Stones over Beatles, every day and always. No arguments please.
  • danko_jonesStones over Beatles, every day and always. No arguments please.

  • campipesSo you're a "lets spent the night together" kinda guy as opposed to a "I wanna hold your hand" kinda guy
  • thefids@danko_jones HELL YEAH. 👍🇬🇧
  • shecannotbeserious@campipes what was the doubt?xP
  • nstryeah right!!
  • sdsexton1@danko_jones I always tell it like this...The Beatles fans were fucking screaming for the band. The Stones fans were screaming to get fucked by the band!
  • danko_jones@campipes more of a brown sugar guy than a yellow submarine guy.
  • slomaxsterJust saying this....... That Paperback Writer may be the blueprint of the rock intro.... The guitar riff intro (one of the best) followed by the bass AND then the drums! Boom into major riffage! Is that the blueprint?
  • staciedreSorry, Your "that fan" disagrees.
  • kaffieeI love you Danko Jones, but poor form.
  • guitarbastardwhenever this discussion comes up i whistle obladioblada. thats the killer argument for the stones!
  • stubermanStones never did anything nearly as heavy as "Helter Skelter" or "I Want You." Just sayin'.
  • danko_jones@stuberman Sure but Beatles were incapable of writing songs like "Emotional Rescue", "Hot Stuff" & "Heaven". We could go back and forth all night.
  • stubermanThat's because disco didn't exist in the 1960s.
  • danko_jonesAnd that's why it's Stones over Beatles all day, every day. The breadth of the Stones discography trumps The Beatles every time.
  • danko_jones@stuberman
  • stubermanIn eight years, The Beatles went from rockabilly to power-pop to acid-rock to musique concrete to orchestral prog. In 50 years, the Stones have rewritten 10,000 variations on the same blues rock song and dabbled in disco for 10 minutes when Mick was hanging out at Studio 54.
  • danko_jones@stuberman I concede the Beatles were more diverse musically but the whole Stones vs Beatles debate doesn't rest on their musical output alone. The Stones might've been goodie two-shoes but they were a helluva lot cooler. That goes a long way in pointless arguments such as these.
  • philrindJohn Lennon>Mick Jagger+Keith Richards
  • philrindPlease explain how the Stones are "cooler".
  • guitarbastard@philrind that cant be explained. either you understand rock n roll or you dont. sorry dude.
Log in to like or comment.