Can someone explain why The Rolling Stones were so popular?

Question

I really do not understand what was the big deal about them.
I love classic rock but I do not like that band so much. Why were they so popular? And why is Yes so unpopular?

Answer 1

I don't get it either
For me, the Stones was always a mediocre band that could kick out an awsome tune once in a while, but they never touched me emotionally (like Pink Floyd), nor did they push the boundaries of music (Yes). People say the Stones are up on the same level as the Floyd and the Stones and I highly disagree, they don't even come close. I guess it was cause their songs are simplier and easier to sell (short and simple)
I think people don't like Yes that much because they were to experimental, they were to different from the cookie cutter rock they're use to and unfimilarity pushes people away.

Answer 2

THey were considered the yin to the Beatles yan. The Beatles were the light side and the Stones were the dark side. Seriously, I don t think the Beatles had any rivals but if they did the Stones were maybe the closest. But here s where it gets interesting. The Beatles broke up in 1970 but the Stones kept going. Then after Led Zeppelin broke up the Stones kept going. They were and are the energizer bunnies of rock n roll. THeir best days are long behind them but few if any bands in rock n roll history have had the staying power as well as lasting popularity of the Rolling Stones. A handful of rock bands have sold more albums but if you are talk about over all influence and longetivity they are with very few if any peers.

Answer 3

Listen to the lyrics and the meaning behind the lyrics. A lot of people can relate to the lyrics because they are about the human condition and universal truths. For instance, "You can't always get what you want. You can't always get what you want. But if you try sometime, you might find...you get what you need." And the Rolling Stones have survived the test of time. You still hear sooo many of their songs on the radio. The same ones they played in the 70's.

As for Yes, "Owner of a lonely heart" is the only song that comes to mind. I was never a fan of Yes. To each his own.

Answer 4

Their lists are always compiled from the votes by like 100 people in the music world, from producers to critics to actual musicians. So your beef isn't with the magazine but with the people who voted all those singers better than Freddy Mercury. Making lists of anything is a tricky task, obviously you wont be able to please everybody. I like their lists if only for the simple way it gets 100 great somethings all together in a way that is easy for me to read. You left out Bob Dylan. The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, and Bob Dylan are a sacred trinity for that magazine. That's just the way it is, sure it's kind of annoying but whatever. As for the magazine itself, they recently had an issue featuring interviews with Lemmy and Madonna. That was like some astrology thing where all my planets aligned. It was awesome.

Answer 5

The Rolling Stones have been on top for over 40 years now. They have had hits ranging from blues to ballads to funk to straight-out rock and roll, and everything in between! The Jaggar/Richards songwriting team has been one of the most prolific in all of music history.

Yes was a second-rate band by comparison. They were always too overly pretentious for me, and their music all sounded the same. Besides, the Stones had been making hits for YEARS before they even came along. The Stones made DOZENS of hits, while Yes only had a few! Yes WAS a popular band, but never huge. The Stones have had longevity. They are TRUE classics.....living legends!

Does anyone even know WHO the members of Yes are?!

Answer 6

They reflected the attitudes and beliefs of a generation that was the antithesis of everything that came before them. There was the very unpopular Vietnam War, political scandals and corruption to the core, and overwhelming distrust of the establishment and its so-called "objectivity". The "flower children",as they were called, found a spokesman in Mick and the boys who themselves were actually only a small catalyst in the whole sixties generation. They were enormously influential, and their style of music resonated with a generation not content with Elvis or Patsy Cline styles of "conformist music" (Elvis was not conformist by any stretch). There were also the Beatles, The Who, The Kinks, The Grateful Dead, and who could ever forget Jimi Hendrix or the Doors? It's just that the Stones were at the top of the mountain and have never come down. They are legends and immortal icons. They kick ***!!!!

Answer 7

The rolling stones were ALOT more mainstream than yes, but yes is popular but not nearly as popular as the rolling stones

Answer 8

Three of their albums are among the greatest rock albums of all time: Beggar's Banquet, Let It Bleed and Sticky Fingers. They have several other great albums, and at least 50 classic songs which are instantly recognizable. Their best music is more timeless than anything the Beatles ever did. You're simply being naive about how great they are. I wouldn't say Yes is unpopular -- it's just that art rock is a more selective taste than the bluesy rock and roll the Stones play.

Answer 9

Because the Rolling Stones write music that any thumb fingered idiot can play in a bar band and sound good. Simple music, simple chords.

Yes on the other hand, is as ornate as a Victorian tract house, it's music can barely be played live in a recognizable form by the band itself. A band devoted to studio albums , which rarely does itself justice in concert never builds a real following as even it's most devoted fans can't be troubled to leave their own rec rooms.

Answer 10

The Rolling Stones were so popular because Mick Jagger was a...uh...flirt? Or a sex symbol if u will, Yes rocks hard, but most people [posers] judge bands on how they look, and not how they sound...