What's your favourite?

I love the Stones, but I also love the Beatles. It's hard to chose.

I can't really choose! Should I???



I love both The Beatles and The Stones!

I don't remember the name.
Whichever has Ringo playing drums

depends on the mood

the velvets

I love both. But Beatles by a mile.

novabrkr said:

Totally. But of the 2 choices, I'd rather take the Stones.

Stones

beatles by a country mile

STONES - you can't get away from the blues!!!

As much as The Stones were great, it is Beatles. Beatles, Beatles as far as I am concerned.

/

This debate...



...reminds me of Jr. High School.


Most of the goody-two-shoes kids in my class were on The Beatles side of the fence.
Myself (the only Black kid) and my best friend (the only long-haired kid)...




...Oh yeah, youse blend, were the class rebels

We were holding it down for The Stones.


Both groups have their place in the R&R landscape.
The Beatles certainly raised the songwriting bar in the Pop/Rock genre.
The Stones at the very least (personified in Keef) helped to write the book on living the sex/drugs/R&R lifestyle.


tA

Tribal Disorder

http://www.soundclick.com...dID=182431

Beatles, mostly just because they broke up before they slipped into shlock like some of the Stones stuff.

MendesCity said:

The Beatles could have carried on for a few more years but I dread to think what there 70's stuff would have sounded like. A perfect comeback time would have been mid 90's but only with John. As impossible as that would have been.

Scooter said:

considering they way they were working in the late 60's (apart), it probably would have sounded exactly like the stuff that they put out solo, just with some different guys (each other) on the instruments.

The Rolling Stones

Most definitely the Rolling Stones!

If you're talking purely rock & roll, the Stones.

But if you're talking all around musical greatness, innovation, influence, diversity there's no question, the Beatles.

theAudience said:

True, but Lennon described the Beatles as the Trojan horse--they smiled and were nice & friendly, but once you let them in they sang about sex & drugs.

MendesCity said:

Totally true. They never had the chance to get bad & tarnish their image.

I was also thinking of how they didn't pander to their audience. When they sang simple pop tunes they seemed to really believe it, but they didn't hold back on more intellectual stuff once they were capable of it. It always felt very genuine. That's not to say that the Stones weren't genuine, though.

MendesCity said:

Yes, yes, yes ... and then looked at what the four of them produced on their own: Ringo ... well, 'nuff said; George - crap after All Things Must Pass (actually, during ATMP - "Apple Jam" anyone?); Paul - most twee, insipid lukewarm crap; Lennon - two great solo albums, true, but by the end of his life he was turning out the same sort of insipid crap Paul had made billions on. I think they would have had one more decent album in them after Abbey Road.

I pick The Stones. Satanic Majesties is a way better album than Sgt Pepper. Yes, you read that right.

I love both bands! But I pick the Beatles

Shapeshifter said:

Yes to all of that, and I'll single out one of your comments: despite its reputation as a masterpiece, All Things Must Pass is really only a half-great album, even leaving aside the fairly useless jam portion. What's great on it (isn't it a pity, title track, awaiting on you all) ranks with the beatles best, but a lot of the material is pretty ordinary.

As for Lennon, I think you're being generous by giving him two great albums. Imagine is still pretty good (something that can't be said of much that he was to release) but Plastic Ono is his only genuinely great solo album I figure.

the beatles are my pick, but both bands are essential as far as things like this are concerned and represent pop culture at its absolute finest imo.
[Edited 5/6/07 19:07pm]

Shapeshifter said:

I can't believe that you'd make fun of me for saying Mick was a great vocalist and then turn around and say something like that!

damosuzuki said:

Yes, there's a lot of filler, but the great tracks are enough to make it my favorite solo Beatles album by a mile (at least).

My pick: The Beatles.

NDRU said:

Agreed. The Beatles may have been undercover or stealth bad-boys, but The Stones owned that image (or had it cultivated for them to oppose The Beatles early good-boy image) right out of the gate.


tA

Tribal Disorder

http://www.soundclick.com...dID=182431