ive never heard them classified as part of the british invasion since they came later.

oh. my. god. you big dumb redneck. *shakes head*

Well, they were. And they were huge in America too. The Beatles and Stones both gave music it's concrete base for the future but it was the Rolling Stones who gave Rock n Roll everything else., image, culture, flare etc.

...The majority of it anyway.

maybe im just bias b/c im not a big Stones fan, and I realize that they were (and still are) big here in america, but if it comes to which is better and which is more influential, its the Beatles hands down.

That would be classic coming from a Stones fan.

I don't really see what The Stones did for the "Rock N Roll" image that Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis and Little Richard did not.

hmm, the stones are really good early, and the beatles a really good late, so I am divided. heh
Beatles

The Stones man. I mean look at their whole anthology: not fade away, i can't get no satisfaction, you can't always get what you want, sympathy for the devil etc. don't get me wrong beatles have also amazing anthology. I just like my stones better.

The Beatles, easilly.

The Beatles were more influential and better song writers and I just like more.

As musicians I have to say the Stones were much better. But as song writes it has to be The Beatles, John and Paul were geniuses. But I think Lennon was better as a solo artist :love:
Plus they were completely different styles of rock 'n roll, with different images, its a silly comparrison. Tis like comparing The Clash to Elvis.