Beatles vs. Stones

But, Mick Jagger alone has twice the sex appeal of all three of the “sexy” Beatles.

Stones win. I don’t see how this even requires thought.

And I’ll bet you get orgasmic just looking at Barney Fife…

The Beatles are the best. I always thought that the Stones were the 2nd most overated band of all time, followed closely by Nirvana. ::Getting into my asbestos suit::

Wow Homeslice, I like you already :slight_smile:
BTW John was sexier than any of the Stone, and the other three began as simply cute, but then matured into handsome men. Something the Stones never, ever successfully accomplished. They are not handsome nor ‘men’

The Beatles had about ten times the range of the Stones. Take John or Paul out of the band and you still have more raw talent than Mick or Keith. The Beatles made fantastic, artful pop songs about love and various other cool emotions - the Stones were low-down and dirty and sang about getting laid. Interesting how they came out of virtually the same mold, playing the same teenybopper blues.

The Stones probably rocked harder. Going through '60’s-70’s Stones albums is like a primer in how to play rock guitar in open tunings. But their songs were often either banal or insulting. ‘Brown Sugar’ has a near-perfect groove to it, but the subject leaves much to be desired.

Frankly, I think the Who or Hendrix’s band win the hardest-rocking test, though Hendrix deserves his own damn catagory.