Beatles vs. Stones

@tylermunns  I have to believe there was a lot of mutual respect between all those guys, if not outright friendship.  McCartney/Lennon were, IMHO, a little further ahead of Jagger/Richards in their songwriting.  The first Beatles LP was +/- 3 years before the Stones.  

Yes, I think each group recognized the different talents of the other one. The Beatles wrote great songs. The Stones were more focused on the music, the sound, the beat. The Stones had the advantage of longevity. The Beatles were basically done by 1969. That's when the Stones' best music was just starting.

If you prefer pop, you choose the Beatles. If rock and roll is your thing, it's the Stones.

Similar quandary as Duke vs. the Count in my mind, Not really apples to apples, all had different musical aspirations/goals I believe.

Bottom line, it’s all good when played on hi hf! 😀

@phil59 

If you prefer pop, you choose the Beatles. If rock and roll is your thing, it's the Stones.

That sounds about right.

I always preferred the Beatles whilst my heavy rock/metal fan younger brother always preferred the Stones.

I still remember buying him a copy of the Stones Rolled Gold double LP for his birthday whilst he was still at school.

Jefferson Airplane