by 
eddie1
ANSWERS: 25
-
Although I love the beatles I would have to go with Rolling Stones. I think they are a little more my ERA!!!!!!!Plus... Rock and Roll HELLLOOOO!!
-
I would have to say the Stones, and they are still going strong
-
I’ll go with the Beatles. The Stones are the better musicians but a little to “edgy” for me. I could find myself singing along to quite a few Beatles tunes. Lennon is a legend too.
-
the beatles, who else could come up with lyrics like here come ol flat top he come groovin up slowly he got joojoo eyeball he one holy roller??? gotta love it!
-
Thats kind of like Ford or Chevy.i like them both,but i would say the Beatles,because they did alot for how long they were around.give the Stones credit,they will probably be playing to your grandkids-kids.
-
Rolling stones have sold 12 million records to date while the beatles have sold over 1 Billion (yes that's a 'B'), considering the Beatles where together for like 10-15 years and stones for like 40 than this clearly defines who was/is better. Depending on taste of music of course.
-
The Stones. The Beatles have alot of good stuff under their belts, but I just like the stones more.
-
The stones all the way. They are more my type of music (the Beetles are too 'meh' for me)
-
the Beatles. They're much more influential and revolutionary and experimental. Tomorrow Never Knows? Who else would think to sing a lead vocal through a Leslie cabinet in 1966? What about Sgt. Peppers? Interestingly enough marked greatest album of all time by Rolling Stone magazine. Well, personally, I just think the Beatles are much more interesting and diverse. They have such beautiful arrangements such as "She's Leaving Home" or "Michele" to great rockin' tracks like "I Am The Walrus" or "And Your Bird Can Sing" and everything in between. Forget about it. Don't get me wrong, I like the Stones, but I dont think they compare to the legacy that is The Beatles.
-
Stones. They have a unique form of music and have unmistakable longivity and they still entertain crowds of hundreds of thousands of people.
-
The Beatles; The Stones can't even compete. The Stones though longevity and the talent that they have never came even close to what the Beatles have accomplished. They were the leaders of a generation, captured the hearts and minds of the whole world; from fashion, music, religion, politics and much, much more. Never has there been a band been as influential and popular than those four young lads from Liverpool. Even today radio stations devote hour long blocks of Beatles music. What group that has been disbanded for so long put out a new album like #1 and the new Love album is #2 as of today 12/17/06 on the Billboard Rock album chart. I could go on and on. The Beatles go deeper than the music. Randy
-
THE BEATLES..they have still have the most influence on the shape rock n roll has taken and continues to take. If you follow there songwriting and personal history you'll see how the world including the "stones" took note!
-
If you look at them in the context of the times, the Beatles were more innovative and creative, but I don't think they've aged as well. I think around the White Album and Let It Be, if the songs hadn't been by THE BEATLES!!! and it hadnt been the Summer of Love era, they wouldn't have made much of a splash. The Stones are more timeless... you can enjoy their rock from over almost 40 years.
-
Personally The Stones do it for me as a whole package. They had the bad ass rock 'n' roll thing down, whereas The Beatles were just this funny duddy pop group. But musically I think The Beatles win.
-
The Beatles. They were very dynamic, especially for pop music. "Life is very short, and there's no tiiiiiiiime, for fussing and fighting my friends." Note the dramatic 3/4 section inserted in a happy 4/4 piece. Yet the lyrics are quite dark. Always catchy and involving. Whereas the Stones, well let's just say I never liked blues rock, so maybe I'm biased.
-
I think the beatles were way overrated. Stones all the way!!!
-
BEATLES! I have never liked Mick Jagger.
-
better, the beatles, musically speaking a larger range of styles, more experiments with mixing etc. But for absolute, kick ass, hard rock and roll the stones. This question is like asking if you like your grandma or grandpa better, you can't make the call.
-
It is a very close call, one you could make for either group and not be wrong. The Beatles made the biggest impact from the start, and the Rolling Stones have carried the torch in a most remarkable way for well over 40 years now so either way you can't go wrong. Personally I feel the Rolling Stones are the better of the groups with all things considered. They are the much better musicans and they put on a much better show then the Beatles ever thought about. Touring the world playing before millions and millions of people as 60 year olds is a mind boggling fact in itself but when you consider the fact that their ticket prices are sky high its even more an amazing feat. The Beatles deserve all the accolades that they have received but when it comes to rock and roll, they were the orignal boy group and the Rolling Stones are the granddaddies of rock n roll forever.
-
The Beatles were much more inflential and important to the development of music then the Rolling Stones could ever hope to be. The Beatles changed music and blah blah blah you've heard it all before... The Rolling Stones played it safe with the blues-rock formula most of their career. Although yes Sgt. Peppers ia a joke. More important for it's revolutionary production techniques than actual songs. As for who's better that's a matter of personal opinion. I like them both and they're the best 2 bands I almost never listen to.
-
Rolling Stones have killed more people at their concerts, so they win.
-
for the last time the beatles
-
I'll have to say the Rolling Stones suit my musical tastes better.
-
The Beatles!!! =D
-
Why don't you check here: http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/97040
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC