I like the Stones but mostly just the stuff that has Brian Jones in - his ability as a musical arranger is really striking and well beyond the (for me anyway) relatively narrow scope of talent that the so called Glimmer Twins had for writing hits, where Jones had a knack for bringing in different/ surprising instruments that elevated his songs to another level.
Back to The Doors, here you have 3 virtuoso musicians playing in perfect synch behind a baked pretentious front man. For whatever reason I connect emotionally with their music far more deeply than the Stones (Beggars Banquets might be the exception to that).
My dad was in the St John Ambulance in the 60s. He used to attend Sheffield United and Wednesday matches. He also covered the City hall concerts. He once told me about the Beatles concerts…I remember him telling me he was terrified ! …
The sheer volume of the girls screaming…having to go in amongst them to recover fainting girls for fear of them being trampled to death. He also recalled going back stage to stick a plaster on Paul’s finger. …
Him and his mates stayed behind after the concerts to help the hall staff gather all the handbags … shoes and other items into neat piles.
The Doors whilst excellent musically and in terms of musicianship didn’t innovate or break much original musical ground. They stayed in a pre established westcoast psych lane. They did that very well and darker than many on the mass market psych circuit. As far as tragic charismatic front men they rate rather highly. They were not the equivalent pinnacle of the British Invasion culturally. The fact Morrison died creates a very strong mystique- had he survived I wonder if they would have moved on musically or if his personality would’ve broken the band ?
My mum has a story about when she watched the beatles in 1964 as a 13yr old. Her aunt was an usherette at a theatre in southampton and got her in to see them. My mum had a nice new coat with a fur collar and she said she was screaming and so excited that she pulled all the fur out of the collar and my nan crucified her when she got home.
Her aunt also got her in to meet them after and she got a signed autograph from all four of them.
Her older brother then pinched it and gave it to a ‘bird’ he was chasing at the time
I like band on the run,there,I’ve said it out loud.
I find the stories behind the classic bands of the period Beatles,stones,who,led zep Floyd etc fascinating.
I rarely listen to any of them.
No idea what was going on between the making of sgt pepper to dark side of the moon,but Abbey road was certainly sprinkling some magic dust from the new techniques bands were using that still sound brilliant decades later
Morrison Hotel. It’s pretty much a straight up rocker, not much psychedelia. Some great deep cuts You Make Me Real, Queen Of The Highway, Maggie M’Gill
Tuned-in to this thread hoping, mebbe, to get a sense of direction, instead I’ve got a dose of envy that I don’t love any band as much as some of you love the Beatles. Loving things is cool, I’m not being sarky.
They certainly stand as exemplars of where creative freedom + drugs can take talented people: some of that’s inspirational, some of that’s a Public Health Warning…
Another band I rarely listen to - only really enjoy the Syd Barret era daftness.
Of their contemporaries it’s Love > Doors > Hendrix >{distant 4th} Stones >{distant 5th} Floyd in terms of hours listened. Just a matter of personal preference - arguments as to artistic merit are as open-ended as they are pointless: all of them were self-limiting in different ways.
Yeah I wouldn’t suggest that the Doors had innovated to the extent that The Beatles did, but I’d point out that they fused psych, blues, rock and roll, lounge jazz etc so were broader in scope than the Stones and for me much more musically interesting.
not sure you can completely dismiss Macca’s solo stuff. It’s our generation that struggles…
