Beatles or Stones?

[CGM]

The only reason why I bring this topic up is because two guys at work believe the rolling stone are better. They must be high. The stones are a great rock band but that's all they are. The Beatles are so much more. They change the world and music forever. I want to see what you cats think. Please set these guys straight.

They were both "boy bands," but I much prefer the Stones. The Beatles were one of the earliest examples of successful mass marketing of music...

I happen to like Led Zep better than both, though.

I think I'm probably the only person alive who is lukewarm on Led Zepplin. They have some good tunes, but they don't really do much for me. I think it's Plante's voice (sacrilege, I know).

You and me both. Plant I find kind of pretentious. Page is a good studio guy, but live he is pretty average.

As for Neil Young vs the Beatles, well I thought you had it right the first time. I can go for months without hearing a Beatles song, or at least I would if I could, and not give a damn, but I go through withdrawal if I don't get my Neil.

[CFH]

They were both "boy bands," but I much prefer the Stones. The Beatles were one of the earliest examples of successful mass marketing of music...

I happen to like Led Zep better than both, though.

I think I'm probably the only person alive who is lukewarm on Led Zepplin. They have some good tunes, but they don't really do much for me. I think it's Plante's voice (sacrilege, I know).

You and me both. Plant I find kind of pretentious. Page is a good studio guy, but live he is pretty average.

As for Neil Young vs the Beatles, well I thought you had it right the first time. I can go for months without hearing a Beatles song, or at least I would if I could, and not give a damn, but I go through withdrawal if I don't get my Neil.

All things being equal and ignoring all outside factors like influence etc. I would probably have Neil Young close to the Beatles in terms of my preferences. There are many times that I would choose NY over the Beatles without hesitation, perhaps even the majority of the time (for example, I have two Neil Young albums on my MP3 player and no Beatles), but I still love the Beatles. One mitigating factor is that I've heard almost every easily accessible (alubms + singles) Beatles song that I am somewhat sick of hearing almost all of them, so it's hard to gauge how much I really like them.

[CGM]

I think I'm probably the only person alive who is lukewarm on Led Zepplin. They have some good tunes, but they don't really do much for me. I think it's Plante's voice (sacrilege, I know).

You and me both. Plant I find kind of pretentious. Page is a good studio guy, but live he is pretty average.

As for Neil Young vs the Beatles, well I thought you had it right the first time. I can go for months without hearing a Beatles song, or at least I would if I could, and not give a damn, but I go through withdrawal if I don't get my Neil.

All things being equal and ignoring all outside factors like influence etc. I would probably have Neil Young close to the Beatles in terms of my preferences. There are many times that I would choose NY over the Beatles without hesitation, perhaps even the majority of the time (for example, I have two Neil Young albums on my MP3 player and no Beatles), but I still love the Beatles. One mitigating factor is that I've heard almost every easily accessible (alubms + singles) Beatles song that I am somewhat sick of hearing almost all of them, so it's hard to gauge how much I really like them.

Neil is a Canadian icon for sure, they love him here. I've seen maybe half a dozen of his shows over the years, arena shows that are always packed to the rafters, and the crowd is always very responsive.

[CFH]

You and me both. Plant I find kind of pretentious. Page is a good studio guy, but live he is pretty average.

As for Neil Young vs the Beatles, well I thought you had it right the first time. I can go for months without hearing a Beatles song, or at least I would if I could, and not give a damn, but I go through withdrawal if I don't get my Neil.

All things being equal and ignoring all outside factors like influence etc. I would probably have Neil Young close to the Beatles in terms of my preferences. There are many times that I would choose NY over the Beatles without hesitation, perhaps even the majority of the time (for example, I have two Neil Young albums on my MP3 player and no Beatles), but I still love the Beatles. One mitigating factor is that I've heard almost every easily accessible (alubms + singles) Beatles song that I am somewhat sick of hearing almost all of them, so it's hard to gauge how much I really like them.

Neil is a Canadian icon for sure, they love him here. I've seen maybe half a dozen of his shows over the years, arena shows that are always packed to the rafters, and the crowd is always very responsive.

I saw him in Vancouver last year and it was easily one of the best shows I have ever seen. He pretty much sold out GM Place, which is pretty impressive. Not bad for a guy who suffered an aneurysm not long ago and who is well into his 7th decade (no pun intended). Matter of fact, I think I'll put on Rust Never Sleeps right now.

Interestingly enough, he did a great cover of A Day in the Life as his final song.

[Oggie]

I'd pick the Stones any day, 'Jumping Jack Flash' is one of my favourite songs.

[boxinggirl]

I'd pick the Beatles any day as they had more talent than the Stones. Paul and John were the backbone of the Beatles and to this day Paul can write some great songs. I like the Stones but feel that talent wise the Beatles win my vote.

It's hard to compare the two bands, as their styles were so different. CCR and The Doors are 2 other favorites of mine.

[amat]

The Stones out of the two but that's because I was raised on them with my mom. I'd take the Grateful Dead over either though.