Beatles -v- The 'Stones

Jim_Are_Great

So, one of rock's oldest debates. The Beatles or the Rolling Stones, and why?

Although I like the Beatles, The Stones win it by a mile for me. I find their music much more complex and listenable. Their lyrics seem more meaningful and their back-catalogue is much more impressive. They're still going, too. If I could be that cool when I'm sixty, I'll be happy.

Chong

The beatles will always win for me, them and elvis have made music what it is today.

quarryman

pfffft. no way.

Beatles a mile. I can't see how there can be any artistic comparison.

Beekay

The Beatles. No one will ever do what the did.They went from a boy band to a stoner band

Illuvatar

The Beatles sound the same every song. They did nothing for music compared to others. The Stones on the other hand are more diverse and can actually be called rock, unlike the beatles. Though I can think of others that beat these guys by a long shot.

Nightwish

hmmm.....................neither

quarryman

Illuvatar wrote:

The Beatles sound the same every song. They did nothing for music compared to others. The Stones on the other hand are more diverse and can actually be called rock, unlike the beatles. Though I can think of others that beat these guys by a long shot.

so much wrong with this post i don't even know where to start.

i think its a safe bet though, that you know very little about music. very little.

zAbbo

Beatles, for the diversity of quality music.

From 2 minute pop songs, to acid induced drum loops, its fair to say they done it all.

Illuvatar, the uninformed

toiletduck

the beatles definitely, thats not to say that the stones arent great also.

Goodshape

The Beatles -v- Anybody and it's still going to be the Beatles.

Better than Jesus.

Ancient1

Jim_Are_Great wrote:

So, one of rock's oldest debates.

Have i missed something?

Board@Work

Goodshape wrote:

The Beatles -v- Anybody and it's still going to be the Beatles.

Better than Jesus.

Here Here..

Sarky

I was never particularly fond of either, but after seeing how some people can become so mind-shreddingly, terrifyingly obsessed with the Beatles to the point of having your pencil case renamed John Lennon and being reduced to tears on hearing someone say "There are much better musicians around, you know", I'll go with the Stones any time.

quarryman

so you reckon the stones are a better band because there are people who are obsessed with the Beatles.

interesting reasoning.

Ishmael

Never really understood why people liked the rolling stones, i've never heard a stones song that made me think they were anything worth listening to

Beatles are ok, can't say i'm a fan but i'd listen to their stuff b4 the stones anyway.

Sarky

I never said it was logical.

I just can't listen to them without horrible mental images of neurotic shrieking nutbags popping up. It tends to dampen anyone's liking for a subject.

BEAT

Illuvatar wrote:

The Beatles sound the same every song. They did nothing for music compared to others. The Stones on the other hand are more diverse and can actually be called rock, unlike the beatles. Though I can think of others that beat these guys by a long shot.

whoa there partner,
I'd suggest actually listening to all of thier music before you make a comment like that.
Their sounds were extremely varied, one of the reasons they were so sought after and why so many different bands ever since then have replicated thier sound/music.
seriously,
The Beatles are the gods of rock tbh
and Sarky....
are you serious? saying the stones just to be different? come on now

Sarky

No, I'm saying the Stones because I don't associate them with the negative stuff I just outlined. It's very much a personal thing. The Beatles had a couple of songs I really quite enjoyed, but I just can't listen to them now.

Stupid children, ruining things I like...

inflight

Beatles All the way, and I've had both influences in my house since I was a wee bit of a thing cos I've a Daddy who's a fan since the start. All their stuff isn't the same at all, how could you compare Paperback Writer to Penny Lane to Sea of Monsters to Eleanor Rigby?? (To name but a few..)

skregs

Stones by a long shot. The Beatles were great for being the Westlife of their day, but the stones are a top class rock band.

mike65

Wrong poll question, it should be the Who vs the Kinks!

Both wipe the floor with Beatles and Stones.

Mike.

BEAT

you, my good man, live in your own little world it seems

dregin

Where's the "I'd prefer eat my socks than listen to either of these" option???

Jim_Are_Great

Ishmael wrote:

Never really understood why people liked the rolling stones, i've never heard a stones song that made me think they were anything worth listening to

You clearly haven't heard Paint it Black, Wild Horses, Gimme Shelter, Brown Sugar, You can't Always Get What You Want, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Honky Tonk Women, Sympathy For The Devil, Get Off My Cloud ... Hell, I could be here all day.

dregin wrote:

Where's the "I'd prefer eat my socks than listen to either of these" option???

Explain yourself.

quarryman

I honestly can't believe the number of people criticising The Beatles here.

How can anyone fail to give them credit for creating and influencing the best music in subsequent generations? Seriously, if you are unable to see the talent and genius behind The Beatles' catalogue you have very little understanding of music at all.

Granted, I'd imagine there's a number of 15 year old posters above who reckon wheezer and greenday are "teh win" but more who are just clueless.

The Beatles created modern music and no great act, now or since, will deny they were influenced by them.

BEAT

heh quarrybuddy,
you get me and I get you, we are probably Beatles soul mates

btw, my location was also once here, there, everywhere but no one got it...glad to see someone else out there with like mind.
now it says here and there in latin

28064212

It's clearly The Beatles. The Stones were great, Exile on Main Street was a genuinely classic album, but for pure musical and lyrical genius, no-one can possibly fault The White Album, Abbey Road, Sgt Peppers, Revolver.......
OK they evolved from a very pop band initially, but it was classic pop. Back then it was groundbreaking stuff, it wasn't like today's pop where there's virtually nothing new

Dr. Loon

I reckon you'll find that most people who criticise The Beatles don't actually know their music. They may have heard Help, and I wanna hold your hand, but they haven't gone beneath the surface.

In saying that, I myself haven't listened to an awful lot of Stones, yet what I have I like, but I would still say The Beatles. I have now decided to go and acquire more Rolling Stones.

Doctor J

My Mum was a Stones fan and my Dad loved The Beatles so I grew up with them both and I dig them both... but I prefer the Beatles myself.


Sorry Ma

toiletduck

The Beatles are the best band ever! I loved the anthology, got it on dvd a few weeks back.

toffo

Like them both, but with a gun to my head.... the stones.

scarfacemj

Here here man, The Stones till the day I die. Rock and or Roll as you like.
The Beatles were and always will be a pop band, Love Me Do indeed!

Its only rock n roll but I llike it!!!!!!

Jim_Are_Great

Ancient1 wrote:

Have i missed something?

Yes. Clearly.

Googe

I like the Beatles - a good band with good songs

But the Stones are simply amazing especially mid-period in my opnion. Keith Richards rhythms are just great and have not been rivalled since

Ancient1

Jim_Are_Great wrote:

Yes. Clearly.

No i haven't because this was never a debate. Are you implying that they were in a competition of some kind? In that era it was the Beatles and the Stones, not the Beatles versus the Stones.

Drevin Fairy

Goodshape wrote:

The Beatles -v- Anybody and it's still going to be the Beatles.

Better than Jesus.

agreed, i was brought up on sergant peppers lonely hearts club band

Illuvatar

quarryman wrote:

so much wrong with this post i don't even know where to start.

i think its a safe bet though, that you know very little about music. very little.

Don't start. I've grow up with this stuff. The Beatles are so much better off solo then they were together. If anybody it'd be you who knows the least between us about music. The Stones actually plays ROCK music. The Beatles on the other hand are too mellow, not enough beat, compared to the Stones.

28064212

Of course the Beatles played rock music, they just happened to know how to use complex melodies and harmonies. I love the Stones, think they're great, but there's no way you can claim the Beatles "did nothing for music compared to the others". By the others, do you just mean the Stones? The Beatles have influenced virtually every band since then

scarfacemj

The Beatles were the first boy band, people forget that, so it cud be argued that they are responsible for the musical hell in which we find ourselves today. Yes they made some great records but so did many a band during that time.
It just like in football: who's better Maradonna or Pele?
The masses say Pele but those who understand the cause know the answer

The Beatles are the masses favourite, enough said

dregin

Jim_Are_Great wrote:

Explain yourself.

Eh, I don't like either band. At all.

Chad ghostal

The beatles are better than the stones in every way possible,
they may have been the masses favourite, but that doesnt take away from their talent, and yes they may have been one of the first boy-bands but that doesnt take away from the later albums...which are some of (and include) the best albums of all time..
beatles every single day of the year..

28064212

So because more people like the Beatles, the Stones must be the best? Right. Equally, the Pele/Maradona comparison is crap. Both of them were beautiful players and scored wonderful goals. The general consensus, by experts ("in the know") and the public is that Pele was the better talent.

And the Beatles were not a boyband. Or rather they were, in that they were a band of boys, but not by today's chart hell definition. They understood music and wrote classic pop tunes. And if you follow your theory that less popular is inherently better, the Beatles later albums are by no means "popular" among the masses.

Illuvatar

I suppose Led Zepplin got his style of music from them?! If you say yes you're wrong. Other bands have done more for music than the Beatles by far and that's not just the Stones. There's also better music out there than both bands. But the Beatles just scratch the surface of music. Others have done better.

garred

gotta go with the Beatles, not just for the music but what they did in the studio (production). Never really liked the Stones. Although would'nt classify the Beatles as best band of all time.

quarryman

Illuvatar wrote:

I suppose Led Zepplin got his style of music from them?! If you say yes you're wrong. Other bands have done more for music than the Beatles by far and that's not just the Stones. There's also better music out there than both bands. But the Beatles just scratch the surface of music. Others have done better.

like who?

28064212

Illuvatar wrote:

I suppose Led Zepplin got his style of music from them?! If you say yes you're wrong. Other bands have done more for music than the Beatles by far and that's not just the Stones. There's also better music out there than both bands. But the Beatles just scratch the surface of music. Others have done better.

Nobody said anything about directly taking the Beatles style. Led Zeppelin were rock innovators in their own right. Virtually all bands are influenced by their great predecessors. Before the Beatles there was Presley and Holly, going back through Bill Haley to classic blues and country. However, the Beatles took their influences, transformed them and added their own take on music, lyrics and life to produce something which was entirely new and started off a whole new chapter of rock.

Go to the allmusic website, search for Led Zeppelin, read through the list of who they think influenced them. Shock! The Beatles (as well as the Stones) are on the list.

Illuvatar

quarryman wrote:

like who?

BOB SEGER

Dr. Loon

Illuvatar wrote:

BOB SEGER

Ah ha ha ha ah ahaa aha ahhahahah aha aha hah.



Sorry.

28064212

Illuvatar wrote:

BOB SEGER

Somebody else influenced by the Beatles (and the Stones)

Illuvatar

http://www.rockhall.com/hof/inductee.asp?id=182

A good read on The Stones. Also the Beatles.
The ending to The Stones:Through it all, no one has yet dethroned the Rolling Stones of their title as the World's Greatest Rock & Roll Band.

Illuvatar

Also the Stones AND the Beatles influenced EACH OTHER.