[SR-71Panorama]

Beatles, no contest.

 

[Audiofiler]

The Beatles.

Stones made great songs but produced few records with the cohesive theme or playability throughout that the Beatles constantly released. Pure Magic.

 

[robm321]

Beatles. Not really competative.

 

[drlee27]

The beatles are in a class by itself; the Stones should be compared to bands like L. Zeppelin, the Who, and maybe U2.

 

[Akabeth]

I Love the Beatles

 

[monolith]

Pretty obviously The Beatles.

 

[DavidMahler]

I honestly didnt realize when I put this poll up that the Beatles would win so overwhelmingly. Wow

 

[mbriant]

I can't help but think that in some cases, particularly among the young'uns who weren't there as both bands first introduced their various tunes throughout the years, that opinions are distorted because they're comparing the geriatric Rolling Stones they see performing today against the legend of the young, vibrant Beatles from nearly 40 years ago. Yes, perhaps seeing old Mick belting out "Satisfaction" for the trillionth time doesn't have the magic it once did, but neither does Ringo doing Octopuss's Garden or Paul crooning "Mull of Kintyre", IMO.

That's not to say the Beatles weren't great, as I agree with those that feel they are in a class/category all by themselves. But back in the day, both bands created a lot of excitement, and in fact, the Rolling Stones still do now....geezers or not.

 

[DavidMahler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbriant /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can't help but think that in some cases, particularly among the young'uns who weren't there as both bands first introduced their various tunes throughout the years, that opinions are distorted because they're comparing the geriatric Rolling Stones they see performing today against the legend of the young, vibrant Beatles from nearly 40 years ago. Yes, perhaps seeing old Mick belting out "Satisfaction" for the trillionth time doesn't have the magic it once did, but neither does Ringo doing Octopuss's Garden or Paul crooning "Mull of Kintyre", IMO. That's not to say the Beatles weren't great, as I agree with those that feel they are in a class/category all by themselves. But back in the day, both bands created a lot of excitement, and in fact, the Rolling Stones still do now....geezers or not.

Maybe that's a point......... but let's compare The Beatles and the Stones' output when they were BOTH together

1964
The Beatles LPs - A Hard Day's Night, Beatles for Sale
The Rolling Stones LPs - England's Newest Hit Makers, 12X5
(I think the Beatles win here.....the Beatles albums are stronger)

Let's compare the singles for that year.....
Maybe we shouldn't compare because The Beatles had one quarter of their hit singles that year while The Stones essentially had one minor hit with Time is On My Side.

(I know music should not be compared in terms of record sales, and I do not compare albums in terms of record sales, but I think the sole purpose of singles is record sales so I use sales to compare singles specifically.)

The Beatles win by a LANDSLIDE for 1964

1965
The Bealtes' LPs - Help!, Rubber Soul
The Rolling Stones LPs - The Rolling Stones Now!, Out of Our Heads, December's Children

Now, despite the fact that the Stones released one more album in 1965 than the Beatles did, I have to give The Beatles the edge here as nothing The Stones released that year is as consistent nor as important as Rubber Soul. Help! is great as well, but certainly Out Of Our Heads is Help's equal and yields each band's most famous song...... Yesterday for the Bealtes, and Satisfaction for the Stones.

Let's compare the singles.....

Ticket To Ride versus Play with Fire / The Last Time........I'll give the edge here to the Stones because they have a stronger A / B combo here.

Help! versus Satisfaction....... Satisfaction is the signature song here and while Help! is certainly no slouch, it doesnt define its genre nearly as well.

Yesterday versus As Tears Go By....... Well yeah, Yesterday wins here especially since As Tears Go By just aims to copy The Beatles success of acoustic guitar and strings.

We Can Work it Out / Day Tripper versus Get Off of My Cloud....... I'll give the edge here to Beatles because they have a stronger A/B combo here.

Overall........ for 1965 The Beatles win by a slight margin BECAUSE while the singles tie, The Beatles offer Rubber Soul which does not (at least in the USA) contain any singles which means that this strong album does not repeat material that was offered elsewhere, whereas Satisfaction was available both as a single and on Out of Our Heads.



1966
The Beatles LPs - Revolver
The Rolling Stones LPs - Aftermath

The Beatles win considerably here.....no need to discuss this

The Singles...
The Beatles - Paperback Writer, Eleanor Rigby / Yellow Submarine
The Rolling Stones - 19th Nervous Breakdown, Paint it Black, Mother's Little Helper, Have You Seen Your Mother Baby

The Stones win here in the Singles.

I feel Revolver is more of a landslide against Aftermath than The Stones singles are against The Beatles.

The Beatles win by a slight margin.


1967
The Beatles LPs - Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour
The Rolling Stones - Between the Buttons, Their St Majesty's Request

Well.....The Beatles win by an exhausting majority here.


The singles....

The Beatles - Penny Lane / Strawberry Fields, Hello Goodbye, All You Need is Love / I am the Walrus

The Rolling Stones - Ruby Tuesday / Let's Spend the Night Together, We Love You, She's a Rainbow / 2000 Lightyears from Home

Penny Lane / Strawberry Fields vs. Ruby Tuesday / Let's Spend the Night Togehter......this is tough but I think the Beatles single is more essential.

All You need is Love vs. We Love You.........All You Need is Love much much better

Hello Goodbye / I am the Walrus vs She's A Rainbow / 2000 Light Years from Home.....These singles are very comparable.... a poppy A side and a strong psychedelic B Side.....The Beatles songs are stronger here though and so they win

For 1967....the Beatles win by a significant SIGNIFICANT margin


1968
The Beatles LP - The White Album
The Rolling Stones LP - Beggar's Banquet

Both albums feature a return to roots and are very strong, but The Beatles White Album is certainly a more impressive album.


Singles of 68
The Beatles - Lady Madonna, Hey Jude / Revolution
The Rolling Stones - Jumping Jack Flash, Street Fighting Man

Lady Madonna versus Jumping Jack Flash - The Stones win by a considerable margin

Hey Jude / Revolution versus Street Fighting Man.....Even though Street Fighting Man is a very strong single, Hey Jude / Revolution is likely the greatest single in the history of pop rock music and so the Beatles win.


For 1968....The Beatles win again


1969

The Beatles LPs - Abbey Road
The Rolling Stones LPs - Let it Bleed

OK this is the toughest comparison.......I'm going to call it a tie here, though Abbey Road is probably a stronger album altogether.

The Singles
The Beatles - Get Back / Don't Let Me Down, The Ballad of John and Yoko, Come Together / Something
The Rolling Stones - Honky Tonk Women / You Can't Always Get What You Want

(At this point I feel The Stones were Less concerned with singles than they were before) While Honky Tonk Women / You Can't Always Get What You Want is a Beautiful single, The Beatles' Come Together / Something is certainly equal and The Beatles released additional great singles.....thus the Beatles win.


1970 -1971
For this one I will compare the Beatles Let it Be LP with the stones' Sticky Fingers (released one year apart)

Sticky Fingers is a stronger album since Let it Be is very uneven.


The Singles
Let it Be vs Brown Sugar.......wow this is tough......I'll call it a tie
Long and Winding Road vs. Wild Horses.......another tough one and I'll Call it a tie

Thus the Stones win in this contest (the only one I feel they win)


Yes........the Stones released a major album (Exile on Mainstreet) the following year....however the Beatles released two great albums in 63 and so we can assume that they cancel eachother out.

Thus, based on MY OPINIONS The Beatles win this contest by an extreme margin.

Hope you enjoyed

 

[MusicallySilent]

Not an "incredible" fan of either, however I tend to prefer the beetles.

 

[RuiCanela]

I'm a bad boy I like Stones!!

 

[tru blu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidMahler /img/forum/go_quote.gif Maybe that's a point.........but let's compare The Beatles and the Stones' output when they were BOTH together Thus, based on MY OPINIONS The Beatles win this contest by an extreme margin. Hope you enjoyed

I must say, DavidMahler, "Big-up!" to you for undertaking the analysis. I don't agree with all your conclusions—particularly the Sgt. Pepper and White Album stuff—but that was awesome reading. And for the record, it ain't makin' me change my vote.

Just to add something to mbriant's comment about ageism (something I suspected, too), it's worth stating that even as geezers the Stones are still doing fine work. There have been times when even I wished they'd just retire to their respective palaces, but then they manage to come up with a record as genuinely striking as their last one, A Bigger Bang. I only got around to hearing it a little while ago, and was truly astounded by its quality. It doesn't make we wanna go see them, though; I was lucky enough to do that in the early '80s.

 

[Pars]

Nice analysis DavidMahler. It brought to mind another important point around 1969 or so when you mentioned that the Stones were no longer as concerned with singles. Radio in the '60s was mostly AM pop stations, playing the Billboard top 40 (dreck if you wish)... i.e., singles. In the late '60s (68-69-70, probably earlier in some of the US at least) the rise of FM radio with a much deeper playlist (including entire albums or LPs) was taking over, and this had a large effect on what was getting airplay. If it were left to AM / top 40, Hendrix, Zeppelin, the Who, etc. major acts would not have been heard and we'd still be listening to bubblegum

 

[stewgriff]

I voted for the Beatles, as they're unique in their place. The Stones have to fight off the Who (and Led Zeppelin, to a lesser degree) as far as their legacy in rock goes, and I like both Zep and Who more than the Stones. Not to say that the Stones haven't done their fair share of great music...and today I'd rather see wrinkled old Jagger/Richards and Co. still enjoying themselves over wrinkled old Paul McCartney paying off his alimony bills (or Townshend and Daltrey trying to cover up the loss of the greatest rock rhythm section of all time).

 

[minimus]

There have been only three bands/singers I have ever become really absorbed in to the point that I would listen to their music for months on end almost exlusively because it was so unique and absorbing.

They are the Rolling Stones (Aftermath, Beggar's Banquet, Let It Bleed, Exile on Main St., Sticky Fingers), Bob Dylan (Blonde on Blonde, Blood on the Tracks, The Basement Tapes, Desire, Infidels, and pretty much all of the Bootleg Series), and Radiohead (The Bends, OK Computer, Kid A, Amnesiac). (Well then there was that unfortunate absorption with Genesis, but chalk that up to high school naivete.)

The only two Beatles albums I was ever able to really get into are Abbey Road and Sgt. Pepper's and I never felt the need to listen to either album compulsively.