Turn on thread page Beta

The Beatles or The Rolling Stones watch

  • View Poll Results: Stones vs Beatles
    The Rolling Stones
    21
    30.00%
    The Beatles
    49
    70.00%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Still waiting for some reasons why the Beatles are better, other than the assertion that they're "something else"...
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    If you compare the best works of both bands it would have to be The Stones for me. No song has ever replaced Gimme Shelter in my itunes Top 25 most played list. :P

    However I do find almost all Beatles song's catchy if not iconic or incredibly amazing. I want to hold your hand for example.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shubham_ag)
    If you compare the best works of both bands it would have to be The Stones for me. No song has ever replaced Gimme Shelter in my itunes Top 25 most played list. :P

    However I do find almost all Beatles song's catchy if not iconic or incredibly amazing. I want to hold your hand for example.
    That's true. And for that reason I would say the Stones were more special.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MC armani)
    I was joking mate.
    Well make funny ones next time so it's clear they are jokes

    (Original post by MC armani)
    Still waiting for some reasons why the Beatles are better, other than the assertion that they're "something else"...
    You didn't read my post then did you
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    both were essential contributors to music.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    As much as I love the Stones...
    The Murakami junkie in me SCREAMS to vote Beatles!!!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davie18)
    The beatles easily. The stones didn't have even half as many truly great songs as the beatles did imho.


    A few? What about I am the walrus, let it be, while my guitar gently weeps, long, long long, happiness is a warm gun, a day in the life, lovely rita, back in the ussr, tomorrow never knows, yesterday, across the universe, strawberry fields, the long and winding road, hey jude, day tripper, Within You Without You, in my life, eleanor rigby.

    That's more than "a few". And I haven't even mentioned any of their early stuff.
    Happy, gimme shelter, jumping jack flash, satisfaction, wild horses, sympathy for the devil, brown sugar, start me up, street fighting man, ruby tuesday, ventilator blues, paint it black, beast of burden, under my thumb, angie, you cant always get what you want.

    Only the ones in bold even come close to the Stones songs listed above. And they don't come very close.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The Stones . They had soul and ooomph. The Beatles were wet lettuces who sang soongs like she loves you yea yea yea and I wanna hold your hand
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davie18)
    Yea, so the stones are better just because none of them have been murdered
    must be something in that no one hated any of the stones enough to shoot them in the head...
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    rolling stones
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Never really got into The Stones. I'm sure they fantastic, but they've never captured me like The Beatles have.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Stones easily. Gimme Shelter :sogood:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    oh yeah stones are better, my fave song is sympathy for the devil, their only downfall was having the hells angels for securtiy at a gig, and then they beat a guy to death...
    but listening to some of the stones records gives me a real buzz
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chuck)
    The Stones . They had soul and ooomph. The Beatles were wet lettuces who sang soongs like she loves you yea yea yea and I wanna hold your hand
    This. and the Stones had Keith Richards. Who is a Don.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Funnily enough I prefer the early Beatles - post 65 they lost the spirit that made them such an interesting band. While I accept that their later stuff was fairly ground-breaking, their 66-70 period seems to be made of a number of great songs surrounded by pure self-indulgent filler.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    The Who.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Also the Stones handled psychedelia much better than the Beatles did - songs such as 'Under My Thumb' have a dark energy you'd never find in a Beatles song...
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MC armani)
    Happy, gimme shelter, jumping jack flash, satisfaction, wild horses, sympathy for the devil, brown sugar, start me up, street fighting man, ruby tuesday, ventilator blues, paint it black, beast of burden, under my thumb, angie, you cant always get what you want.

    Only the ones in bold even come close to the Stones songs listed above. And they don't come very close.
    Well I mean there's just no point in arguing over something like this then. I just disagree entirely with what you said but you can really "prove" to someone that certain songs are better than others, it just simply comes down to opinion.

    I mean how you don't think tomorrow never knows or strawberry fields is as good or better than the stones stuff is just beyond me, but like I said there's little point in arguing over something like this.

    I just think though another point to make about the beatles is that they have a wider range of sound from their songs than the stones do. You have the pop songs like I want to hold your hand, then you have stuff like let it be, or tomorrow never knows, or eleanor rigby, or and And I love her. Every one of the songs I mentioned has a completely different sound to it, and I just don't think you get that with the stones. The beatles were more innovative and just in my opinion wrote better songs, but as I've already said it would be pointless to argue over how good their songs were because it simply comes down to opinion.

    (Original post by chuck)
    The Stones . They had soul and ooomph. The Beatles were wet lettuces who sang soongs like she loves you yea yea yea and I wanna hold your hand
    Anyone who says this clearly hasn't listened to a single beatles album from Rubber Soul onwards. I completely agree their early stuff was like that, but their later stuff was so much more than that. If you haven't listened to their later albums I don't really think you can form a valid opinion on them.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Impossible to choose
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The Beatles, The Rolling Stones are brilliant, however The Beatles are on a whole different calibre of brilliance.
 
 
 
Poll
If a uni gives me an unconditional offer they....
Useful resources

Articles:

TSR wiki music section

Quick link:

Unanswered music threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.