I can ever laugh at anything ever again... everything just pales in comparison to that... oh my god...

[QUOTE=BigTrav415]...oh my god... that was so funny... so perfectly hilarious... I, I just don't know... if I can ever laugh at anything ever again... everything just pales in comparison to that... oh my god...[/QUOTE]
why, i lose the humor in that

[QUOTE=Magical_Mystery_Tour]Same here. My friends don't like the Beatles (:eek:), so whenever their in my car I play the Beatles as loud as I can to try and get some good music into them. So far my attempts have not yeilded anything.[/QUOTE]
I have just stopped bothering with trying push music onto people. I'll tell people they should check band x out, and just leave it at that.

Yeah that's like me too. Luckily the friend of mine that I mainly talk music with has a pretty open mind, and will listen to almost anything I recommend to him just so he can say he at least gave it a chance. I do the same in return with his music. Our tastes are relatively similar though.

Me toosies. I know this guy who was like - "The Beatles?? They suck." He still doesn't like them on account that they're "pussies". They were actually hardarses in their day!

[QUOTE=bahamut_ali]Me toosies. I know this guy who was like - "The Beatles?? They suck." He still doesn't like them on account that they're "pussies". They were actually hardarses in their day![/QUOTE]

Well not really once they became big. Brian Epstein forced them to be clean shaven and where suits so their image wouldn't create controversy. But before that they were pretty bad-a[SIZE="2"]s[/SIZE]s.

[QUOTE=leppermessiah]Well not really once they became big. Brian Epstein forced them to be clean shaven and where suits so their image wouldn't create controversy. But before that they were pretty bad-a[SIZE="2"]s[/SIZE]s.[/QUOTE]

It would be cool to see the beatles in todays time

In my car and home, I have a rule that we listen to only the music I want. So, whenever my friemds are at my place, I play them Beatles, The Who, The Dead, Floyd, Rush, and so on.

The Beatles were very contraversial. Calling them "pussies" is being close minded. Think, they introduced drugs, sex, and questioning to their generattion.

[QUOTE]Think, they introduced drugs, sex, and questioning to their generattion.[/QUOTE]

I disagree, if there is anyone who has attributed to contributing more questionable topics, it's Elvis.

I don't know, he had an impact, no doubt, but not nearly as wide-scale as The Beatles.

Maybe if I rephrase that- maybe they did not introduce those topics, but they certainly made them a large phenomenon.

Elvis hit the scene in 54, close to a decade before the Beatles started exploding globally, so you could argue it was different generations if you wanted.

[QUOTE=rockinbass17]In my car and home, I have a rule that we listen to only the music I want. So, whenever my friemds are at my place, I play them Beatles, The Who, The Dead, Floyd, Rush, and so on.

The Beatles were very contraversial. Calling them "pussies" is being close minded. Think, they introduced drugs, sex, and questioning to their generattion.[/QUOTE]

Your joking...Bob Dylan definitely introduced drugs and questioning to their generation, maybe not sex though. Hell, he introduced drugs and questioning to the Beatles. I'd say the Rolling Stones were probably even more advocates than the Beatles in terms of sex and drugs. But anyways...I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing. The Beatles aren't pussies at all. They weren't big macho he-men...but they were pretty badass.

Haha, does anyone remember He-Man?

edit - No teenagers in the mid to late sixties listened to ****ing Elvis. Elvis was an officer in the Vietnam War, he was also the FBI's drug narc...I'm sure a few million people still listened to him though. He's still Elvis for gods sakes. Elvis became popular again in the early seventies for a while when he was working at Vegas and stuff...before he became a big mess and died.

[QUOTE=thickasabrick]Your joking...Bob Dylan definitely introduced drugs and questioning to their generation, maybe not sex though. Hell, he introduced drugs and questioning to the Beatles. I'd say the Rolling Stones were probably even more advocates than the Beatles in terms of sex and drugs. .[/QUOTE]

I agree completely on both those points.

[QUOTE=thickasabrick]edit - No teenagers in the mid to late sixties listened to ****ing Elvis. Elvis was an officer in the Vietnam War, he was also the FBI's drug narc...I'm sure a few million people still listened to him though. He's still Elvis for gods sakes. Elvis became popular again in the early seventies for a while when he was working at Vegas and stuff...before he became a big mess and died.[/QUOTE]
Hence arguing that they would be two different generations.

No question the Beatles were an exteremly potent catalyst for change in the time. People (like Bob Dylan) influenced the nation by influencing the Beatles. Not to say, of course, that his influence wasn't substantial on it's own


I must have missed this He-Man episode

The Beatles are a lot more bad *** than the stones. If you know anything about the Beatles day's in the cavern. They played for like 12 hours straight there, and would eat and sleep on stage. Not to mention kick bum's in the stage if they climbed on stage. John even threw a knife to scare one of the guy's that was climbing on the stage. The Beatles worked their *** off in the cavern and deserved everything they got.

[QUOTE=Kaleidoscope Eyes]No question the Beatles were an exteremly potent catalyst for change in the time. People (like Bob Dylan) influenced the nation by influencing the Beatles. Not to say, of course, that his influence wasn't substantial on it's own


I must have missed this He-Man episode[/QUOTE]

He-Man was a really old cartoon/movie type thing with this super strong guy named He-Man and a girl named She-Woman. I think. Haha. Didn't you ever see that Ghost Busters movie where they say "Who ya gonna call?" and all the little kids are supposed to say "Ghost Busters!" but instead they start chanting "He Man!" Oh the memories...

I think the 60's wouldn't have been the same without Dylan because he influenced all those early rock bands like the Beatles to become more interested in the art and beauty of music instead of just cliche pop songs. And the 60's definitely wouldn't have been the same without the Beatles because they sort of introduced that same concept to the entire world.

[QUOTE=HighVoltageRockNRoll]The Beatles are a lot more bad *** than the stones. If you know anything about the Beatles day's in the cavern. They played for like 12 hours straight there, and would eat and sleep on stage. Not to mention kick bum's in the stage if they climbed on stage. John even threw a knife to scare one of the guy's that was climbing on the stage. The Beatles worked their *** off in the cavern and deserved everything they got.[/QUOTE]
See, Lunch are you saying I should just stand by and let people say crap like this. I think not, I'll let this one slide..... but after that.
We've been through this before, and I think it was decided by me the Stones are more bad arse.:P
[SIZE="1"](Stones played just as hardcore in their early 60's and early 70's day.)[/SIZE]

Unlike the Beatles, Bob Dylan's postion in the music world wasn't garunteed. Someone was bound to come across and make it big in America, and the Beatles happened to be them, but now Bob Dylan no one was going to be Bob Dylan if Bob Dylan didn't... ugh, that made sense I hope.

[QUOTE=Jacaranda]See, Lunch are you saying I should just stand by and let people say crap like this. I think not, I'll let this one slide..... but after that.
We've been through this before, and I think it was decided by me the Stones are more bad arse.:P
[SIZE="1"](Stones played just as hardcore in their early 60's and early 70's day.)[/SIZE][/QUOTE]

No man, I was just saying I don't think you should intentionally shift conversation to the Stones as much, but maybe you didn't use to do it either. In a compare contrast with the Beatles, I have absolutely no problem with you discussing the Stones here.

We all know who real bada[SIZE="2"]sses[/SIZE] here are anyway.
/Points to avatar.

[QUOTE=Lunch]No man, I was just saying I don't think you should intentionally shift conversation to the Stones as much, but maybe you didn't use to do it either. In a compare contrast with the Beatles, I have absolutely no problem with you discussing the Stones here.

We all know who real bada[SIZE="2"]sses[/SIZE] here are anyway.
/Points to avatar.[/QUOTE]

Well I can agree that without the who Paul probably wouldn't have written Helter Skelter.

Ok, the badasses of the 60's, we'll just end the discussion with saying that The Beatles, The Who, the Stones, and Dylan were all equally badass in influencing people to question and all that.

[QUOTE=HighVoltageRockNRoll]The Beatles are a lot more bad *** than the stones. If you know anything about the Beatles day's in the cavern. They played for like 12 hours straight there, and would eat and sleep on stage. Not to mention kick bum's in the stage if they climbed on stage. John even threw a knife to scare one of the guy's that was climbing on the stage. The Beatles worked their *** off in the cavern and deserved everything they got.[/QUOTE]

I mentioned before that in the Beatles' very early days they were very bad-as[I]s[/I]. But when each band became familiar to the public eye, the Beatles were known as the "clean-shaven innocent boys" while the Rolling Stones were known for their "bad boy" image.

[QUOTE=leppermessiah]I mentioned before that in the Beatles' very early days they were very bad-as[I]s[/I]. But when each band became familiar to the public eye, the Beatles were known as the "clean-shaven innocent boys" while the Rolling Stones were known for their "bad boy" image.[/QUOTE]

We'll the Beatle's wen't from bad-as[COLOR="Silver"]s[/COLOR] to clean cut, and the Stone's went from bad boy's to a safer act than Janet Jackson at the superbowl :p

[QUOTE=HighVoltageRockNRoll]We'll the Beatle's wen't from bad-as[COLOR="Silver"]s[/COLOR] to clean cut, and the Stone's went from bad boy's to a safer act than Janet Jackson at the superbowl :p[/QUOTE]
Over a span of 40 years... And the Stones started out just like the Beatles FYI.