TS: Bee Gees 1966–69 vs. Monkees 1966–69 vs. Beatles 1966–69

a BIT harder not a but harder

I dig the other two but cmon ppl

who are the other two?

Just glad you didn't throw the Kinks into this mess!

"Paperback Writer" is the only one of the Beatles bunch I love.

All of the albums from the period are also a part of this POLL.

xpost thank heavens for small mercies

so this is:

Revolver (1966)
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967)
The Beatles (aka the White Album) (1968)
Yellow Submarine (1969)
Abbey Road (1969)

put that against anything and anything should lose...

yeah.

Monkees = good

Bee Gees = nails down blackboard 50% of this period (which is better than other periods)

Beatles = DNA

gotta agree w/mark & bee. even though i was age 8-11 during the years in question i submit the experience of hearing these three artists on the radio guarantees a beatles vote. not "you had to be there" but "the beatles defined the times in a way even a stupid kid could understand." remember the monkees and the BGs were imitators. and i don't mean this to be condescending cause listening in retrospect puts all three on an equal playing field.

plus i just think the beatles were BETTER but hey taste is subjective

Beatles best period vs. Bee Gees best period vs. Monkees best period?

Beatles, duh......

I love the Bee Gees, but so many of those albums (as albums) are done in (somewhat) by the ballad-after-ballad thing. It gets frustrating, because their uptempo stuff is usually great. Has more to do with pacing than anything else, so if you take it as individual songs, I might vote for them. But really, Beatles, even though I could probably go to my grave happily without ever hearing them again.

in a funny way, I feel like the Bee Gees were maybe the most unpredictable/adventurous of the three. albums are littered with jokes, pisstakes, bizarre detours, highly unfashionable decisions etc

Shakey, dude...have you heard "Pisces Aquarius Capricorn and Jones"? The Monkees album? Because you would NOT be saying that the Monkees weren't in the running if you had.

I have - I went through a period maybe a year or two ago when I decided to really dig into the Monkees catalog and while I like bits here and there they're very inconsistent and the most consistent thing about them is something I don't like: compromised results. If they were 100% sugary pop-machine silliness I would love that. If they were 100% psych-rock auteurs I could go for that too. But it seems like more often than not they ended up splitting the difference in a way that missed the best elements of both approaches.

well that just makes me sad...

so many of those albums (as albums) are done in (somewhat) by the ballad-after-ballad thing. It gets frustrating, because their uptempo stuff is usually great. Has more to do with pacing than anything else

I'm going off the deluxe reissues from a few years ago, which don't suffer from this problem.

xp

The one Monkees LP where I'd agree that there's something like Shakey's "compromised results" issue is The Birds, the Bees, and the Monkees. A song like "Tapioca Tundra" - OK. But I don't think any shortcomings of Headquarters or the fourth album are a result of not committing to one direction or another.

fwiw my favorite Monkees song is "Auntie Grizelda"

cuz Peter just goes IN

Just glad you didn't throw the Kinks into this mess!

― Johnny Fever, Wednesday, March 28, 2012 11:51 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

they don't fit b/c their sound was notably different. also they are probably better than these three bands IMO.

i mean

- face to face, something else, village green..., arthur
- dedicated follower of fashion, sunny afternoon, dandy, dead end st, mister pleasant, waterloo sunset, did i mention waterloo sunset?, death of a clown, autumn almanac, susannah's still alive, wonderboy, days, oh yes DAYS, plastic man, shangri-la, victoria, ::ahem:: VICTORIA

[ pedant ]"Nowhere Man" = 1965 [ / pedant]

Why list those Beatles singles and not "Strawberry Fields Forever"? "Eleanor Rigby"?

I know this isn't a very challenging opinion but much of what the Beatles did in this period is some of my favourite music ever made (even more so if we throw in 1965). I'm surprised to see several people claiming that the Bee Gees and Monkees equalled or surpassed them.

(The clips posted here are not swaying me so far.)

(Bee OK: Don't forget Magical Mystery Tour!)

they don't fit b/c their sound was notably different.

I suppose early Boyce and Hart Monkees was Beatles-like to some extent, but not sure that it was much more so than a lot of other groups were. The comparison was more resonant with them because it was a situation of four guys singing different style songs.

Bee Gees 1st has some kind of notable Beatles influence too, I suppose, though I don't know how easy it is to pinpoint. By the time of Odessa, I'm not sure that they sound any more like the Beatles than the Kinks did.

And then you have the fact that half of this period for the Beatles is '68-'69, while the comparison to the Monkees and the Bee Gees seems to involve their earlier music.

I've only heard three of these Monkees albums (HQ, Pisces and Head) and one of the Bee Gees' (Odessa) so maybe I'm missing something but for me The Beatles win out over just about anybody I can think of from this era.

I mean The Kinks are a great band but I relistened to Face to Face and Something Else recently and they didn't hold up as well as I'd remembered. Arthur, on the other hand, is undeniable.

in defense of the Bee Gees:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PLeNdfkoBI

Bee Gees 1st has some kind of notable Beatles influence too, I suppose, though I don't know how easy it is to pinpoint. By the time of Odessa, I'm not sure that they sound any more like the Beatles than the Kinks did.

agree with this ... "Please Read Me" off of 1st is probably the most overtly Beatle-y thing on the record

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RUjnqH3kMw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFnvk8x0-f8

and omg this song, so gorgeous

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-6kKCX2q1I

Barry's song about his dog >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paul's song about his dog

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sjSRfY8o2s

and omg this song, so gorgeous

But this is even better:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCuOsB9L_qo

and really, how CAN you tell is humans are real?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tn7kfNnB8g

IF lol

65-67 may have been an even better era for The Beatles than 66-69. But even though I am no fan of the white album, 66-69 still features their best two years, plus "Abbey Road". There was just nobody who was better than Beatles in this period overall. Including Bee Gees and Monkees and everybody else.

That said, the debut by Bee Gees was a fantastic album that they would never match later. Up with the best of this era. Which speaks volumes considering this era was unusually great.

Yeah, f the White Album. What a piece of crap.

It wasn't crap in any way, but.... it wasn't The Beatles. It didn't sound like The Beatles. And I think it is rather typical that people who don't really like The Beatles tend to see the white one as their favourite Beatles album. I don't dislike it in anyway, it is a great album with lots of great tracks. But it still isn't as glorious as anything else by The Beatles had used to be before. And more than half of the tracks sound like anything but The Beatles.

geir just go take some meds and take a walk.

honestly my worst fear when starting this thread was wondering when geirbot was going to show up.

it wouldn't be a beatles conversation without him

A more attractively perverse route would be to poll 1970-1975 Bee Gees (pre-Main Course) vs. Monkees solo (really Nesmith) vs. Beatles solo (would win there too but still, tons of caca).

that would be tough... think the Beatles would win it tho. As much as I love Trafalgar and Mr. Natural, nothing in that period matches the heights of All Things Must Pass. Or Imagine. Probably better than Ram tho.

> That said, the debut by Bee Gees was a fantastic album that they would never match later. Up with the best of this era. Which speaks volumes considering this era was unusually great.

> ― Hongroe (Geir Hongro), Friday, March 30, 2012 12:36 PM

Bee Gees' 1st (which is what i think you're referring to) actually their third album. The Bee Gees Sing and Play 14 Barry Gibb Songs from 1965 is their first.

btw guys i was kidding upthread this isn't really hard at all unless you are a weird eccentric monkees or bee gees stan because seriously Revolver, Sgt. Pepper's, Magical Mystery Tour, White Album, abbey Road gtfo

i mean, i'm glad the internet has made it possible to connect with others who share your fetish but for real

(Bee OK: Don't forget Magical Mystery Tour!)

― EveningStar (Sund4r), Friday, March 30, 2012 1:00 AM

i did forget as i only thought about albums, than add that and it really is "gtfo"

wtf am I even talking about, it's totally Beatles no matter how much I love the Monkees AND the Bee Gees.

who am I kidding

Take out 66 and The Beatles might not win. Include Paperback Writer (and RAIN) and Revolver, and they fucking walk it.

Compared to Bee Gees and Monkees, The Kinks or The Move would be much closer to The Beatles during this period (but no cigar....)

I've been a music fan long enough, been on ilx long enough, lived long enough to like all these songs by all these artists and to know that there are plenty of sane people who don't seem to like The Beatles that much- I even remember an otm nabisco post explaining why this is so- but this feels like some kind of trap or puzzle I must solve to escape to safety so I will make like Bruce Lee or Orson Welles, smash the mirrors, heed the challops and vote for The Beatles.

this feels like some kind of trap or puzzle I must solve to escape to safety

Yeah. Good post!

Sure, not eveeyone likes The Beatles, but those who don't should be more likely to rep for Rolling Stones, Jimi Hendrix, Zappa, Captain Beefheart, Otis Redding, Aretha Frankkin or James Brown than Bee Gees and Monkees.

Yeah, that's right, you tell us what we like, Geir, we wouldn't know otherwise

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3Ili2VvtvU

Thought about the discussion on this thread whilst driving my car listening to the radio and considered making one of those Let Me Show You My Diverse Tastes Which Actually Turn Out To Be Nearby Points On A Straight Line Introduce Yourself! style posts- "I like The Beatles AND John Coltrane, The Velvet Underground AND James Brown!" As I genre-hopped my way through the XM dial it occurred to me that it must be nice to pick one artist to like and then stick to your guns, plugging your ears to the siren song of keeping up with all the Crate Digger Jones out there.

Take out 66 and The Beatles might not win. Include Paperback Writer (and RAIN) and Revolver, and they fucking walk it.

― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Saturday, March 31, 2012 11:03 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

so I'm the only guy who really kinda hates all those Bee Gees songs?

Probably, but it's no wonder since they were all written by Paul Simon and sung by John Fogerty

Sorry that was cold

lol

I don't like the Bee Gees much until the early 70s.

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

i like the monkees and '60s era bee gees just fine but i'd prob pick the beatles even if they'd stopped in 1966 after recording 'and your bird can sing.'

I voted for The Beatles but The Bee Gees wuz robbed

The Monkees and Wrecking Crew too

51 fps i've gotta work back thru

Actually not so surprising those who didn't go for The Beatles would rather go for The Monkees. The Monkees were considerably more "country" because of Mike Nesmith, and as such, less musically similar to The Beatles.

lol at your display name Geir :D

Geir is nothing if not self aware.

In the top two of sly Scandinavian Internet personae

Geir is nothing if not self aware.

― Naive Teen Idol, Sunday, April 8, 2012 3:32 PM (2 weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

unfortunately he is also nothing if not monotonous and infuriating.

anyway, this wasn't much of a contest, huh? oh well.