Started By
Message

re: Beatles or Stones?

Posted on 5/10/24 at 3:30 pm to
Posted by FortunateSon
Tennessee
Member since Apr 2024
19 posts
Posted on 5/10/24 at 3:30 pm to
I've listened to both for my entire life. The Beatles had unmatched creativity. Paul's melodies are tremendous. George was an immensely talented (and underrated) musician who did whatever the song required. John was a legend.

That said, 60 years of rock is more impressive, IMO. The Beatles couldn't make it 10 years.

Mick is the best front man of all time. Keith has magic in his 5 strings. The band is the tightest you'll ever hear. They've made huge hits in multiple genres. They've performed with everyone from Muddy Waters to Lady Gaga. They have dozens of anthems.

For me, the choice is easy.
Posted by OWLFAN86
The OT has made me richer
Member since Jun 2004
177102 posts
Posted on 5/10/24 at 3:45 pm to
quote:

For me, the choice is easy.
agreed for much the same reasons

The Beatle were a Great pop band that played Great R&R on occasion

the Stones the Worlds Greatest Rock & Rolls Band

that created great . Blues, Country, Disco and some pop
This post was edited on 5/10/24 at 4:17 pm
Posted by Kafka
I am the moral conscience of TD
Member since Jul 2007
143037 posts
Posted on 5/11/24 at 6:05 pm to
quote:

Mick is the best front man of all time
Ehh

He's better than Daltrey (or Keith Relf), I'll give him that.

But the Beatles had two much better "frontmen"
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram