It's impossible that the Beatles are the best rock band ever

[Bone Daddy]

I've said it before but no one seems to understand that the Beatles were never a "rock" band they were pop. If I see one more persong talking about the Beatles being better than the Stones I'ma strangle a b!tch. The Beatles were only superficially based on black music, which is the major determining factor for being a rock band. Sure they covered some classic rock songs, but at the same time took all the danger and sex out of it. Give credit for the songwriting, if you absolutely must, but please stop shotr of offering any other praise till you really, really look at what they did.

[Copper Scroll]

What difference does it make--rock or pop? What use are the categories?

The bottom line is that the Beatles consistently made better records than any rock or pop act of its time. So, yes, in at least one major way, they were better than the Stones.

[skanky80]

Dont get me wrong, I love The Beatles, but in no way, shape or form were they ever close to being better then The Stones.

[mansell]

after listening to led zeppelin's boxset i have to go with them...i didnt know they did all those familiar songs

[Young Steff]

Dont get me wrong, I love The Beatles, but in no way, shape or form were they ever close to being better then The Stones.


lol come on, the Stones are so overrated, i dont think i like 10 Stones songs, the Beatles have about 50 GREAT songs and numerous other good ones

[skanky80]

lol come on, the Stones are so overrated, i dont think i like 10 Stones songs, the Beatles have about 50 GREAT songs and numerous other good ones

lol, f*ck that. I could name 8 Stones songs that are better then the Beatles entire discography.

[informerx]

I'm not even the biggest rock fan but Beatles>Stones. Like it or not Beatles are the most copied band and most influential. Beatles could make the pop soft songs everyone loved as well as songs like come together and oh darling.

[Brooklyn329]

lol, f*ck that. I could name 8 Stones songs that are better then the Beatles entire discography.

Go ahead.

[The Amerikkkan Idol]

Led Zepplin was better than both of them put together.

[Young Steff]

I love Zepplin, Beatles, Sabbath, all the other generic "I have to like these bands or else people think im crazy" bands, and never got the Stones, most if not all of their hits do nothing for me.

[The Amerikkkan Idol]

I love Zepplin, Beatles, Sabbath, all the other generic "I have to like these bands or else people think im crazy" bands, and never got the Stones, most if not all of their hits do nothing for me.

100% C/S

Other than "Gimme Shelter" & "Start Me UP", I can't even listen to most of their stuff.

[flapjacks]

lol, f*ck that. I could name 8 Stones songs that are better then the Beatles entire discography.

Please, don't embarrass yourself.

Stones' songs : Beatles' songs : : fingerpainting : artwork hanging in a museum

With that said, it's often put forth that "The Stones are the greatest Rock 'n' Roll band" and I have no problem with that. As far as "rock 'n' roll", the Stones did that comparatively small artform more often, and better, than the Beatles.

Stones' range <<< Beatles'

But "pop" is a bigger genre, which has room for a lot more different songs, and the Beatles are the best pop(ular) music group/artist ever by quite a ways. You can't put up ANYone who matches the sheer amount of classic material they produced, and certainly not in so short a time period.

[flapjacks]

Except very possibly James Brown.

[skanky80]

Please, don't embarrass yourself.

Stones' songs : Beatles' songs : : fingerpainting : artwork hanging in a museum

go f*ck yourself.

Jumping Jack Flash, Paint It Black, Gimme Shelter, Sympathy for the Devil, Soul Survivor, Midnight Rambler, Monkey Man, Street Fighting Man, etc, etc. (i could keep going here)

I consider those songs (and more) better then anything the Beatles did. and I love the Beatles as well.

[Copper Scroll]

Midnight Rambler

:laugh:

[ALCHEMY]

lol, f*ck that. I could name 8 Stones songs that are better then the Beatles entire discography.



A day in the life?

[Bone Daddy]

From a lyrical standpoint, The Beatles exist in their own little sphere, apart from anything significant happening in the world. Their few attempts at social commentary were, quite frankly, pathetic. Sure they were catchy and you could sing along but as far as making a statement apart from theat, they failed. In that perspective a song like Gimme Shelter" or "Sympathy for the Devil" or "Sister Morphine" have relevance that The Beatles couldn't even approach........until they broke up. As individuals the Beatles (except Ringo) have all had better more relevant songs than any Beatles song.

[DC]

Both bands are annoying

[Profasi]

I hate all of you.

[Ayatollah Watts]

Beatles > Stones only song I could listen to repeatedly from teh stones is Miss You... and that wasn't even really a rock song

[AnwarSadatX]

go f*ck yourself.
Jumping Jack Flash, Paint It Black, Gimme Shelter, Sympathy for the Devil, Soul Survivor, Midnight Rambler, Monkey Man, Street Fighting Man, etc, etc. (i could keep going here)
I consider those songs (and more) better then anything the Beatles did. and I love the Beatles as well.

man you are so stupid, no beatles = no stones, the stones are just beatles clones not to mention the fact mccartney/lennon wrote for them as well

[skanky80]

man you are so stupid, no beatles = no stones, the stones are just beatles clones not to mention the fact mccartney/lennon wrote for them as well
The Stones are Beatles clones? Man, you really have no idea what the f*ck you are talking about.

[BigHedd]

Semantics semantics. who really cares about this kind of sh1t?

[The Amerikkkan Idol]

man you are so stupid, no beatles = no stones, the stones are just beatles clones not to mention the fact mccartney/lennon wrote for them as well

That really couldn't be further from the truth. They almost did two totally different genres of music. It would be like saying that N.W.A were Run-DMC clones or something.

[Bone Daddy]

man you are so stupid, no beatles = no stones, the stones are just beatles clones not to mention the fact mccartney/lennon wrote for them as well
That's just stupid. They came out at the same time and while the Stones had "Satisfaction" the Beatles were still a glorified cover band.

[Worm of Earth Jim]

no beatles= no stones? you must be stupid
no chuck berry = no beatles or no stones
no little richard = no beatles or no stones

both bands Stones and Beatles started out as white boy blue cover bands and came out around the same time. Beatles decided to switch to pop and create **** like "I wanna hold yer hand" While Stones kept coverin old blues songs before writin their own "Time is on my side"
Beatles ain't the greatest rock band but they are def the most influential and copied
as for rock goes Led Zeppelin >>The Beatles

[Mister Discotheque]

Fukk all of them. The Clash >>>>> The Ramones >>>>>>>> *

Put that in your syringe and inject it hoe!

[skanky80]

Fukk all of them. The Clash >>>>> The Ramones >>>>>>>> *

Put that in your syringe and inject it hoe!

:laugh: