Entertainment & Music

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The Beatles or the Rolling Stones?

If you had to choose to listen to only one...why?

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

Sueisright · 31-35, F

Stones totally. Don’t rate the Beatles at all

4thdimensiondream · 61-69, M

Beatles. Nothing against the Stones but I see them as just a good rock n roll band. The Beatles changed music. Heck they changed the world.

MisterMeccano · 56-60, M

Stones. A much more talented band.

MrGomco · 36-40, M

Rolling Stones!!

ididntknow · 51-55, M

I like both

katielass · F

Stones, no question

MasterLee · 56-60, M

Stones, beatles are horrid

RedRider72 · M

Beatles hands down...you listen to every album they ever made, and none of them were the same..

MartiniTime · 61-69, M

Beatles! Their evolution as a band and song writers is AMAZING to me. The Stones got famous doing covers of old Blues Tunes......which is not a bad thing, but from a creativity standpoint, the Beatles win. Even the name is creative.....BEATles....the beat....the play on words.

BUT, if you go by guitar riffs and sheer rockability........the Stones would win.

SW-User

@MartiniTime Very well said. I couldn't agree more.

Normanwestie · 61-69, M

Rolling Stones every time one of of my all time fav bands

FreeSpirit1 · F

Stones have a more extensive catalog

LienOnYourDreams · 46-50, M

Stones all the way.

Degbeme · 70-79, M

The Beatles

LostSoul22

The Stones!

Harmonium1923 · 51-55, M

The Beatles did a lot more interesting stuff. They wrote something like 300 original songs. It's amazing that the same guys did 8 Days A Week, Eleanor Rigby, Lovely Rita, Get Back, and on and on.

Dale321 · M

Stones. Beatles are so over played, over covered by the media. It's great music but so over exposed, I cringe every time I hear one of their songs.

Ghauzy · 51-55, M

The Beatles take me for a ride thru many places and many colors. Across the universe is a movie I can watch many times over.

jackson55 · M

The Beatles were good, but the stones are still around. Keith Richards wrote a book called Life, it's pretty good.

Whyme · 46-50, M

Ive done nothing wrong why torture me with neverending horrible music

VioletRayne · 36-40, F

Beatles. I like their music better

SW-User

The Beatles, no question.

ozzydevil · M

Rolling Stones

SW-User

The Beatles

SW-User

I'm going to see Paul McCartney in October, while he's on tour.

chrisCA · M

I can't decide. 😟

JustGoneNow ·

@chrisCA same.

Mondayschild · F

Rolling Stone

Ramon67 · 61-69, M

The Beatles

MartiniTime · 61-69, M

One more thing........did Clapton ever play on a Stones tune? NOPE, but he did for the Beatles ....... While my Guitar Gently Weeps. Look it up.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Gforce1163 · 56-60, M

Definitely the Beatles. Much broader range of musical styles

Tantrapleasure · 56-60, M

Beatles. I've seen the Stones many time, never did see the Beatles.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Dangerousliasons

Beatles!...Revolutionary!

rachelsj · 22-25, F

Beatles

uncalled4 · 56-60, M

Beatles. Far larger variety of songs and much, much better singing.

JustGoneNow ·

@uncalled4 this is super hard, though. I love the Stones. Love the Beatles too. I’d give it to the Beatles by just a hair based on the library of work, but Stones are an awesome band and the rough part for them is they were during Beatlemania and got a bit overshadowed by the Fab Four or else they’d have even been bigger. Terrible question. Ugh.

JustGoneNow ·

@uncalled4 technically the Stones have a bigger library, though. I’d argue the Beatles have a bigger catalog of hit songs, though.

Beatles 12 studio albums 208 songs

Stones 25 studio albums 422 songs

Add a comment...