Klimtology
Footballguy
Stones for me.
And You?

And You?

This.I think the Beatles are far and away the best and the most important rock band in history. Their music is more diverse than the Rolling Stones and, especially post-Help, more sophisticated. What they did in essentially 8 years is almost unfathomable. The Stones win the longevity battle which, in my mind, is worth very little. Beatles and it is not even close.
I don’t think the Beatles music is more diverse than the Stones - and I think you’re heavily discounting what the Stones did during their overlap with the Beatles: Aftermath, Beggar’s Banquet, Let it Bleed and Sticky Fingers are extremely strong records. It’s obviously close, or people wouldn’t bother asking still, 50 years later.I think the Beatles are far and away the best and the most important rock band in history. Their music is more diverse than the Rolling Stones and, especially post-Help, more sophisticated. What they did in essentially 8 years is almost unfathomable. The Stones win the longevity battle which, in my mind, is worth very little. Beatles and it is not even close.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. And I’m also entitled to hold the opinion that millions upon millions of people can be wrong about pieces of music or possibly many other things. I’m not a sheep.I don’t think the Beatles music is more diverse than the Stones - and I think you’re heavily discounting what the Stones did during their overlap with the Beatles: Aftermath, Beggar’s Banquet, Let it Bleed and Sticky Fingers are extremely strong records. It’s obviously close, or people wouldn’t bother asking still, 50 years later.I think the Beatles are far and away the best and the most important rock band in history. Their music is more diverse than the Rolling Stones and, especially post-Help, more sophisticated. What they did in essentially 8 years is almost unfathomable. The Stones win the longevity battle which, in my mind, is worth very little. Beatles and it is not even close.
OkEveryone is entitled to their opinion. And I’m also entitled to hold the opinion that millions upon millions of people can be wrong about pieces of music or possibly many other things. I’m not a sheep.I don’t think the Beatles music is more diverse than the Stones - and I think you’re heavily discounting what the Stones did during their overlap with the Beatles: Aftermath, Beggar’s Banquet, Let it Bleed and Sticky Fingers are extremely strong records. It’s obviously close, or people wouldn’t bother asking still, 50 years later.I think the Beatles are far and away the best and the most important rock band in history. Their music is more diverse than the Rolling Stones and, especially post-Help, more sophisticated. What they did in essentially 8 years is almost unfathomable. The Stones win the longevity battle which, in my mind, is worth very little. Beatles and it is not even close.
I can buy some arguments on why someone would prefer The Stones, but this is definitely not one of them.don’t think the Beatles music is more diverse than the Stones
take that comment to the Primus threadThey both suck.
I replied to someone that said the Beatles are more diverse and disagreed. I didn’t make it an argument why they were better. Frankly I don’t care who likes who better. Both are great.I can buy some arguments on why someone would prefer The Stones, but this is definitely not one of them.don’t think the Beatles music is more diverse than the Stones
Gimme sympathy
After all of this is gone
Who'd you rather be?
The Beatles or The Rolling Stones?
Oh seriously, you're gonna make mistakes, you're young
Come on, baby, play me something, like "Here Comes The Sun"
- Metric
Agreed. Outside of Bitter Sweet Symphony, the Stones weren't near the songwriters that the Beatles were.Stones are a better band. Beatles wrote better songs.
I like both - but identify with the Stones more.
This is an artificial dichotomy. The debate was a media creation of the '60s. They're both great in their own ways. That is all we need to know.
She smiled sweetlyGimme sympathy
After all of this is gone
Who'd you rather be?
The Beatles or The Rolling Stones?
Oh seriously, you're gonna make mistakes, you're young
Come on, baby, play me something, like "Here Comes The Sun"
- Metric
Sounds like she prefers the Beatles.
Great band.
And that version was really Andrew Loog Oldham’s orchestral spin on the Stone’s original song - proving even more so they couldn’t write songs.Agreed. Outside of Bitter Sweet Symphony, the Stones weren't near the songwriters that the Beatles were.Stones are a better band. Beatles wrote better songs.
I like both - but identify with the Stones more.
I feel like I know and have enjoyed more stones than beatles songs but I also feel like I've never given the beatles a fair shot. Can a stones fan give me the top 10 songs I should listen to and a beatles fan do the same and I'll report back?
With that said, it's a pretty difficult question and for me could change at any moment. In this instant I'm saying Stones.
Considering the Beatles wrote the Stones very first hitAgreed. Outside of Bitter Sweet Symphony, the Stones weren't near the songwriters that the Beatles were.Stones are a better band. Beatles wrote better songs.
I like both - but identify with the Stones more.