[MrSiki99]

Stones or Beatles?

 

[elrod-tom]

Let's see...where to begin?

Best albums?

Rubber Soul
Revolver
Sgt. Pepper's
The White Album
Abbey Road
Yesterday and Today (I'm an old US Mix fan

)
Meet the Beatles (see above)


vs...


Exile on Main Street
Beggers Banquet
Let it Bleed
Aftermath
Their Satanic Majesty's Request
and....help me here....


IMHO, it's no contest (and I'm a Stones fan, BTW...)

 

[MrSiki99]

You listen to the strokes? Awesome!

 

[Zanth]

I'm more of a Stones fan than a Beatles fan. I find merit in the songs of the Beatles but I feel it is mixed in with far more crap than the early albums of the Stones. Given the Stones long career I permit more room for error on their part of their latter day sins

 

[welting]

i like the stones' music better in most cases, but I like the beatles because of how they revolutionized and rethought the genre. my vote: Beatles

 

[blessingx]

Until I saw "Which is better?" I didn't know what the question actually was. I currently own four Stones albums and only one Beatles. I like the Stones much better, but I think the Beatles were better musicians. The Beatles took it further, but I gotta say the Stones were more soulful, were the big bridge, and who over the years I go to. Course if you ask for best album, I'd ask where are the Beach Boys? "Pet Sounds" I still place over anything by either other band. And I'd place "Exile" over any Beatles album. In the end though, my vote goes to the Beatles for their entire output.

 

[gpalmer]

I went with the Beatles, but I would have appreciated the option of neither. The Stones were mostly a parody by the time I really listened to them and other than having some very tasteful bass lines never really impressed me in any way. The Beatles always impressed me with their talent displayed during bridges. They managed to combine some wildly different sounding musical thoughts within the same song and bridge between them in such a way that you never really noticed that you had traveled from one to the other. An example of this sort of things comes to my mind in McCartney's later work "Band on the Run." I would have really loved to have heard the heights they could have hit if they were into the music first and foremost for the music rather than first and foremost for the record sales. As it is, I think their recorded work just shows a fraction of their true artistic talent.

EDIT speeling!

 

[MrSiki99]

Hmm...gpalmer..you certainly have some interesting thoughts. I guess I could agree to some extent. I love the Stones and Beatles though.

 

[gpalmer]

Quote:

Originally posted by MrSiki99 I love the Stones and Beatles though.

I think I could have loved both groups if I was a little bit older, but I grew up during the days when both groups were overplayed to death on the radio. Sadly, it turned me off on both groups and I've never really recovered from it. One of these days it will be time to dig out their music and really appreciate it when I'm less prejudiced.

 

[Music Fanatic]

Of course, one way to rank them would be to look at their SO's: Yoko Ono vs Jerry Hall. And, uh, Marianne Faithful. And Marsha Hunt. And Bianca Jagger.

 

[gpalmer]

Quote:

Originally posted by Music Fanatic Of course, one way to rank them would be to look at their SO's: Yoko Ono vs Jerry Hall. And, uh, Marianne Faithful. And Marsha Hunt. And Bianca Jagger.

LOL, that's just mean!

 

[Dusty Chalk]

I don't really like either one very much, so I ain't voting.

Lppppt!

 

[MrSiki99]

How can you not like either one!!!!

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Quote:

Originally posted by MrSiki99 How can you not like either one!!!!

In a paraphrase of the Uma Thurman character in Pulp Fiction -- I'm more of an Elvis man.

I don't know, I just always eschewed the mainstream. Took a lot of convincing to get me to like Zep.

 

[MrSiki99]

Seems reasonable.