Temptations or Beatles?

**skooldem1** · 10-29-2011, 12:50 PM

Now that the Supremes vs Beatles thread is winding down, I'd like to add the Temptations to the discussion. Who was better the Temptations or the Beatles?

**paladin** · 10-29-2011, 01:13 PM

Why did I know this was coming ? Although I am not one to participate in the Supreme threads, this one gives me a little leeway. LOL.....

They are as difficult to compare as The Supremes because these guys were not a band. But I have always preferred the Temptations. The Beatles were always ok, but they never had me running to the record store to get their latest release.

As far as popularity goes, The Beatles would probably win most any band to band comparison, however as far as musical output and my personal preference I would still select several bands over The Beatles, including The Jacksons, War, Earth Wind and Fire, Rufus , Frankie Beverly and Maze and The Time.

**soulster** · 10-29-2011, 01:19 PM

Once again: bad match-up. The Temptations didn't play their own instruments, nor did they write their own music. The Beatles did their own thing [[after 1964), while the Temptations were always told what to do.

**captainjames** · 10-29-2011, 01:35 PM

Try comparing John, Paul, George and Ringo to the Stones.

**soulster** · 10-29-2011, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by captainjames

Try comparing John, Paul, George and Ringo to the Stones.

Yes! Clean-cut image vs. the bad boy image. Even then, their influences were different. The Beatles were influenced by skiffle, Carl Perkins, Little Richard, and the Stax sound. They admired Motown, and played their songs, but they just couldn't sound like them. By contrast, until, 1965, the Stones were influenced by everybody, but mostly the legendary bluesmen.

**Jimi LaLumia** · 10-29-2011, 04:30 PM

The Supremes/Beatles thread is not actually about who was better, although some folks steered it that way;
it's about The Supremes holding their own as an American Group in the 60's with sales, radio airplay and #1's on Billboard, in which they ran a close second to the British Beatles, and as a result were the #1 American recording act of the 1960's;
I love The Temptations, but they come nowhere near in this particular equation..

**Jimi LaLumia** · 10-29-2011, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by soulster

Yes! Clean-cut image vs. the bad boy image. Even then, their influences were different. The Beatles were influenced by skiffle, Carl Perkins, Little Richard, and the Stax sound. They admired Motown, and played their songs, but they just couldn't sound like them. By contrast, until, 1965, the Stones were influenced by everybody, but mostly the legendary bluesmen.

Read Keith Richards current auto-biography "Life"; he constantly talks about Motown and how all The Stones wanted to listen to and spin, besides the blues, was Motown imports , from 1961 on, he name checks The Marvelettes, quotes a line from "Back In My Arms Again" [[he was spending time with a young woman of color named Flo when that was a hit, and they got a good chuckle out of it every time they heard the song; The Stones, Brian Epstein & The Beatles, Dusty Springfield, all the UK stars including The Dave Clark 5 were totally swept up by the Motown sounds of 1961, 62/63/64)

**tamla617** · 10-29-2011, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by captainjames

Try comparing John, Paul, George and Ringo to the Stones.

took the words right off my keyboard!

**marv2** · 10-29-2011, 05:06 PM

Temptations man.....forgettaboutitt!

**candykamaine** · 10-29-2011, 05:24 PM

^^ I agree with Marv I love the tempts a lot more.

About the tempts songwriting ability, I know that they did write songs just not as much as the beatles and did'nt they write "Check Yourself" along with Berry [[from wiki entry of the song although I am a skeptic of wiki sometimes)?

**stephanie** · 10-29-2011, 06:06 PM

No comparison.

**arrr&bee** · 10-29-2011, 07:33 PM

Someone has too much time on thier hands!!

**marv2** · 10-30-2011, 01:26 AM

Originally Posted by arrr&bee

Someone has too much time on thier hands!!

What next? The Jackson 5 vs The Osmonds? hehehehehehe.......!

**rovereab** · 10-30-2011, 08:57 AM

For me:

Both group produced excellent music
Both groups were style icons.
Both groups were excellent ambassadors for their countries
Both groups were key in opening up the acceptance of their genre of music in each other's countries

And most importantly.....

Both groups have given me, and others for sure, countless hours of enjoyment

So overall for me, neither is better, just great groups!

Eamonn

**soulster** · 10-30-2011, 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by Jimi LaLumia

Read Keith Richards current auto-biography "Life"; he constantly talks about Motown and how all The Stones wanted to listen to and spin, besides the blues, was Motown imports , from 1961 on, he name checks The Marvelettes, quotes a line from "Back In My Arms Again" [[he was spending time with a young woman of color named Flo when that was a hit, and they got a good chuckle out of it every time they heard the song; The Stones, Brian Epstein & The Beatles, Dusty Springfield, all the UK stars including The Dave Clark 5 were totally swept up by the Motown sounds of 1961, 62/63/64)

Sure! They all loved Motown! That should go without saying!

**copley** · 10-30-2011, 07:40 PM

Originally Posted by rovereab

For me:

Both group produced excellent music
Both groups were style icons.
Both groups were excellent ambassadors for their countries
Both groups were key in opening up the acceptance of their genre of music in each other's countries

And most importantly.....

Both groups have given me, and others for sure, countless hours of enjoyment

So overall for me, neither is better, just great groups!

Eamonn

What he said.

**jaybs** · 10-31-2011, 05:22 AM

It has to be The Temptations for me! though I do admit The Beatles did some good song writing over the years. My Brother was 11 years older than me and he went to see The Beatles several times and of course he liked them. It was so hard when I went into radio and we broadcast from Liverpool that The Beatles were so much on the playlist as a national treasure something I did not feel, but of course even when The Temptations & Tops were not on the playlist I slipped some in my show, those tight Harmonies! MMMmmm!

**mr soul** · 10-31-2011, 06:25 AM

John George Paul & Ringo V David Eddie Melvin Otis Paul...oh I get it...the common denominator is they both have Paul's...otherwise comparitively speaking there's no comparison.

**snakepit** · 10-31-2011, 07:08 AM

Bunny Sigler.....what's he got to do with it?

**mr soul** · 10-31-2011, 07:42 AM

well spotted Snake...I thought you were pointing out I'd dropped a Paul. lol.

**juicefree20** · 10-31-2011, 11:36 AM

It seems to me that if you liked Soul, you'll go with The Tempts. If you lean toward Pop, then you'll likely go with The Beatles. I liked them both but as a Soul kid, I would lean much more toward The Tempts.