1. What is your favorite genre of music?
2. Overall, would you say that the Beatles or the Rolling Stones are (or were) more popular?
3. Which of the two bands do you prefer?
4. What is your favorite album by one of these bands? (just looking for one answer here - for example, if you like Let It Bleed the best by the Stones and the White Album the best by the Beatles, just go with Let It Bleed).
5. Which band do you think has had a stronger lasting impact on music?
Thank you.
― David Coontz, Monday, 17 January 2005 22:04 (twenty-one years ago)
2. The Beatles were and are obviously a lot more popular than the Rolling Stones. It seems bizarro to me that this would even be a question.
3. The Beatles
4. My favorite Beatles album is Revolver and my favorite Rolling Stones album is Hot Rocks.
5. The Beatles, by FAR. Again, it seems odd that this would even be a question.
― Matthew "Flux" Perpetua, Monday, 17 January 2005 22:09 (twenty-one years ago)
― David Coontz, Monday, 17 January 2005 22:16 (twenty-one years ago)
― darin (darin), Monday, 17 January 2005 22:17 (twenty-one years ago)
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Monday, 17 January 2005 22:17 (twenty-one years ago)
― dave225 (Dave225), Monday, 17 January 2005 22:20 (twenty-one years ago)
2. The Beatles.
3. The Stones.
4. Beggar's Banquet
5. I don't feel terribly qualified to answer this question. The Beatles, at least, had a most immediate impact; the Stones I'd say may have done more to influence /a wider variety of (sonically different) bands/ . What I mean is, typically a Beatles-influenced band will be very pop, maybe with a psych feel. Where the Stones touched on those sounds, they also undoubtedly influenced lots of white-boy blues rock bands, country-rock bands, and also set the precedent for aging rockers NOT EVER BREAKING UP.
― Ian John50n (orion), Monday, 17 January 2005 22:23 (twenty-one years ago)
Punk/indie
The Beatles were/are more popular
The Rolling Stones
Exile on Main Street
The Beatles
― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 17 January 2005 22:23 (twenty-one years ago)
2. The Beatles
4. Sgt Pepper
5. The Beatles
― Alba (Alba), Monday, 17 January 2005 22:35 (twenty-one years ago)
3. Stones
4. Let It Bleed
― Omar (Omar), Monday, 17 January 2005 22:37 (twenty-one years ago)
2. Beatles
4. Let it Bleed
5. Stones (the Beatles were sui generis. It doesn't get more generis than the Stones).
― mick, Monday, 17 January 2005 22:40 (twenty-one years ago)
3. Beatles
5. Beatles
― Pumpkin Pirate (Broken Hipster), Monday, 17 January 2005 22:47 (twenty-one years ago)
2. the beatles
3. the beatles by a country mile
4. abbey road ... no, revolver ... no, abbey road ... definitely abbey road
5. the beatles by several country miles, a stile, a large field and an ocean
― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Monday, 17 January 2005 22:56 (twenty-one years ago)
― Carel Fabritius (Fabritius), Monday, 17 January 2005 23:25 (twenty-one years ago)
pop
the Beatles
most of the time, the rolling stones, although i think "ticket to ride" is one of the greatest songs ever.
beggars banquet
the rolling stones had some impact on country-rock and funk, and certainly an impact on the aesthetics of some of the dirtier punk/metal bands. the beatles had an impact on beat bands, british psych, art rock, extreme, and oasis. (not bad until you get to the last two.)
answer: the beatles probably revolutionized music more, but the stones have the "stronger lasting impact."
― cathy berberian (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 17 January 2005 23:47 (twenty-one years ago)
― Matthew "Flux" Perpetua, Monday, 17 January 2005 23:51 (twenty-one years ago)
― earlnash, Monday, 17 January 2005 23:54 (twenty-one years ago)
Rock
The Beatles (The White Album)
― The Good Dr. Bill (The Good Dr. Bill), Monday, 17 January 2005 23:57 (twenty-one years ago)
4. Abbey Road
― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 00:05 (twenty-one years ago)
3. Rolling Stones
4. Beggars Banquet
5. No comment
― miccio (miccio), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 00:07 (twenty-one years ago)
Are you SURE about this? It seems that the Rolling Stones mostly just influenced country and rock groups, whereas the Beatles cover the gammut from power pop to art rock to adult contemporary to Michael Jackson to electronic music and beyond. Their fingerprints are all over pop culture in general, and they've been covered by artists in nearly every genre of music from around the world. They are so much a part of the fabric of late 20th century pop music that it's almost difficult to NOT be influenced by the Beatles, even if you hate them. Also, almost everybody knows The Beatles, which just plain isn't true about the Stones. The appeal of the Beatles crosses all ages and races, which is just not the case with the Stones.
― Matthew "Flux" Perpetua, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 00:08 (twenty-one years ago)
That which rocks.
I'm inclined to say the Beatles. The `Stones aren't for everyone, but there honestly is "something for everyone" in the Beatles catalog. Almost.
Well, I like'em both, really. The Beatles seem a bit more sunnier, poppier, more accessible....and the `Stones (vintage Stones, at least) seem a bit more pleasingly evil and debauched...for whatever that's worth. But, y'know, some days I'm in the mood for one, other days I'm in the mood for the other.
Revolver by the Beatles. Despite it being the (at the moment) univerally regarded "best Beatle album," I just think it holds up really well. The midpoint between their earlier, more conventional period and their arguably excessive experimental phase.
Without question, the Beatles.
― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 00:08 (twenty-one years ago)
3. The Beatles.
4. "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band".
5. The Beatles.
― Diego Valladolid (dvalladt), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 00:15 (twenty-one years ago)
― lovebug starski (lovebug starski), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 00:18 (twenty-one years ago)
http://franklarosa.com/ThumbnailServlet?image=/vinyl/BigImg/cathy.jpg&width=350&smooth=1
― cathy berberian (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 00:21 (twenty-one years ago)
― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 00:56 (twenty-one years ago)
― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 00:57 (twenty-one years ago)
― chris andrews (fraew), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 01:06 (twenty-one years ago)
― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 01:07 (twenty-one years ago)
― chris andrews (fraew), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 01:25 (twenty-one years ago)
Post punk
Beatles
White Album
― buck van smack (Buck Van Smack), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 01:35 (twenty-one years ago)
Authentic Jamaican roots reggae.
Overall, yes.
I've never heard of two bands.
Which bands? I like The Freewheelin Bob Dylan' by the Bob Dylan Band.
Stronger than what? I think Kraftwerk had a lasting impact on music. I don't know very much about them, though.
― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 01:36 (twenty-one years ago)
― I Am Curious (George) (Rock Hardy), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 01:48 (twenty-one years ago)
4. Magical Mystery Tour. If that doesn't count as an album then White Album.
― dog latin (dog latin), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 01:52 (twenty-one years ago)
We have a winner!
― Broken Hipster (Broken Hipster), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 01:53 (twenty-one years ago)
― Broken Hipster (Broken Hipster), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 01:54 (twenty-one years ago)
― Bruce S. Urquhart (BanjoMania), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 02:14 (twenty-one years ago)
2. I think the Beatles were probably more popular overall (talking globally).
4. Revolver.
― RS £aRue (rockist_scientist), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 02:21 (twenty-one years ago)
― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 02:27 (twenty-one years ago)
― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 02:29 (twenty-one years ago)
― RS £aRue (rockist_scientist), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 02:42 (twenty-one years ago)
2. Overall, would you say that the Beatles or the Rolling Stones are (or were) more popular?Unfortunately, the Beatles are more popular than the Stones. Note I didn't say they were better, just more popular.
3. Which of the two bands do you prefer?If a gun was held to my nutsack, I'd say the Stones.
4. What is your favorite album by one of these bands? (just looking for one answer here - for example, if you like Let It Bleed the best by the Stones and the White Album the best by the Beatles, just go with Let It Bleed).Beatles - 1Stones - Fourty Licks
5. Which band do you think has had a stronger lasting impact on music?Again, I'd have to concede that the Beatles have had way more impact. Most of it for the worse.
― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 03:04 (twenty-one years ago)
― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 03:05 (twenty-one years ago)
― jole, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 03:15 (twenty-one years ago)
― Bryan Moore (Bryan Moore), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 06:38 (twenty-one years ago)
3. The Rolling Stones
― Nic de Teardrop (Nicholas), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 06:54 (twenty-one years ago)
― Shmool McShmool (shmuel), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 06:59 (twenty-one years ago)
― Tip Mikkleson, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 07:07 (twenty-one years ago)
post-punk rock
the beatles
the rolling stones
aftermath -- an evil pop masterpiece.
the stones (as perverse as that may sound).
― Eisbär (llamasfur), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 07:12 (twenty-one years ago)
2. Depends on where we're talking about. I wonder if the Stones aren't more popular in the U.S. I'm going with the Stones for the hell of it.
3. Beatles, by as Fiendish said "a country mile"
4. For me it's a choice between childhood and adulthood: Sgt. Pepper vs. Abbey Road. I'm going with Abbey Road.
5. The Beatles. God was born when the Beatles formed, haven't you heard?
― Bimble... (Bimble...), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 07:21 (twenty-one years ago)
in the spirit of the above:
1. pop (but i honestly think classical is more complex)2. beatles (but i honestly think the stones slept with more women)3. beatles (but i honestly think chris robinson prefers the stones)4. rubber soul (but i honestly thing revolver came later)5. beatles (but i honestly think mick jagger is a better dresser)
― fact checking cuz (fcc), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 07:41 (twenty-one years ago)
― Jez (Jez), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 07:59 (twenty-one years ago)
― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 10:06 (twenty-one years ago)
Jazz
Beatles (probably a simple fact not an opinion?
Beatles (but I love The Rolling Stones also)
4. What is your favorite album by one of these bands?
Abbey Road
Difficult. Far more bands used The Stones template but someone would probably have come up with a similar mix of Chicago blues, Chuck Berry, Dylan, Country, yadda yadda even if the Stones hadn't existed. The Beatles were much more of a one-off and probably changed the landscape more, even though they had fewer direct imitators.
― frankiemachine, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 10:40 (twenty-one years ago)
can i cheat and say beatles "complete bbc sessions" and rolling stones"jumpback"the stones can be easily copied but the beatles had wider taste in music.the beatles knew when to stop(thanks Yoko).
you'll get 100 replies here.
― revolverville, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 10:44 (twenty-one years ago)
― Marcello Carlin, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 11:13 (twenty-one years ago)
― Neil Kulkarni, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 11:43 (twenty-one years ago)
― mms (mms), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 12:26 (twenty-one years ago)
― Acme 2, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:25 (twenty-one years ago)
― Stevem On X (blueski), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:34 (twenty-one years ago)
― mcd (mcd), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:45 (twenty-one years ago)
Progressive Rock
I don't like either of them much, really.
I don't own a single album by either band. Best tracks, as an alternative
beatles - Tomorrow Never Knowsstones - 2000 light years from home
Stones, probably, for useless "look at me i'm a badass motherfucker 'mojo'"
OK, now you've got yr info/survey, what are you going to target market at us? ;)
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:46 (twenty-one years ago)
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:47 (twenty-one years ago)
― mark grout (mark grout), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:48 (twenty-one years ago)
― Stevem On X (blueski), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:49 (twenty-one years ago)
4. White Album / Exile On Main Street
5. Beatles (unfortuntately)
― Dadaismus (Dada), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:50 (twenty-one years ago)
A: Robbie Williams
A: They're not as popular as Robbie Williams!
A: ROBBIE WILLIAMS!
A: ROBBIE WILLIAMS GREATEST HITS
A: ROBBIE WILLIAMS
― Marcello Carlin, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:52 (twenty-one years ago)
4. Beatles, Revolver
5. The Beatles had far more of an impact, I think; the Stones executed well but didn't transform how musicians approached songcraft.
― Joseph McCombs (Joseph McCombs), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:53 (twenty-one years ago)
― Dadaismus (Dada), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 14:53 (twenty-one years ago)
― peter smith (plsmith), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 15:25 (twenty-one years ago)
― o. nate (onate), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 15:45 (twenty-one years ago)
2. Overall, would you say that the Beatles or the Rolling Stones are (or were) more popular? Beatles.
3. Which of the two bands do you prefer? Stones.
4. What is your favorite album by one of these bands? (just looking for one answer here - for example, if you like Let It Bleed the best by the Stones and the White Album the best by the Beatles, just go with Let It Bleed). Beatles--Beatles for Sale. Stones--Exile on Main St.
5. Which band do you think has had a stronger lasting impact on music? The Beatles by a nose.
― eddie hurt (ddduncan), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 15:53 (twenty-one years ago)
4. Between The Buttons
― Dr. C (Dr. C), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 15:58 (twenty-one years ago)
― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 16:52 (twenty-one years ago)
3. The Beatles. I'd like to be able to say Rolling Stones but I'm afraid I can't.
4. Either Rubber Soul or Revolver.
You're welcome.
― Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 17:04 (twenty-one years ago)
― ppp, Tuesday, 18 January 2005 17:12 (twenty-one years ago)
It seems to me that Muddy Waters, Howlin Wolf, Little Walter, Hank Williams, and Johnny Cash basically had accomplished all of these things before the Stones, at least up through the part about the first critique - though I'm not sure I get the second meta-critique or the eraser part, so maybe that's where the Stones' contribution lies.
― o. nate (onate), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 17:20 (twenty-one years ago)
― RJG (RJG), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 17:33 (twenty-one years ago)
Okay, so...
Um... I think if I have to use the widely accepted "genres" I'll probably fall in the punk/indie camp. A substantial chunk of my favorites are technically postpunk and another good sized one would likely be called bubblegum, but punk/indie probably covers the majority.
The Beatles are more popular precisely for the reasons Stones fans tend to dislike them in these comparisons. Alex has probably already said it best... Just about everyone can find Beatles stuff to like, which isn't true for the Stones by and large.
The other reason they were more popular is their image. It stands to reason that a band marketed as "good guys" is going to be more accepted by everyone than a band with a "bad boy" image, right?
Without context for this question it's difficult to answer, because it is dangerously easy to answer this question with the same answer as #2 but without different reasons. (i.e. They had a stronger impact because they were more popular.)
I am going to say the Beatles though, because I don't think the Stones changed the face of music in quite the same way. There's no doubt of the Stones' influence on tons of bands, but the Beatles "changed what was possible" in more ways. (Off the top of my head I'm thinking of use of harmony, for one.)
― martin m. (mushrush), Tuesday, 18 January 2005 18:06 (twenty-one years ago)
― Geir Hongro, Monday, 2 April 2007 11:54 (nineteen years ago)
― Mark G, Monday, 2 April 2007 11:56 (nineteen years ago)
― Geir Hongro, Monday, 2 April 2007 12:36 (nineteen years ago)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nG_nKn7vZA
http://dangerousminds.net/comments/never-before-seen_footage_the_rolling_stones_play_the_beatles_1965
― Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Thursday, 18 October 2012 23:54 (thirteen years ago)
And did the Beatles ever do the Stones? No. They did a Who track once though. "A quick one while he's away"
― Mark G, Friday, 19 October 2012 00:01 (thirteen years ago)
The Stones' second single was, for all intents and purposes, written for them by Lennon/McCartney ("I Wanna Be Your Man").
And the Beatles didn't really cover "A Quick One" so much as goof on the "We'll soon be home" part during a lull in/the lull that was the Let It Be filming.
― 5-Hour Enmity (Tarfumes The Escape Goat), Friday, 19 October 2012 00:07 (thirteen years ago)
You'd think there would be 10 seconds of Satisfaction or something during the Get Back sessions, but it doesn't look like it...
― Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Friday, 19 October 2012 00:12 (thirteen years ago)
xpost I know, it just amuses me that the (only?) contemporaneous cover they ever had a go at was that one.
Not counting "Hello Dolly" that they did for the banned Xmas single
― Mark G, Friday, 19 October 2012 00:25 (thirteen years ago)
Good point re: only contemporaneous cover. My guess is that John started it off, having just played on the bill with the Who at the RnR Circus.
― 5-Hour Enmity (Tarfumes The Escape Goat), Friday, 19 October 2012 02:22 (thirteen years ago)
Well they covered a ton of current R&B stuff in the early years. But yeah nothing really past '65.
― Emperor Cos Dashit (Adam Bruneau), Friday, 19 October 2012 02:35 (thirteen years ago)