| View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
|
| Poll: The Beatles or the Rolling Stones? |
|
|
|
|
| The Beatles |
|
85% |
[41] |
| The Rolling Stones |
|
14% |
[7] |
|
|
|
|
|
| Total Votes : 48 |
|
| Author |
Message |
|
Facetious
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 5,563
Age: 13
Gender: Male
Location: Somewhere you've never been
My Charts
|
| #31 | Posted: 03/31/2012 05:51 | Post subject: |
 |
| junodog4 wrote: | I'll admit the Stones have become bloated since Tattoo You (and really, since Some Girls). However, I still really respect their work, and they find their way into my CD player often.
That said, it's the Beatles. C'mon...
Voted Beatles.
Put the Stones up against Dylan or Pink Floyd... |
Yeah, Tattoo You was amazing, and after that they couldn't make anything even nearly as good.
Nobody can be put up against Dylan. Not even the Beatles. Not even Pink Floyd. Or Beefheart.
_________________
 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Patman360
Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Posts: 1,220
Age: 20
Gender: Male
Location: Ireland
My Charts
|
| #32 | Posted: 03/31/2012 10:39 | Post subject: |
|
The Beatles hands down, feel they have a stronger discography than not just the Stones but probably most, if not all bands  |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Happy
Joined: 15 Jan 2012
Posts: 50
Age: 18
Gender: Male
Location: New Jersey
My Charts
|
| #33 | Posted: 04/01/2012 04:56 | Post subject: |
|
| I love them both, but I had to go with the Beatles. |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VADERBREWING
Joined: 01 Jul 2011
Posts: 75
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Location: Oregon Coast
My Charts
|
| #34 | Posted: 04/01/2012 06:37 | Post subject: |
|
Thanks for the comments on page 1 GARY. I cant go into the same depth as that...I'm for the most part only good for sarcasm that can't quite be taken seriosly because of mispellings and typos. I was really curios what people would comment about this battle.
Were the Beatles broken up before the Lennon murder?
I've commented on the Beatles before, I love'em, and their albums are tight. And I give them the edge over the Stones for that. I would note this however, the Stones have songs that I am more likely to play weather by myself or hosting if I were not going with playing whole albums.
As far as a frontman goes, I'm thinking jagger, I think for the Beatlmania it was a whole band appeal. But my god what insane popularity they had.
Gotta go, just heard a gunshot. Don't worry, it was far away.
_________________
New fav's: The Weepies, Art Brut, 311. Old Fav's: Bowie, zepalin, stones, buckcherry, cheap trick, couting crowes. Seen: Black Crowes, Nirvana, Ugly Kid Joe, Pretenders, Phycadelic furs, Ozzy, Thompson Twins, B Adams...regret not seeing G&R. |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JTpleaseDONTbeTAKEN
Joined: 27 Feb 2012
Posts: 5
My Charts
|
| #35 | Posted: 04/01/2012 16:26 | Post subject: |
|
| The only band that can truly stand up to the Beatles would be radiohead |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Facetious
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 5,563
Age: 13
Gender: Male
Location: Somewhere you've never been
My Charts
|
| #36 | Posted: 04/01/2012 17:21 | Post subject: |
|
| JTpleaseDONTbeTAKEN wrote: | | The only band that can truly stand up to the Beatles would be radiohead |
And I guess The Velvet Underground, The Magic Band, Sun Ra, and The Red Crayola never existed, right? 
_________________
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itsit
Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Posts: 3,609
Age: 16
Gender: Male
My Charts
|
| #37 | Posted: 04/01/2012 17:28 | Post subject: |
|
Radiohead are good but not Beatles good.
And the VU only had 4 true albums, not fair to compare them to 13 albums! |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hayden
Elvis Costello & Patrick Fitzgerald
Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Posts: 4,197
Gender: Male
Location: Canada
My Charts
|
| #38 | Posted: 04/01/2012 17:30 | Post subject: |
|
| Eggman/Walrus/Taxman wrote: | | And I guess The Velvet Underground, The Magic Band, Sun Ra, and The Red Crayola never existed, right? |
In what way are Sun Ra & Red Krayola up to standards with the Beatles or Velvet Underground?  Taking a leaf outta Scaruffi's book.
_________________
~Hayden
 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lancashirearab
A Porky Prime Cut
Joined: 25 Mar 2012
Posts: 172
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Location: Too Far South!
My Charts
|
| #39 | Posted: 04/05/2012 18:37 | Post subject: |
|
| I have recently been buying Rolling Stones albums and they have made some great albums. However, I have already got two or three that are only alright. The Beatles didn't do alright. |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sethmadsen
is a jack of all trades idiot.
Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 1,488
Gender: Male
Location: Ground Control
My Charts
|
| #40 | Posted: 04/06/2012 00:58 | Post subject: |
|
| Captain_Dude wrote: | The Beatles, definitely.
However, to me, it's like apples and oranges. They're two totally different sounds, objectives, and attitudes...I hate to compare them. |
I agree with this wholeheartedly. I feel The Beatles are obviously the winners when it comes to being artistic. Stones are much better rockers though.
Overall Beatles by far though.
I have this same issue when saying what my favorite band is today.
It's kinda like Radiohead vs. Nirvana. Nirvana rocks, but doesn't have the artistic depth that Radiohead has. |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Shop at your favourite store
