Really, really not as good as everyone makes them out to be.
They're also a bit noveltyish, I think.
Moreover, they shouldn't ever be spoken about in the same breath as the Stones or The Beatles, because there's such a universe in between them regarding quality and consistency. This is probably proved by the fact that I bet you a million quid that they played 'You Really Got Me' at Every Single Gig, even when they stopped being all beat and rocknroll.
I don't think they're crap by any means, and I do love his voice, but of the selection of songs I have heard, The Small Faces are Arsenal and The Kinks are Fulham.
i havn't quite got them yet.
been listening to Village green perservation society and 'something else by the kinks'.
good, but not quite amazing.
the song 'This Time Tomorrow' is one of the best things ever, though.
and you're
wrong.
Noveltyish...?
The Kinks are class and you're points don't stand up.
1) If you'd written a song as good as 'You Really Got Me', you'd play it at every single gig... so what?
2) They don't deserve to be spoken about in the same breath as the Stones and the Beatles only because they are totally different bands, just as the Stones shouldn't be compared to the Beatles.
3) Waterloo Sunset = one of the best tunes ever written.
I'm not gonna go on and on, but I think the Kinks are way underrated considering how good their songs are.
Waterloo Sunset is
indeed one of the most brilliant songs ever heard, but while 'You Really Got Me' is great, its not so brilliant you'd hold on to it for so long.
If Ray Davies ever plays a show, its as if he's GOT to play that. I don't think they've got enough ultimate tunes to put them up there with the greats. They have about 5 at a push.
Even things like 'Apeman' get on their best-ofs. wtf?
some of his points do!
he picks them up on lack on consistency and all you can do is name one good song.
they have a lot of good songs, but just not as many as the other big hitting names of the era, i think is what he's saying.
I only named one song because...
I couldn't be bothered remembering and typing out all the songs and albums, that's all. But I'll give you some good songs to come back at your point: Days, Sunny Afternoon, Victoria, A Well Respected Man, All the Day and All of the Night, This Time Tomorrow, Lola, Picturebook, for example.
Anyways, what's so wrong with being inconsistant? It happened to the Beatles, it happened to the Stones, it happened to many, many great bands and artists. It's natural.
I think in the case of the Kinks, the sum of the parts are greater than the whole.
When did it happen to The Beatles?
...
'Let It Be', 'Magical Mystery Tour', 'Abbey Road', 'White Album'... It's not that I don't think they're good, far from it, but not consistant by the Beatle's earlier standards.
: O ...
I'll give you Let It Be, but then take it back because they weren't even really a band by then, and it Across The Universe, Get Back, I Got A Feeling and Dig A Pony are all as good if not better than the best Kinks songs.
I'll give you the first half of Abbey Road, but then take it back for the second, which is probably the best thing ever done.
But Magical Mystery Tour? Possibly my second favourite.
...
We can discuss Beatle's albums 'til the cows bring home the bacon to roost.
I was just making the point that even the best artists weren't consistent and it wasn't a fair to throw that at the Kinks.
I think that considering you think of them as a "noveltyish" act, they've done pretty well for us lot on here to still be discussing their music forty years and (for the majority) to still hold it in high esteem. This isn't and won't be the case for the majority of other bands from the past or future!
But,
Waterloo Sunset > Across the Universe, Get Back, I Got A Feeling or Dig A Pony. It just is.
But if you just did that,
tit for tat, The Beatles would win hands down.
For your Waterloo Sunset, I give you Strawberry Fields.
"For your Waterloo Sunset, I give you Strawberry Fields"...
I concur, you win!
What songs have you heard?
Some stuff is easily as good as the Stones or Beatles output at the time.
Inconsistency
is a fair charge but then look at the Stones' recorded output since 1972!
I think the Kinks had some really good songs.
Yeah but
The Stones were essentially a 60s band, weren't they? Pretty much everyone apart from Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd's output since 1972 was dogdirt.
And if you want to bring later recordings into the proceedings, may I refer you to exhibit C = The Kinks' late 70s, early 80s reportoire. In fact, I wouldn't wish that upon anybody, so don't even dare.
Victoria is my fav Kinks song
then
David Watts
Well Respected man
This Time Tomorrow
Apeman
Picturebook
one of the best bands of all time !!!
Just dig a little deeper !!
agree with you on inconsistency
especially later on, but I'd say they're better than nearly all the other 'big' bands from the 60s eg Stones, Who, Doors, small faces but they don't quite beat the beatles. Best stuff to listen to is Village green, Arthur ... and Something else.
Arthur - the decline and fall of the british empire
is superb, even the bonus tracks on the reissue. Mindless Child Of Motherhood is an under rated song.
I agree with this
I think they're a bit pants as well. I don't think Ray Davies deserves the praise heaped on him as a songwriter, its all so stereotypical. I do think Waterloo Sunset is brilliant and I'll echo what someone said about Victoria, that's great too, as is 'You Really Got Me'.
Lola though? God its horrible.
I quite like them
but dont love them.
amazing band
apart from the obvious. amazing tracks as well:
Come Dancing
Mr. Pleasant
Apeman
Holloway Jail
20th Century Man
ETC
Come Dancing
is such a great song
Love the Kinks but waaaaay
Prefer the Small Faces.
Holy shit...
wrongness is taken to a new level.
On none of 3 times i've seen Ray Davies has he played 'You Really Got Me'. He did however play (amongst a selection of his solo material) the following GREAT songs:
Lola
Sunny Afternoon
Til the end of the day
Days
Waterloo Sunset
Victoria
Dedicated Follower of Fashion
Wonderboy
...and some others.
Back.In.Your.Box.
Underrated
They piss on the Stones.
And The Who.
He's so awful.
He has a huge choir on, and he plays solos over the OLD songs with 80s guitar technology and it sounds BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD.
If you got a Kinks best-of
It would be choc full of some of the greatest songs ever written, regardless of who you might compare them to.
the original post at the top here
is fucking hilarious.
small faces shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as the kinks.
ray davies is one of only a handful of truly genius songwriters evr to emerge from the uk.
ludicrous crap from wrightylew.
good to see there are some people with taste willing to spring to the defence though!...
"Ludicrous crap"
Hehehe. I agree that the Small Faces don't hold a candle to the Kinks.
I've got TWO.
I tried the first one and it was boring.
I got another and it had the odd gem on.
The Small Faces are years and years better. From their early R&B years to their psychedelic time, they did more and better in two years than The Kinks did in 20.
Grow Your Own, I Got Mine, E Too D, Whatcha Gonna Do About it in the early days.
Tin Soldier, Ogden's Nut, Itchycoo Park, Lazy Sunday, Rollin' Over, Song of a Baker... and so many more in the latter days.
Steve Marriott and Ronnie Lane make Davies look like a crap wannabe.
The Kinks are great
for me the Beatles are ridiculously over-rated, the Beatles are Pele everyone gets brain-washed into saying they are the best ever even though they probably have not witnessed anything to back up these claims, whilst the Kinks are Diego Maradona or George Best meaning true fans now they are better than the Beatles / Pele but they have to put up with the mainstream media telling them otherwise
outrageously wrong.
...
www.myspace.com/eastindiaplayingcompany
your band is quite good
:)
thank you very much, sir. we dig the sixties.
nothing wrong with that
the 60s were the second best decade for music
80s>60s>90s>70s>50s>40s>30s>20s>10s>00s
^
Is entirely correct.
i'd still put the 60s above the 80s.
Just had a listen to your myspace...
your music's good man, I like it.
we had to stop making music due to uni
but we;re starting up again after exams and the new ideas are exciting.
very noisy, lots of fucked up sounds and lots of energy i think.
thank you for you continued support
xxxxxxxxxxxx
I think you're great too, neecho.
Its quite odd for a band to nail tunes like that without them being Northern.
Oh my God so so wrong.
60s>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>50s>70s>40s>00s>30s>90s>20s>80s
I can't put into words what an offensively awful decade the 80s was for everything apart from action films.
the 80s were great if you looked beyond the mainstream
Big Black, Rapeman, Arsenal, Bull, Ween, Butthole Surfers, Dead Kennedys, Naked Raygun, Pixies, Flour, Tar, U-Men, My Bloody Valentine, The Minutemen, Unsane & The Jesus Lizard are just a few of the great bands that spring to mind
But the 60s were great if you looked both at
and beyond the mainstream.
You can't even compare the 60s with the other decades, because everything happened in them for the first time. Everyone tried everything. Since then its just been ever-so-slight advances and rehashes.
I love the 60s
but for me the 80s had more bands that I think wow! they are amazing, it's a close call between the 60s and 80s though, the 70s for me is the most over-rated decade for music
...
Please, please, please stop comparing the Kinks to the Beatles!
I hate to admit it
but I sorta agree with wrighty. And extra points for the football analogy. Go Falcons!
At least The Kinks continued to play live.
They didn't wuss out like The Beatles.
hahahha:D
Imagine The Beatles touring 'She Loves You' in the 70s.
Lennon would have shot himself.
I prefer The Kinks to The Beatles
They were definitely a lot cooler than the Beatles ever were.
The Small Faces and/or PAul McCartney were just as 'novelty' in their approach as the Kinks, surely? I don't see it as novelty, anyway - it's just music with a sense of humour which is healthy (although I think they resented the release of 'Lazy Sunday', didn't they?). Ray Davies' lyrics seem consistently more complex than Marriott's. The whimsical nature of them often hides revealing and biting social commentary.
All great bands, though!
God, how can anyone prefer them!?
Even listening to the earlier stuff, its so obvious how further ahead The Beatles were.
I think its like comparing The Subways to Radiohead or something.
did your dad tell you The Beatles were better?
i hate this The Beatles are untouchable bollocks, yes they did a few half decent tunes probably about ten at best, but that is it