Best band ever Pink Floyd vs The Beatles

[Svperstar]

EDIT : I realize saying best band ever was a bad idea when there are so many bands out there and it isn't always apples to apples, but I can't edit it because it is a poll, so please just ignore that and give your 2 cents on which band is better between the two if you like

Well what do you think?

Personally I can't get into The Beatles, I have tried, since I got into headfi I got a copy of the new best of Beatles and listened to it, they aren't bad but the music just seems so shallow and bubble gum compared to PFs stuff. So much emotion and meaning in Pink Floyds music to me.

[akwok]

How about a few more choices? :-/..

[Svperstar]

Originally Posted by akwok

How about a few more choices? :-/..

I thought about that but I would end up with a massive poll and someone's favorite band would be let out. So I just went with these two, besides, polarizing people is much more fun :P

Almost added Led Zeppelin, Rolling Stones, The Who, and such, but personally I like maybe 1 or 2 songs from those groups and honestly I am not really familiar with them. I also thought about 80s and 90s bands but the poll would just be huge plus I think I might get beat down for even mentioning Pearl Jam and The Beatles might be in the same league :P

[asmox]

out of the two, i prefer Pink Floyd.. but i don't consider either to be anything close to the 'best band ever'.

besides, it's really difficult to answer this question properly. there are many different styles of rock (and music in general, for that matter), many bands that you simply cannot compare directly and say, "this band here is better than that band there..".

all i can really contribute to this is my personal favorite artist.. Gordian Knot.

[Svperstar]

Originally Posted by asmox

out of the two, i prefer Pink Floyd.. but i don't consider either to be anything close to the 'best band ever'.

besides, it's really difficult to answer this question properly. there are many different styles of rock (and music in general, for that matter), many bands that you simply cannot compare directly and say, "this band here is better than that band there..".

all i can really contribute to this is my personal favorite artist.. Gordian Knot.

I knew putting that as the subject would get a lot of responses like this :P

OK edited it, now it just says which band is better, should make most happy

EDIT: Crap I edited it but I guess since its a poll it won't stick, doh

[Aman]

The Beatles were obviously more innovative and better songwriters than Pink Floyd. Because they appealed to a great audience, I HAVE to say The Beatles. The choices are pretty lousy to begin with.

In terms of tallent, both have immense tallent - both are quite loyal to their genre and creative at the same time, expanding the boundaries. I think it boils down to whether or not you favor the concept albums of The Beatles (White Album, Sgt. Pepper) to Pink Floyd's - and personally I like Floyd's music better in this reguard, but not enough to warrant them being "best band ever".

But honestly - best band ever? Neither or the two.

While The Beatles would be up there, there are many bands that are both more tallented than them and more creative. The Mahavishnu Orchestra, for example, was possibly one of the most innovative fusion bands to ever live, backed by John McLaughlin, Billy Cobham, and Jan Hammer - all of whom are known as being at the top of their class. And that's only one example - there are many solo artists that deserve that kind of credit as well - and then there's the lost blues era with Buddy Guy.

[Svperstar]

Originally Posted by Aman

The Beatles were obviously more innovative and better songwriters than Pink Floyd. Because they appealed to a great audience, I HAVE to say The Beatles. The choices are pretty lousy to begin with.

I disagree, I think Pink Floyd was more innovative, while I admit I haven't heard as much of the beatles as pf the beatles I have heard just sounds mostly like generic rock and lacks the experimentation of PF. Also it doesn't seem to have the same kind of raw emotion.

Popularity seems like a poor judge of artistic merit. N'Sync has the record for the fastest selling CD ever I think, so obviously they are the best musician's ever right? But even if you want to go that route, PF has had the longest stay on the charts of any band with DSOTM IIRC.

[dj_mocok]

I think Beatles is more publicly known in general compared to Pinkfloyd.

[ekwinix]

LED ZEPPELIN!!!!

Hahaha. Back on topic - I think the Beatles were revolutionary, but Pink Floyd are evolutionary.

The Beatles started brilliant, non-filler studio albums, but I think Pink Floyd took it to the next level. Especially if you consider their unbeleivable live performances, I think it tips the favor into Floyd...

[ojnihs]

Oof... this is a definite hard decision. I grew up listening to both of them because my dad was a big fan of both the groups...and I definitely have to say that both bands were immensely talented in their own ways, but with the Beatles being extremely popular and more with the growing culture while Pink Floyd was definitely a group that had it's own particular following I'd say.

I went with Pink Floyd, however, because I personally never really got into the Beatles myself. I couldn't do it, no matter how good they were, because I just couldn't find myself really listening to their songs over and over again. I think PF's music is much more innovative and better in the fact that it was a lot less generic. I always felt that most of the Beatles songs sounded the same (IMO, but I understand that some of their concept stuff is quite different from the rest)... while I could listen to Pink Floyd because their songs are so much more different.

I'm not going to say either group is the Best Band ever, because I feel that Led Zeppelin will hold that spot in my heart till I die, but that's just my opinion on the two that were available for discussion.

[elrod-tom]

Originally Posted by Svperstar

PF has had the longest stay on the charts of any band with DSOTM IIRC.

One thing to consider - there was a period of time in between when the Beatles broke up and the mid-70's when their albums were not in current production. I'm not sure how that affected the stay in the charts of an album like, say, Sgt Pepper's, for example.

I selected the Beatles, mainly because they were so innovative relative to the landscape at the time. As much as I enjoy Floyd, I'd take Beatles to my desert island first. Their music had a more universal appeal...I can't tell you how many people I've met who don't much care for ROCK who enjoy the Beatles.

Their music also inspired a generation of new musicians, and continues to inpsire a second. I can't tell you how many times I've read that a band was inpsired by the Beatles over the years...and I'm not talking about boy bands here folks. I suspect that if you sat down with David Gilmour or Roger Waters and asked them about the Beatles, they'd probably tell you that they had a significant impact on their music.

[greenhorn]

Originally Posted by elrod-tom

Their music also inspired a generation of new musicians, and continues to inpsire a second. I can't tell you how many times I've read that a band was inpsired by the Beatles over the years...and I'm not talking about boy bands here folks. I suspect that if you sat down with David Gilmour or Roger Waters and asked them about the Beatles, they'd probably tell you that they had a significant impact on their music.

As impressed as I was by the PF performance on Saturday (and I've been only listening to that since, it goes on loop ), I don't think PF would have been the same if the Beatles wouldn't have existed before them. I am sure that elrod-tom is correct, many great post-Beatles bands were proud to say they were much influenced by the Beatles... which remain the best

[Jahn]

Please don't get too flamey at me, but I'm going to say that Pink Floyd might be the best in their genre of Rock, but The Beatles can make an argument for being one of the best bands of Rock period (and may have created a few genres of Rock along the way!)

I'm not saying this just because The Beatles were around at the adolescent stage of Rock and Roll back then, but because they helped it get out of Puberty, if you know what I mean. Pink Floyd seems to me like a Rocker in his 20's, checking things out but already "locked in" and confident.

That doesn't diminish their importance - and their music seems far more developed because of it - but The Beatles were just so groundbreaking and dominant in their time, it's hard not to just hand the trophy over, you know?

One Example - if this was a poll about "What is your Favorite Band" and the 3 choices were Pink Floyd, The Beatles, and New Order, I would pick New Order, because I like listening to them the most and they sound the best to me. But do I think they can objectively claim the Best Band Ever mantle over PF or the Beatles? No way, man.

[EyeAmEye]

Of the two, Pink Floyd by a landslide. The Beatles claim to fame was being the first out of the gate. In comparison to many other bands, they don't measure up.

[rhythmdevils]

Originally Posted by greenhorn

As impressed as I was by the PF performance on Saturday (and I've been only listening to that since, it goes on loop ), I don't think PF would have been the same if the Beatles wouldn't have existed before them. I am sure that elrod-tom is correct, many great post-Beatles bands were proud to say they were much influenced by the Beatles... which remain the best

dont get me wrong here, i LOVE pink floyd.

but there wouldnt have been a pink floyd if there wasnt a beatle. if this question was presented to pink floyd, even they would go with the beatles. to me, this cant be a question of which turned out better in the end, because its almost like father and son.

the beatles cut the road into the mountainside and made it level, while floyd paved it