The Beatles VS. The Rolling stones

Beatles Vs. Rolling Stones

  • Beatles

    Votes: 82 56.9%
  • Rolling Stones

    Votes: 62 43.1%

  • Total voters
    144
A poll for the unimportant age group primarily.:1orglaugh
Easy choice for me although both had some great tunes,I think the Beatles is the clear choice.
 
Well, the way I see it, the Beatles are the Beatles. And the Stones...well they aren't the Beatles...but The Who would crush them both!
 

BNF

Ex-SuperMod
The Beatles transcended Rock N Roll to Art. But the Rolling Stones are pure Rock N Rock at it's best. [/URL]

The "art" part is what makes the Beatles so annoying and contrived in my book.

Had the Stones stopped with Emotional Rescue... maybe Tattoo You.. they would be a shoe in for me. But, the garbage since '80-'81....

The Rolling Stones for me. Mostly because they played hard, soul rock and did it well.
 

om3ga

It's good to be the king...
Actually I like both groups...but the Beatles just shade it for me
 

meesterperfect

Hiliary 2020
I am and have been a huge Stones fan since I was 10.
I got everything they did up until 86, I even got live if you want it..... plus I have the entire Beatles collection.
I cannot answer this question.
 
I'll again take a option three...

I don't judge bands this way.

Reason is simple, liking all types of music. It also goes for the band. Some tracks I like, other I don't and this goes for these two bands.
 
The Beatles​
 
Who cares if the Beatles had hits, their music is just ahhh I think they are the most overrated band ever. It's such boring music. The Stones are pure rock and roll.

Rolling Stones wrote Gimmie Shelter which is such a badass song, Beatles don't have anything badass.

Gimmie Shelter is so badass, Scorsese has used it 3 times(possibly more) in his movies and it just sounds badass.
 
Top