The Kinks certainly had much better longevity than the Beatles and churned out really good stuff at least through the beginning of the 1980’s.
I saw the Kinks about 6 times. FWIW, At the Oakland Indoor Coliseum, one of the encore songs was Twist and Shout. The only time I saw the Kinks play a beatles song.
IMHO, I would much prefer to listen to the Kinks than the Beatles, but that’s me.
“Twist and Shout” wasn’t a Beatles song.
Saw em at Cobo Hall (Detroit) in 1979 on their “Low Budget” tour. They had a midget bassist. Ray Davies announced about the midget “he’s a wild one girls!”
To me, LB is their best album. It was HUGE in DETROIT–and Detroit is the home of rock & roll.
A Kink can take a bullet better than a Beatle.
Too soon?
That was probably Jim Rodford. who’s quite small but not actually a midget. He played with the Kinks for almost 20 years and is currently one of the reformed Zombies. Still touring as far as I know.
I’ve spoken to him at a couple of Zombies gigs; nice bloke.
Nah, just tasteless.
Ray Davies is an amazing songwriter and The Kinks have stages of development, and some masterpieces in each stage.
But not comparable to The Beatles. The Beatles are simply two or three orders of magnitude in importance vs. a band like the Kinks.
But to be fair, the thread didn’t ask whether they were as important as the Beatles, but whether they were as good. And while my answer was a somewhat reluctant No, I think it’s a fair question.
(FWIW I say that as a far of both bands, who’s familiar with their whole catalogs with the possible exception of some rarities—and among the Kinks rarities that I have heard, there are some minor gems.)
Fair point. Yeah, The Kinks / Ray Davies is a great songwriter. I agree with your assessment - I would say No, but not without a deep respect for his songcraft.
To me, yes the Kinks are better. But i know that’s not really the answer from the world as a whole. Basically all me saying the Kinks are better says is that I like The Kink’s music better and prefer to listen to them versus the Beatles.
As for as influence in the music industry, album sales, number 1 hits, and probably most any quantitative measurement the Beatles will come out on top. But I’d still rather hear Art Lover over She’s So Heavy. Personal preference.
Yeah, I’d rather listen to any random Kinks record in my collection than any random Beatles record. The Kinks have more meaning in the songs (John at least admitted to intentionally writing nonsense), when they rock they rock harder, and when they’re tender and complex they don’t really have an equal.
Plus, Father Christmas is the best Christmas song, ever. Rocking, brutal and tender.
The Kinks had snob appeal that the Beatles lacked. You could never say with a straight face that you appreciated Sgt. Pepper on a deeper level than all the unwashed masses, but you could probably say that about Waterloo Sunset. The Kinks were solidly mods when the Beatles refused to take sides in the mods/rockers thing. The Beatles never got much deeper than “Everyone should chill out, drop acid and quit making war on Vietnam, man.” Ray Davies, at his stupidest, would never have claimed he was saving lives by having a sleep-in at a hotel on Montreal. Call me a heretic, but I’m going with the Kinks on this one.
When Pete Townshend said “What the fuck does Paul McCartney know about Rock and Roll?” nobody really disagreed with him. He never could have said that about Ray Davies.
Helter Skelter! The white album shut all their mouths.
Quick aside: the Kinks were banned from touring in the USA by the unions for more than a decade for their behavior on a tour. It really harmed their popularity in America.
Ha. I just googled your pete townshend quote and it came back one hit, this thread.
I don’t know what you mean about this snob appeal thing. It can’t be talking about the actual time when the bands existed. The Beatles had the cachet. The Kinks were so out of fashion they didn’t even have snob appeal. It wasn’t like that back then. You’re talking about the 90s and the internet age. The Kinks seem more timely every day as time goes by, of course, a lot to discover, but they were out of time after the British invasion.
I think the Beatles were rockers. But they didn’t take public stands. They didn’t need to.
Revolver proved it! The claim is silly.
It was the Stones who said the Beatles weren’t that heavy. Compared to Let it Bleed, which came along later (1969) it was somewhat true.
Oh… and Monkey Man is heavier than anything the Kinks or the Beatles ever did. It’s chilling! The guitar playing is amazing. The whole band rocks on that song!!!
I saw them twice in one week on the Low Budget tour. Once in Oakland and a couple days later at Red Rocks. “Catch me now I’m falling” was incredibly awesome.
The Kinks, and definitely on the Low Budget tour (when the big live record was made) was your basic rock in roll. Singer (who played some guitar), lead, bass, keyboard and drums, plus flashpots, blasting lights, amps to 11, Ray shouting “show me your tits” and half the women doing so, panties thrown at the stage, clouds of pot smoke. It was simply rock n roll.
I’m not sure the Beatle’s live was ever all that great? I don’t mean that in a snarky fashion. The clips I’ve seen generally are teeny boppers drowning out the music, the Beatles on a stage far away. I mean Christ, the beatles last played an official concert at Candlestick Park, SF in 1966.
I don’t begrudge the Beatles influence, but I’d much rather watch the Kinks do Lola over any Beatles hit in their heyday any day of the week. And Lola isn’t the best the Kinks did on vinyl or live. Sleepwalker is my favorite Kinks album.
Great post! Their performance in Detroit was one of the best concerts I have ever seen, and I’ve seen em all. Glad I saw that concert. Low Budget put em back in the top ranks. The fav song in Detroit was “Can’t buy a gallon 0f gas.” It was so timely and true. I remember a party (a fall corn roast) where we all sang it together while we partied. It was quite a night!
Your statement about the Beatles live is true.
OR… Apeman, eh