Beatles vs. Stones

Depends on my mood.

Most often played on my system are The White Album, Abbey Road, Let It Be, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers and Exile.

A much easier question to answer would be who I favor between Paul and John.

I prefer John.

Don't ask me to choose between Keef and M. Taylor, though; that's impossible

The Doors. No question.

Rockpile. Their Paul was Nick Lowe, their John Dave Edmunds. I saw both The Beatles and Rockpile live ("only" 15 years apart ;-), and Rockpile were by far the better band. So are NRBQ, Los Lobos, and plenty of others (Marty Stuart And His Fabulous Superlatives. When Norman Maslov---"Mazzy" of the YouTube Vinyl Community, a serious die-hard Beatles fanatic. His Beatles collection is larger than many people’s entire record collections---starts to talk about Marty & his band, he almost hyperventilates).

This continuing idolization of 1960’s Pop/Rock groups mystifies me. They made some fine music, but that was a LONG time ago. Others have made music just as good---if not better---since then. And some music at least as good was made before their time. There was nothing magical about the 1960’s. Except the mushrooms ;-) .

The Stones only flaw was that they are not the Beatles. The Stones are great, and the Beatles are legend, never will there be a group of their ilk again.

If I had to choose I'd probably go with the Beatles, I think they had more memorable songs that can stand the test of time than the Stones (who have had their share as well, of course).

A story in this vein.  In the mid 60s, the Stones first hit with airplay in NYC was Tell Me You're Coming Back to Me.  One afternoon while I was listening to Dan Ingram, the late afternoon WABC DJ (who also had a jazz show on FM, as I recall), he made a comment on air after playing the Stones record to the effect that he felt the Stones were a poor imitation of the Beatles and he didn't like them.  Well, after another record and a few commercials, he came back on and said that the switchboard had lit up due to this comment, so he announced that he would run a contest, $10 to the best letter sent to him telling him why he should like the Stones and $10 to the best letter telling him why he shouldn't.  A few days later he announced that a couple of girls had written him a multi-page letter going on and on as to why he should love the Stones, so they won $10; the winning letter as to why he shouldn't like the Stones was simple--they were costing him $20.