Vincent Vega Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Am I the only one who prefers the acoustic version of "Revolution 1" by the Beatles? I know the heavier, "Metallic" version is the more well known version, the "definitive" version...But I prefer the Acoustic version--I feel it's better constructed. Anyone else agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin' Jack Flash Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 The song itself is pretty poor to begin with, but I prefer the version on The White Album.So yeah, acoustic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 The song itself is pretty poor to begin with, but I prefer the version on The White Album.So yeah, acoustic.Why do you say it's poor?I mean you're entitled to your opinion of course..But why do you feel that way?I think it's got a nice little groove and clever lyrics for the time. The thinking man's Street Fighting Man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin' Jack Flash Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 The song itself is pretty poor to begin with, but I prefer the version on The White Album.So yeah, acoustic.Why do you say it's poor?I mean you're entitled to your opinion of course..But why do you feel that way?I think it's got a nice little groove and clever lyrics for the time. The thinking man's Street Fighting Man.I don't really care for political songs I suppose I don't think of it as a thinking man's Street Fight Man at all since I don't try to parallel everything the Stones did with what the Beatles did. I can see why you'd say that though, it kinda correlates on a certain level but I much prefer the latter. SFM is filled with angst and anger, but Revolution 1 just sounds really forced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 The song itself is pretty poor to begin with, but I prefer the version on The White Album.So yeah, acoustic.Why do you say it's poor?I mean you're entitled to your opinion of course..But why do you feel that way?I think it's got a nice little groove and clever lyrics for the time. The thinking man's Street Fighting Man.I don't really care for political songs I suppose I don't think of it as a thinking man's Street Fight Man at all since I don't try to parallel everything the Stones did with what the Beatles did. I can see why you'd say that though, it kinda correlates on a certain level but I much prefer the latter. SFM is filled with angst and anger, but Revolution 1 just sounds really forced.Well I don't parallel everything they did with the Stones...But remember...The Stones and Beatles were like the Guns and Nirvana of the '60s. There's bound to be comparisons.And both of their songs--Strong protest/political songs--Both came out in '68, by two perceived "rival" bands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin' Jack Flash Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 The song itself is pretty poor to begin with, but I prefer the version on The White Album.So yeah, acoustic.Why do you say it's poor?I mean you're entitled to your opinion of course..But why do you feel that way?I think it's got a nice little groove and clever lyrics for the time. The thinking man's Street Fighting Man.I don't really care for political songs I suppose I don't think of it as a thinking man's Street Fight Man at all since I don't try to parallel everything the Stones did with what the Beatles did. I can see why you'd say that though, it kinda correlates on a certain level but I much prefer the latter. SFM is filled with angst and anger, but Revolution 1 just sounds really forced.Well I don't parallel everything they did with the Stones...But remember...The Stones and Beatles were like the Guns and Nirvana of the '60s. There's bound to be comparisons.And both of their songs--Strong protest/political songs--Both came out in '68, by two perceived "rival" bands.Yeah, I know. I didn't mean, like, you specifically. I understand the comparison, but I just don't see things in those terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.