Alright, this is going to be a fight.
If you had a choice - would it be The Rolling Stones or The Beatles? And if so, why?
Your time starts now.
Beatles all the way. They wrote and performed so many different types of music, and changed with the times. I love nearly every song they ever made. I have never been crazy about the Stones, except Sympathy For The Devil. I love that sone.
I've always been drawn to the Beatles. Dunno why, more exposure maybe.
Beatles no ifs ands or buts-Stones didn't write own music. lousy voices
Ah, but would you not agree the Stones gave a reminder of how good the blues are?
@Palindromeman they sure knew how to recycle classic old blues, I must say.
@Condor5 Copy that. Little Red Rooster, for example.
@Palindromeman, their version of "I Can't Be Satisfied," first done by Big Momma, I believe, is my all-time fave.
A fight? I want the Stones. They're gritty and willing to get down and dirty.
Music-wise, I go with the Beatles, but just barely. I love the music of both groups, but there nothing quite as great as Abbey Road.
Also, Lennon wrote what is basically the agnostic/athiest anthem, Imagine
Well, if I'm going into a street fight, it does have to be with Iggy Pop:
Iggy's a good choice, too. I also think the Pogues and/or Cold Chisel would be good to have your back.
@Ozman Jimmy Barnes with a bottle of vodka and Shane McGowan with a pint of stout would also do the trick.
@Palindromeman That they would. That they would
I'd like to see their planes have a mid air colision.
Define irony:
The Beatles
Straight up. I like that.
Stones are amazing, I've seen em live although I was younger as a boy when The Beatles were playing on the radio I was launched into psychedelics with hendrix, blues bowie,lou reed and the stones.two completely different class and style. So you rarely see the hells angels at a beatles concert.
I would rather chose between The Ramones or The Clash.
Cool. But which way would you go?
clash too dealt with a myriad of social issues
@Palindromeman Clash!
@kmdskit3 I will see you in the car park at Rock and Roll High School!
@Palindromeman Just make sure the mice have their ear protection. Every time they explode there's a huge mess!
I do have a choice, and I choose Pink Floyd over both.
But, if it came down to your two? Very tough; probably The Beatles for their innovative style(s) and diversity of sounds.
I will pay the Floyd. I mean, obviously, I posed a very arbitrary choice. It could have been The Stone Roses vs Happy Mondays. As if (The Stone Roses every time). Oh, look, it's just that Stones/Beatles things is one of those everlasting Marvel/DC Comics arguments.
And in the end? I own them both
Agree on the Pink Floyd part at least.
The Beatles, mainly because they are the ones that brought me fully into the world of music. I came to appreciate the Stones later.
Paul died in 1966 and they (the Beatles) have been faking it with an imposter for decades..
Rolling Stones all the way!!
How is that moon landing conspiracy going for you?
@Palindromeman your not a fan of the Beatles to even know what I'm talking about.
Continue listening to Nickelback on repeat and smoke some spice until you fall back asleep.
?
@FinchiMcQ Firstly, grammar - "your not a fan of the Beatles"; you meant to say "you're not a fan of The Beatles". It's the small things, but they do count. And, btw, I love The Beatles and I would happily never hear another Nickelback song ever again. Actually, come to think of it, I don't even know a single Nickelback song. But, you know, I get your drift.
@Palindromeman get off my back, GrammarNazi, I'm too lazy to go behind my stubborn-ass spellchecker everytime I have a valid point to make.
And if you were a true Beatles fan then you would know that the real Paul died in 1966.
Don’t. Make. Me. Choose! I absolutely adore the Beatles but I think I’d have to choose the Stones. Please, please, please don’t share this. I’m so ashamed
The power of Christ compels you! Yeah, I know, it's a tough choice. But in a world of first world decisions, there is this one.
<I'm thinking Radiohead, but I'll be really quiet about that...>
Why can't we choose both?
Because we live in a cruel and godless world. Oh, bugger it, you can have both.
@Palindromeman haha.
Stones because they are alive.
I like your sardonic sense of humour, D.
@Palindromeman thanks!
Including Keith Richards. I don't believe science has yet concluded why he can still be alive.
@Palindromeman no doubt! Between him and Ozzy (through Nikki Sixx in the mix as well) their dna should seriously be studied to find out how they are still among the living.
@Donna_I Copy that. Possibly all the members of Iron Maiden as well.
@Palindromeman lol! Very true!
The Who ?
for pure go get em yep you have a point
Not a fight. No contest. It has always been The Rolling Stones. I have never connected to the Beatles. Well, maybe to Ringo - he did the voice over of Thomas the Tank Engine and also George Harrison, to a degree; but the Stones understand the blues like I understand the blues. We listened to the same pirate radio stations. I lust in my heart after Keith Richards.
This is a true story. A young mid 20s co worker. I asked her to name The Beatles. "Ringo," she said. "Because he did Thomas the Tank Engine". Then she frowned. "I think there was George." Then she delved deep - "Paul, right?". I affirmed. Then she gave up and said there was a fourth one, and she didn't know his name.
This is a true story.
@Palindromeman Thanks. What a woman! We all love Thomas, and especially the version done by Ringo Starr.
@Spinliesel And who cares about John Lennon, right?