Certainly, based on his definition of rock music, The Rolling Stones fit the bill. My definition is far more expansive. Sly and The Family Stone, for example, are one of the most talented and under appreciated rock and roll bands imo. Not like Top 10 status or anything like that. Just indicative of how expansive my definition of the label is.
I'm hardly the biggest Beatles fan, but that song totally captured the Beatles vintage sound and feel. Fits right in with any of the Bestles stuff, but with a fresh and contemporary vibe. Like you'd expect it to sound if they were able to get back together and cut a track like 20 years ago. Fwiw, I'm thoroughly impressed.
100%. Any list that has Mariah Carey in the top 5 is complete trash. I'm on the fence about Barbara Striesand.
I've always gone back and forth between the Stones/Beatles. But not a rock band? C'mon. I don't think the Stones considered themselves a 'rock band' until like 1968, basically after Brian Jones was sidelined. They even put out a Sgt Pepper rip-off in 1967 too (which kicks ass). I think one of their first singles to chart was a Lennon/McCartney joint too.
U2 should be included in any lists of top rock bands. Particularly if longevity is part of it. Been together since the mid/late 70's.
They just aren't born from American blues like the Stones are. The Beatles are brilliant and much more innovative for sure - but the Stones get down to the essence of it. They bridge the gap between the black musicians who invented blues and rock & roll and the white bands that popularized the genre. McCartney has made many dismissive comments about the Stones being "just a blues band" but I really think when he said those things he was just voicing his insecurity about the one thing the Stones have in spades that the Beatles never did.
Sure, they covered more blues and R&B songs on their early records (but they both loved Chuck Berry). Once they started writing songs (encouraged by Lennon/McCartney), they were doing things like "Ruby Tuesday" or "Paint it Black." Pretty sure sitar isnt a blues instrument haha. They chased the pop charts because they didn't want to be the Yardbirds, John Mayall or Paul Butterfield Blues band, they werent purists. Like the Beatles, they basically just incorporated all of American music into what they were doing (and the Stones were around long enough to do reggae and disco).
I wonder how history will remember U2. A lot of music snobs derided their early work. It wasn’t until the Brian Eno albums that they gathered universal praise. But if you look at it objectively, they have the catalog, the sales, the tours, the unique sound, one of the greatest records of all time in the Joshua Tree, and the courage to completely reinvent themselves a couple of times. I have tickets to see them at the Sphere in Vegas in a few weeks. Looking forward to it.
As far as the whole Beatles vs.Stones thing. I guess it’s a matter of taste. I completely understand the historic importance of the Stones. I understand how influential they were. And they sure have some classics. But I find their catalog underwhelming considering their status. I didn’t get into the Beatles until later in life. But they are absolutely brilliant. To claim they are not rock n’ roll is just trolling. Their early work set the sound of rock n’ roll for a whole generation. And their later work completely reinvented how music was made. I also think them being short lived helped their status. The avoided some of the excesses of the 70s and 80s. There is some cringe Stones stuff out there.
I never listened to them much. But ever since I bought a new car that syncs to my phone a couple of years ago, they kept popping up on the car player. Finally read that they were loaded onto the phone. I don't see the appeal and turn them off quickly.
Very well said Mr. Petty. Especially his use of the words "grittier" and "raw" when describing the Stones- to me THAT is what makes Rock & Roll Rock & Roll.
The problem is everyone hates them now because they forced their album onto every Apple product. They were definitely the biggest rock band from the mid 80s to the mid 2000s. Maybe the last big rock band ever?
I love that. I always did feel that the Beatles set the template for what rock bands became, especially writing their own music. I remember reading an interview once, pretty sure it was with David Crosby, whose band had broken up and he was thinking about getting a real job. But he saw the Beatles' movie "Hard Day's Night," saw how much fun they were having and got the music thing going again. But Tom's comments about the Stones is just as insightful. "We can do that ..." That changes everything.
I also love how the interviewer asked him about Elvis and the Beatles and then he brought the Stones up on his own. Pretty clear who he favors.
