.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to Fuck_Logging_In_NLI.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="Fuck_Logging_In_NLI:699190"]todayistheday nli said:[QUOTE]boner‘s growing pains said:[QUOTE]the beatles were not really all that talented. the early stuff had all been done 100x times better by the south and the early rock and roll/blues men. as for the later material, if they hadn't had george martin producing them and adding a majority of the studio magic that makes those albums incredible, they would have just been another pop band. great stuff agreed. but there are just too many factors in the background that keep them from being "greats" rather than just "the most well known band in the last 50 years". besides, syd barrett would have wiped his ass with paul mccartney. mccartney and lennon admitted to this when they witnessed them recording piper at the gates of dawn at abbey road studios in 67. [/QUOTE] hope this is a joke or else you are the biggest moron [/QUOTE] the beatles were talentless or Pipers-era Pink Floyd was the better psych band? [/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.009 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][