Author | Message |
Is Prince as good as The Beatles? Is Prince as good as The Beatles? I think he is. Prince is a freak of nature, a true musician, artist and songwriter. Plus he can sing. Prince is also very funny and the camera loves him just like the Beatles. I think he is a lot like John Lennon my favorite Beatle. Whatever your opinion is, you have to recognize that The Beatles were the greatest group ever and Prince is the greatest solo artist/musician the world has ever seen. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
callejero said: Whatever your opinion is, you have to recognize that The Beatles were the greatest group ever and Prince is the greatest solo artist/musician the world has ever seen.
if i "have to" recognize anything, i couldn't have my own opinion 2 begin with, dont'cha think? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I think The Beatles set the standard and Prince has met that and more. If you watch The Beatles Anthology, you will see that the one thing the Beatles always had were each other. Prince has done what hea has done on his own! The only reason Prince has a band is because he can't play all the instruments at the same time. The Beatles were awesome but Prince has taken that to a new level. Long live Prince!
But John Lennon was very cool. You may say I'm a dreamer but I'm not the only ONE. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Handclapsfingasnapz said: callejero said: Whatever your opinion is, you have to recognize that The Beatles were the greatest group ever and Prince is the greatest solo artist/musician the world has ever seen.
if i "have to" recognize anything, i couldn't have my own opinion 2 begin with, dont'cha think? You are right. My bad, I never meant 2 offend you my friend! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
What the bloody hell kinda question is this? This post not for the wimp contingent. All whiny wusses avert your eyes. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'm too biased to answer this question objectively. I love one, hate the other. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Moonbeam said: I'm too biased to answer this question objectively. I love one, hate the other.
Hate is a strong word. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
callejero said: Moonbeam said: I'm too biased to answer this question objectively. I love one, hate the other.
Hate is a strong word. Trust him. He hates the other. This post not for the wimp contingent. All whiny wusses avert your eyes. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
There is just no way to fairly answer this question. It's like asking "what's the best favorite?" The answer is different for everybody.
-SWANGgetspersonal | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
prince might be better than an individual beatle, but a group of creative individuals can usually create a more solid body of work. Prince was more of a pop cultural force when he was working with creative band members or trying to impress them, or influenced by them. One can only wonder what kind of supergroup would have formed if two or three or four prince caliber artists had united for at least ten years.
It could still happen with some unknowns! the beatles were the greatest. just look for a list of their accomplishments. My art book: http://www.lulu.com/spotl...ecomicskid
VIDEO WORK: http://sharadkantpatel.com MUSIC: https://soundcloud.com/ufoclub1977 | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
callejero said: Moonbeam said: I'm too biased to answer this question objectively. I love one, hate the other.
Hate is a strong word. I know, but it's accurate in this case, believe it or not! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Okay, This is a yes and no question, simply because this is 2 totally different things.
as artists- They are all amazing musicians, but the Beatles came first, and they were the pioneers.. they set the stage, and they did a damn fine job of it. And there will never be another BAND like them.. at least on a popularity base. I feel that communication/technology/computers prevent the aniticipation that brought so much with The Beatles.. U heard about them on record, radio, news papers, and some on TV, and now u can find out anything on anyone.. What I'm saying is that they came on the scene when the scene was fresh, and they paved the way for future artists.. almost everyone who is a real artist had some kind of influence, if not by the beatles, by a group that was influenced by The Beatles..And In my opinion, I dont think hearing Beatles "1" album can base a real opinion on how great their music is.. Their latter albums show how much they emerged and how incredible the sound became, its timeless:) [This message was edited Tue Apr 15 22:00:53 PDT 2003 by Sdldawn] | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ufoclub said: prince might be better than an individual beatle, but a group of creative individuals can usually create a more solid body of work. Prince was more of a pop cultural force when he was working with creative band members or trying to impress them, or influenced by them. One can only wonder what kind of supergroup would have formed if two or three or four prince caliber artists had united for at least ten years.
It could still happen with some unknowns! the beatles were the greatest. just look for a list of their accomplishments. U know I also feel that George Paul and Johns solo work was pretty damn amazing also. It was a very narrow change, but they still had abilities to create solid work as individuals.. Some of Pauls work in the 80's was sketchy, but the 70's and 90/00's were excellent.. as for the other 2, they created amazing work. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sdldawn said: Okay, This is a yes and no question, simply because this is 2 totally different things.
as artists- They are all amazing musicians, but the Beatles came first, and they were the pioneers.. they set the stage, and they did a damn fine job of it. And there will never be another BAND like them.. at least on a popularity base. I feel that communication/technology/computers prevent the aniticipation that brought so much with The Beatles.. U heard about them on record, radio, news papers, and some on TV, and now u can find out anything on anyone.. What I'm saying is that they came on the scene when the scene was fresh, and they paved the way for future artists.. almost everyone who is a real artist had some kind of influence, if not by the beatles, by a group that was influenced by The Beatles..And In my opinion, I dont think hearing Beatles "1" album can base a real opinion on how great their music is.. Their latter albums show how much they emerged and how incredible the sound became, its timeless:) [This message was edited Tue Apr 15 22:00:53 PDT 2003 by Sdldawn] I Agree with all this. Another important point is that the Beatles output came in only seven years. They managed to improve themselves with every album, explored new grounds (studio wizardry, indian music, using classical instruments), still this experiments didn't diminish their popularity or record sales. As with other artists who like to experiment after they've scored some hits but can't keep up their popularity (for instance Prince with releasing Around the world in a day after Purple Rain). | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Henk said: Sdldawn said: Okay, This is a yes and no question, simply because this is 2 totally different things.
as artists- They are all amazing musicians, but the Beatles came first, and they were the pioneers.. they set the stage, and they did a damn fine job of it. And there will never be another BAND like them.. at least on a popularity base. I feel that communication/technology/computers prevent the aniticipation that brought so much with The Beatles.. U heard about them on record, radio, news papers, and some on TV, and now u can find out anything on anyone.. What I'm saying is that they came on the scene when the scene was fresh, and they paved the way for future artists.. almost everyone who is a real artist had some kind of influence, if not by the beatles, by a group that was influenced by The Beatles..And In my opinion, I dont think hearing Beatles "1" album can base a real opinion on how great their music is.. Their latter albums show how much they emerged and how incredible the sound became, its timeless:) [This message was edited Tue Apr 15 22:00:53 PDT 2003 by Sdldawn] I Agree with all this. Another important point is that the Beatles output came in only seven years. They managed to improve themselves with every album, explored new grounds (studio wizardry, indian music, using classical instruments), still this experiments didn't diminish their popularity or record sales. As with other artists who like to experiment after they've scored some hits but can't keep up their popularity (for instance Prince with releasing Around the world in a day after Purple Rain). I am a BeatleManiac and a PrinceFan, so this a tough call for me. I just thought it was a good topic for discussion. There are some very good people here! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
does an apple taste like a peach? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
abierman said: does an apple taste like a peach?
Good answer! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
callejero said: abierman said: does an apple taste like a peach?
Good answer! clever one too, apples/beatles vs peach/prince. clever. and true love lives on lollipops and crisps | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
i love prince's music more, but i admit that the beatles are better. as henk (?!) said, they put out the greatest single body of music in 7 years - just try comparing the whole beatle's catalogue with prince's albums from FOR YOU upto ATWIAD. as much as i love all but the 1st of those albums, they can't stand up to the beatle's stuff.
he's a better dancer tho, so it evens out in the end, All those who believe in telekinetics, raise my hand...
---------------------------------------------- So I contradict myself? I am large, I contain multitudes. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Prince is NOT as good as the Beatles... SUPERJOINT RITUAL - http://www.superjointritual.com
A Lethal Dose of American Hatred | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IceNine said: Prince is NOT as good as the Beatles...
The Beatles are NOT as good as Prince... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Prince is in no way as talented as the Beatles when looked at as a whole group, they did more in 8 years than Prince, MJ & Madonna and more of that type have done in their entire lives combined...
Compare 1980-1988 for Prince and 62-70 for the Beatles! And try and name one Beatles album that is just shit! Personally . I think we are all Boring with No Lives cause all we do is talk about Prince,Criticize and Gossip. I need a Horny Man is what I Need and probably so do most of yas. We are Sexually Frustrated what we R... Amen..!!! - zelaire | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
yes and no.
Prince, on his own, is as good (or almost as good) as the Beatles as a collective. i never cared much for them as solo artists, but when they came together, even when they were working alone and all contributing to one project, they were glorious. but, you know, if it wasn't for what the Beatles did, there might not have even been a Prince. he was pretty innovative, but so much of the innovation in music of the last 30 years or so has been on the foundations that the Beatles laid. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Prince
Controversy Dirty Mind 1999 Purple Rain Around the world in a Day Parade Sign of the Times In my opinion, not even the Beatles progression of 7 albums can top these 8 albums. I removed "For You" from the list since Prince was only 19 when he wrote the album and the Beatles were in their early 20's when their first album got released. There's no way "I wanna Hold your hand" can even compare to "I Wanna be your Lover"; the first being childish and immature, the latter sexy and raw. The Beatles later albums were impressive, esp. Sgt. Pepeer's, Abbey Road, Magical Mystery Tour, but I prefer "Adore", "Purple Rain", "Forever in My Life", "Sometimes it Snows in April" to "Yesterday", "Here Comes the Sun", "Hey Jude", and "The End." Granted, the Beatles last few albums were epic, but Prince's first few albums were 10 times better than the Beatles first few albums. "Controversy" vs. "Twist & Shout"--I mean, c'mon. For all of you who think Prince doesn't compare with the Beatles, you obviously either don't know Prince's work as well as you should, or you haven't heard the Beatles earlier works. -phunk Whatever it is, it´s got to be PHUNKy!!! | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
piflacoco said: IceNine said: Prince is NOT as good as the Beatles...
The Beatles are NOT as good as Prince... Prince couldn't wipe the sweat off of Paul McCartney's hairy bean bag. SUPERJOINT RITUAL - http://www.superjointritual.com
A Lethal Dose of American Hatred | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IceNine said: piflacoco said: IceNine said: Prince is NOT as good as the Beatles...
The Beatles are NOT as good as Prince... Prince couldn't wipe the sweat off of Paul McCartney's hairy bean bag. Paul McCartney couldn´t wipe the sweat off of Prince's hairy bean bag | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
piflacoco said: IceNine said: piflacoco said: IceNine said: Prince is NOT as good as the Beatles...
The Beatles are NOT as good as Prince... Prince couldn't wipe the sweat off of Paul McCartney's hairy bean bag. Paul McCartney couldn´t wipe the sweat off of Prince's hairy bean bag John Lennon's corpse would whip Prince's ass in a songwriting contest. SUPERJOINT RITUAL - http://www.superjointritual.com
A Lethal Dose of American Hatred | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IceNine said: piflacoco said: IceNine said: piflacoco said: IceNine said: Prince is NOT as good as the Beatles...
The Beatles are NOT as good as Prince... Prince couldn't wipe the sweat off of Paul McCartney's hairy bean bag. Paul McCartney couldn´t wipe the sweat off of Prince's hairy bean bag John Lennon's corpse would whip Prince's ass in a songwriting contest. princes corpse would whip pauls vagina in a...wait ..i need 2 think about it | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
piflacoco said: IceNine said: piflacoco said: IceNine said: piflacoco said: IceNine said: Prince is NOT as good as the Beatles...
The Beatles are NOT as good as Prince... Prince couldn't wipe the sweat off of Paul McCartney's hairy bean bag. Paul McCartney couldn´t wipe the sweat off of Prince's hairy bean bag John Lennon's corpse would whip Prince's ass in a songwriting contest. princes corpse would whip pauls vagina in a...wait ..i need 2 think about it While you are thinking about it, I will state that George Harrison's ghost can write better songs than Prince. SUPERJOINT RITUAL - http://www.superjointritual.com
A Lethal Dose of American Hatred | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IceNine said: piflacoco said: IceNine said: piflacoco said: IceNine said: piflacoco said: IceNine said: Prince is NOT as good as the Beatles...
The Beatles are NOT as good as Prince... Prince couldn't wipe the sweat off of Paul McCartney's hairy bean bag. Paul McCartney couldn´t wipe the sweat off of Prince's hairy bean bag John Lennon's corpse would whip Prince's ass in a songwriting contest. princes corpse would whip pauls vagina in a...wait ..i need 2 think about it While you are thinking about it, I will state that George Harrison's ghost can write better songs than Prince. probably..pitty he cant play music | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |