The Rolling Stones vs. The Beatles (techno, blues, psychedelic, rock) - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > Rock & Metal > Rock N Roll, Classic Rock & 60s Rock
The Rolling Stones vs. The Beatles The Rolling Stones vs. The Beatles (techno, blues, psychedelic, rock)
Register Blogging Today's Posts
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

View Poll Results: Stones or Beatles
Stones 1,000,000,059 99.90%
Beatles 1,000,073 0.10%
Voters: 1001000132. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
Page 37 of 85 « First 273536 37 383947 Last »
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-14-2006, 10:57 PM   #361 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
[MERIT]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Missouri, USA
Posts: 4,814
Default
ive never heard them classified as part of the british invasion since they came later.
[MERIT] is offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 11:02 PM   #362 (permalink)
Five Feet of Fury
 
Spike*Spiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: suburbanite
Posts: 761
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by oojay View Post
oh, i dunno. ever hear of the british invasion? revolutionizing the american rock n roll world forever maybe? what did the stones do? have big lips and do farewell tours since the 80's?
oh. my. god. you big dumb redneck. *shakes head*
Spike*Spiegel is offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 11:03 PM   #363 (permalink)
Whitewater!
 
Merkaba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,885
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by oojay View Post
ive never heard them classified as part of the british invasion since they came later.
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.
__________________
She thinks I'm a reclusive genius, she's going to be very disappointed when she finds out i'm a reclusive wanker
Merkaba is offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 11:07 PM   #364 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
[MERIT]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Missouri, USA
Posts: 4,814
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merkaba View Post
Well, they were. And they were huge in America too. The Beatles 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.
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.
[MERIT] is offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 05:13 AM   #365 (permalink)
Dr. Prunk
 
boo boo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdEyeOpen View Post
The Beatles hands down. I hate it when people say all the Beatles' songs sound the same.
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.
__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strummer521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowquill View Post
I only listen to Santana when I feel like being annoyed.
I only listen to you talk when I want to hear Emo performed acapella.
boo boo is offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 05:52 AM   #366 (permalink)
ashes against the grain
 
tdoc210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: new hampsha
Posts: 2,617
Default
hmm, the stones are really good early, and the beatles a really good late, so I am divided. heh
Beatles
__________________
We went back there and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember... I... I... I cried. I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out. I didn't know what I wanted to do. And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it. I never want to forget. And then I realized... like I was shot... like I was shot with a diamond... a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought: My God... the genius of that.
tdoc210 is offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 06:31 AM   #367 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1
Default
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.
edwards21 is offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 07:44 AM   #368 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Methville
Posts: 2,116
Default
The Beatles, easilly.
The Unfan is offline  
Old 12-17-2006, 12:30 PM   #369 (permalink)
dontcareaboutyou
 
swim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 5,188
Default
The Beatles were more influential and better song writers and I just like more.
__________________
http://nakednaps.bandcamp.com/
swim is offline  
Old 12-17-2006, 01:07 PM   #370 (permalink)
Alan
 
Kurt_Cobain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: In bed, with Cheryl Tweedy
Posts: 275
Default
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
Plus they were completely different styles of rock 'n roll, with different images, its a silly comparrison. Tis like comparing The Clash to Elvis.
Kurt_Cobain is offline  
Closed Thread
Page 37 of 85 « First 273536 37 383947 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Similar Threads


Terms & Privacy - Contact Us - Music Banter - Archive - Top

© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.