I'd say the Beatles, just for their versatility. The Stones have always been the same band, really. They're good at it, don't get me wrong, but it's still the same hyped up blues they've always done. The Beatles on the other hand, could equate to a wide variety of modern equivalents.
In Hamburg they were loud, bratty garage rockers, much like a Jet or a White Stripes.
When we Americans first met them, they were a poppy, better than average boy band, like an 'NSync or Backstreet Boys with the ability to write songs and actually play instruments
By Rubber Soul and the White Album, they were experimental electronic music pioneers, sorta Radiohead like.
You can go into this for days, but you get the idea, I think. The fact that 3 of the four members of the band were among the greatest songwriters ever to walk the earth doesn't hurt, either. Now, I like the Stones, too, and Jagger/Richards are no slouches as songwriters, but they always were and always will be second fiddle to the Beatles.
2006-07-31 16:03:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by kjdean68 2
·
4⤊
1⤋
Beatles 4 Sure
2006-07-31 15:55:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by Punk Rock Princess 89 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Beatles!
2006-07-31 15:55:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, look at it this way. Beatles were the first boy band. Rolling Stones were the first hard rock band. Beatles are dead. Rolling Stones are still touring. I'm going to put my money with the Stones.
2006-07-31 15:58:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Darefooter 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Stones
2006-07-31 16:39:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Beatles by far.
You can pick a beatles song to go with every moment of your life, the stones don't work that way.
R.I.P John and George
2006-07-31 15:57:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by Bonnie G 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I like each corporations however it is hard for me to mention which one for definite. The predicament I have is that I believe The Rolling Stones stayed round for manner too lengthy even as The Beatles give up even as nonetheless on the most sensible in their recreation. I rather do not take care of so much of The Rolling Stones track that was once published after the early Nineteen Seventies. However, I believe that the Sixties releases of each corporations are similarly as well.
2016-08-28 14:46:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by lil 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
tough question
i like the stones better
if the beatles had continued and John hadn't died, idk
it would have been interesting to see the direction the beatles would have taken
2006-07-31 15:57:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
We love you Beatles oh yes we do
We love you Beatles and this is true
When you're not near us, we're blue
Oh Beatles, We Love You!!!
2006-07-31 15:56:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by starikotasukinomiko 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Beatles are awesome. Stones have, maybe, two good songs and do they NOT know how OLD they are? Give it up!!!!!!
2006-07-31 15:55:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by la_bavarde 2
·
0⤊
0⤋