Which British musical band do you like more, The Beatles or the Rolling Stones?

Question

MrOracle · Accepted Answer

The Beatles. While only together for a decade (well, a bit more, but they only released records for 10 years), they took rock and roll from simple pop music to incredibly sophisticated, varied, and massively influential songs in that very short amount of time. They are the most influential band of all time.

The Stones certainly led the way in taking 40s and 50s R&B and Blues and turning it into Rock, and they definitely released some great singles that I love, but they didn't "carry the ball" anywhere near as far, and aren't anywhere near as influential, and they only have a fraction of the number of important, well-known songs compared to the Beatles.

This doesn't mean I don't love a bunch of Stones songs - Honkytonk Woman, Paint It Black, Sympathy For The Devil, Gimme Shelter, Beast Of Burden - all fantastic songs that I listen to fairly often and have played thousands of times. But when you put the two up against each other, it's really not that much of a context.

AngryCarl · Accepted Answer

I voted for the Rolling Stones, but that ain't the Rolling Stones.

KostasKouvalis · Answer

Stones by a long shot. I think Beatles get so much spotlight and win so many titles, simply because they're so iconic, but musically, I would rank the Beatles low on the list.

No way are these...

https://www.youtube.com/embed/t1Jm5epJr10 https://www.youtube.com/embed/GKdl-GCsNJ0

Better than these...

https://www.youtube.com/embed/RbmS3tQJ7Os https://www.youtube.com/embed/Bar7SzNLnY0

And don't get me wrong, Beatles have some good songs, bur the Stones have more good songs.

loveslongnails · Answer

The Stones were basically a blues rock band that wrote some great songs, and I mean really great songs. Their catalog is dynamic, and they had awesome singles in the 60's and early 70's, but they didn't know when to quit. They haven't produced anything memorable since 1990, but their list of hit singles is truly remarkable, AND they're good. I can't knock the Stones for their body of work up until 1990.

The Beatles were a hard-working cover band, and then, they changed the face of rock music, much like Elvis did, like Buddy Holly, like Little Richard & Chuck Berry before them. There are so many things the Beatles did, and as a musician, I get more impressed the more I learn.

abc3643 · Answer

Um... that's not a picture of The Rolling Stones.

That's Queen, a band rather inferior to The Rolling Stones.

This is a picture of The Rolling Stones in 1978...

Left-to-Right: Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, Ronnie Wood, Mick Jagger, Bill Wyman.

Cheapskate · Answer

I am a melody/harmony guy, and based on that, The Beatles win out. I just find them more creative. I could be biased, because I haven't listened much to the Stones.

But so many Beatles songs are amongst my favorite songs. I would struggle to find even one Stones song that qualifies for that list.

I will say Mick Jagger is the epitome of what a frontman is supposed to be.

Danzigdawson · Answer

Almost every song the Beatles ever wrote and recorded is great or, at the very least, interesting from an artistic perspective.

The Stones are great and legendary, but they're not as revolutionary and artsy (in a good way) as were the Beatles. Anyway, I don't really think that their goal was to top the Beatles. Both bands seemed to have respect for each other.

Two great bands who had their own thing.

Siri137 · Answer

I can't stand either of them. Their music is terrible. Then again, I guess you'd have to be a Baby Boomer to actually like them, and that's something I'm thankfully not.

DJB72 · Answer

Between the two, Beatles. Pity the picture you picked of the Stones was Queen...

AviatorTom · Answer

Tough question. The Stones have been around much longer, but The Beatles started it all, and their music is more memorable.

At3mis24 · Answer

Last time I went to London, I walked the famous crosswalk on Abbey road

FunkyMonkee · Answer

Beatles!! Absolutely no contest!! The Stones had a handful of good hits up to the early `70's, that's it.

Dargil · Answer

The second one was Queen. As time has passed, the Stones. They improve with age. May Charlie Watts rest in peace. **crosses**

LiamJHayden · Answer

I actually prefer Queen like you have pictured for the Rolling Stones, but of the two listed I prefer The Rolling Stones. My favorite songs by the Beatles were mostly by George Harrison.

TheSpaceGnome · Answer

Not into either's music, also thats not the rolling stones, thats queen.

Nikki1989 · Answer

The Beatles for their 1966 onwards catalog. The Stones never did much for me.

MysteriousDarkness · Answer

The Beatles are way better than the The Rolling Stones. You put a photo of Queen not The Rolling Stones.

butterly248 · Answer

The stones. I haven't really got to appreciate the beatles tbh

altaboy · Answer

Why do you have a photo of Queen standing in for the Rolling Stones?

strateguy632 · Answer

1st.

exitseven · Answer

The Beatles.

Iron_Man · Answer

It’s a tie

OtterMan68 · Answer

The who!

In_Trance · Answer

Neither

Which British musical band do you like more, The Beatles or the Rolling Stones?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said