The Rolling Stones vs. The Beatles (ambient, blues, country, bass)

ThePinkNightmare · 07-25-2005, 03:22 PM

ooh this is a hard choice. i grew up with the Beatles but i discovered the Stones myself. i do agree that Beatles can sound a bit samey but then again the Stones later stuff gets a bit similar in my opinion. id probably say, the stones at the start of their career gets my vote.

tdoc210 · 07-25-2005, 07:01 PM

well seeing as i cant vote for led zep im gonna have to say the beatles because my mom & dad played them when i was real little and its kind of a distant fond memory one of my very few happy ones

drumchick · 07-29-2005, 01:34 AM

i would have to say the beatles are better than the stones...i love the stones and they are better musicians, but the beatles have better songs.

Josephine · 07-29-2005, 04:59 AM

Well, it's not that I don't like the Stones, but this can't be a serious question at all.
There wasn't ever - and will be never - again such a genius songwriter duo as Lennon/McCartney.
The Stones are cool but nothing compared to the Beatles. And the stuff they're doing now is just ridiculous. What bout: "You shud stop when you're still best"? I don't think that the Stones took this advice to heart...

Josephine · 07-29-2005, 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the death of capitilism

well seeing as i cant vote for led zep im gonna have to say the beatles because my mom & dad played them when i was real little and its kind of a distant fond memory one of my very few happy ones

Same with me...THANK YOU DADDY!

sleepy jack · 07-31-2005, 02:27 AM

Ill vote for the beatles cause they had some decent tunes.

JHendrix_Rocks · 08-01-2005, 04:07 PM

beatles.

right-track · 08-01-2005, 04:29 PM

I love both the Stones and The Beatles. Both have produced some brilliant material.
If I had to choose, then I'd say The Rolling Stones.
Only because they were far superior live. Other than that I'd say they ran each other pretty close.

Animal Mother · 09-25-2005, 12:32 PM

stones---some reason

boo boo · 09-25-2005, 01:13 PM

Both are pretty horrible.

Naw, seriously folks, it's the beatles, in terms of greatness, they have it over the stones, the stones were great, and as a "Rock N Roll" band they were better than the beatles, but when it draws down to just musical quality and musical genius, it would go to the beatles in my opinion, the stones were great, but they always stuck to the same blues rock style, of course they have experiemented with elements of country and folk and on some rare occasions Psychedelic rock, but the beatles were just much more deverse, they could cover so many different styles and do it successfuly, most bands change it up by album but the beatles changed it up by song, Revolver alone had elements of Beach Boys Style Pop, Old School R&B, Indian Music, Chamber Music, Pyschedelia and Ambient music(even before such a thing existed)...And sgt pepper took it a step further by making one of the earliest examples of symphonic rock(a day in the life)...The Stones were amazing but they didn't take as many risques and instead stuck to their basic formula, i would say the stones are the second greatest rock band of all time but IMO number 1 goes to the beatles.

View Poll Results: Stones or Beatles
Stones	1,000,000,059	99.90%
Beatles	1,000,073	0.10%
Voters: 1001000132. You may not vote on this poll

07-25-2005, 03:22 PM	#41 (permalink)
ThePinkNightmare Music Addict Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: in the middle of nowhere Posts: 51	ooh this is a hard choice. i grew up with the Beatles but i discovered the Stones myself. i do agree that Beatles can sound a bit samey but then again the Stones later stuff gets a bit similar in my opinion. id probably say, the stones at the start of their career gets my vote. __________________ Dream as if you'll live forever Live as though you'll die today - James Dean

07-25-2005, 07:01 PM	#42 (permalink)
tdoc210 ashes against the grain Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: new hampsha Posts: 2,617	well seeing as i cant vote for led zep im gonna have to say the beatles because my mom & dad played them when i was real little and its kind of a distant fond memory one of my very few happy ones __________________ We went back there and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember... I... I... I cried. I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out. I didn't know what I wanted to do. And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it. I never want to forget. And then I realized... like I was shot... like I was shot with a diamond... a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought: My God... the genius of that.

07-29-2005, 04:59 AM	#44 (permalink)
Josephine Your La-La-La Teacher Join Date: May 2005 Location: The place I come from is full of people with cruel taste of music Posts: 538	Well, it's not that I don't like the Stones, but this can't be a serious question at all. There wasn't ever - and will be never - again such a genius songwriter duo as Lennon/McCartney. The Stones are cool but nothing compared to the Beatles. And the stuff they're doing now is just ridiculous. What bout: "You shud stop when you're still best"? I don't think that the Stones took this advice to heart... __________________ Urban for President... eh... EUROMOD! Vote or die!

09-25-2005, 12:32 PM	#49 (permalink)
Animal Mother The Wicker Man Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: 22 Acacia Avenue Posts: 54	stones---some reason __________________ I wanna be the first one on my block to get a confirmed kill. You walk through the subway. His eyes burn a hole in your back.

07-29-2005, 01:34 AM	#43 (permalink)
drumchick Groupie Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 1	i would have to say the beatles are better than the stones...i love the stones and they are better musicians, but the beatles have better songs.

08-01-2005, 04:07 PM	#47 (permalink)
JHendrix_Rocks Groupie Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: C-Ville, VA Posts: 16	beatles.

08-01-2005, 04:29 PM	#48 (permalink)
right-track Atchin' Akai Join Date: May 2005 Location: Unamerica Posts: 8,723	I love both the Stones and The Beatles. Both have produced some brilliant material. If I had to choose, then I'd say The Rolling Stones. Only because they were far superior live. Other than that I'd say they ran each other pretty close.