Beatles vs Rolling Stones

The Beatles vs The Rolling Stones, who'll win?
Programme: Big Questions

[@Austerich1]

It's not even a question. Beatles hands down!

[@regaltip8A]

Just remember that in the clip of All You Need Is Love Jagger is sitting at John and Paul's feet. Enough said.

[@faridboufker4048]

The beatles best band the rolling stones the best rock n roll band but for me i prefer the stones

[@farfelllee]

Lmaoooo so true

[@aerorocker1001]

The Beatles, no competition

[@j.f.6469]

simon templer cool story broh

[@PackerBronco]

The Beatles could do any style from Helter Skelter to Yesterday. The Stones repertoire is much more limited; not that they couldn't branch out into different styles but when they did it was with mixed success (Satan Majesty's Request anyone?) For those who dismiss the Beatles as "soft", put on "Yer Blues" and try to tell me that's soft. In the end, there is no comparison. The Beatles are in a class by themselves. Always have been.

[@anosvoldigoad5241]

***** the Beatles is not pop you twat. they are pure rock. and they changed music forever. heck they were the first band to make an heavy rock song.

[@alapekuttaja7222]

youtubedude 459304 They're pop you idiot. POP=Popular music And no, they're not pure rock, no way in hell.

[@williamjordan8603]

@Malte Laurids Brigge Revolution, Helter Skelter, Hard Day's Night, Day Tripper are pretty harsh.

[@JFF35753]

I agree Packer 100%. The Stones are my second favorite band but they never came close to the Beatles. The #1 reason quite simply is because Lennon and McCartney are the two greatest songwriters since... The fab 4 also had three great singers. I love the Brian Jones years and the Mick Taylor years but when Taylor left the band so did I.

[@anosvoldigoad5241]

simon templer nice trolling lol

[@oscarrojas5561]

The Beatles are the best band to ever live

[@controlroomlandry271]

@simon templer Dude, why you so disrespectful? I can tell you're a keyboard warrior. Big balls behind a computer, but a pussy when confronted face to face.

[@paulsmith3035]

@@controlroomlandry271 Dude, why you so disrespectful? I can tell you're a keyboard warrior. Big balls behind a computer, but a pussy when confronted face to face.

[@coalhunt]

I dont get why they even get compared....well the stones were a rock band, a good one. But the BEATLES were the greatest band the world has ever seen and way more than just Rock or Pop

[@nickrigdon8883]

The Stones were FAR more than just a rock band, my friend. Dig deep, and you'll realize that the Stones are the far superior band. You can like the Beatles more, and that's fine, but the Stones are better.

[@matthieuwise5950]

+Nicky Flash and why?

[@controlroomlandry271]

@@nickrigdon8883 No they're not.

[@Mr.O-Town]

@simon templer ha!

[@Mr.O-Town]

@@nickrigdon8883 ha!

[@lolomixed6442]

First hit from the Rolling Stones "I wanna be your man" was written by John and Paul.

[@MWM_YT]

Juan Carlos Cruz so true!

[@AD-bm8mq]

Juan Carlos Cruz it was actually come on (1963)

[@paulcachia3480]

Cause they suck and cant sing

[@myself8027]

Juan Carlos Cruz In five minutos.

[@malcolml309]

It was because of the Beatles, that Jagger and Richards, began writing for themselves.

[@maytvargas]

Of course The Beatles! No match!

[@paulcachia3480]

Yea Yea Yea!

[@juliocesarflores4661]

THE BEATLES ARE ALWAYS THE WINNERS...

[@juliocesarflores4661]

YOU ARE WRONG AND YOU KNOW IT.

[@controlroomlandry271]

@simon templer Why do you have to get so insulting just because someone has a different opinion other than your own? Try calling me that to my face, and you'll have a fight on your hands my friend. For what it is worth, The Beatles are the winners by far.

[@controlroomlandry271]

Simon templar - Of course you would say that you would smash my teeth in, knowing you're thousands of miles away from me and sitting behind a keyboard.

[@controlroomlandry271]

@simon templer I can tell you now, you'll never say the things you type to the faces of the people you insult. Damn fairy...

[@Viajealduende]

The Stones didn't "go to the Beatles to get a hit." The Beatles liked the Stones and offered the song which gave them a lift up. The first Stones hit was "Come on" by Chuck. In fact most people when they think of the Stones early music never mention "I wanna be your man." Red Rooster" Around and Around, Not fade away, The last time, Satisfaction and many more will come to mind before the Beatles song, nice of them to do that but they didn't really need the help although they took it, it was a way to get recognized. The only thing I can say about the Beatles is they hit fame 6 mos before.

[@deniselaurin1005]

Stones get points for longevity, but The Beatles take it all for sheer genius. Besides, everything the Stones did in the '60s was a direct copy of The Beatles. SPLHCB vs. Satanic Majesties, White Album vs. Beggar's Banquet, and Let It Be vs. Let It Bleed...? Go figure...

[@deniselaurin1005]

Also, dumb bimbo doesn't realize that Lennon was on the FIRST copy of Rolling Stone, 13 years before the issue she alludes to.

[@Lunatic4Bizcas]

+Denise Laurin : The Let It Bleed album came out before 'Let It Be,' and The Rolling Stones are almost all Killer and no Filler; whereas The Beatles albums are replete with 'Filler.'

[@paulmcshears8847]

Let It Be was recorded a year before it was released. The reason it is not considered one of the best is because of the sound editing the went on under John Lennon's supervision. In 2003, Paul and Ringo helped in the production of Let It Be... Naked, which got rid of the "wall of sound" that plagued it. The album contains some of the best songs written by Paul and John, Let It Be (of course), Across The Universe, Get Back, The Long and Winding Road, I've Got A Feeling. I'll be the first to admit, I have not listened to the full Let It Bleed album, but at a glance, the only song I can recognize is "Gimme Shelter". When I first saw Let It Be, I immediately recognized the first four songs listed above (not I've Got A Feeling). The concept of filler is very subjective, but to me, in trying to imitate the Beatles, the Stones created a lot of it. By the way, Let It Be was created during a time in which they knew they were falling away from grace, yet the same year, they created what many consider their best album, Abbey Road.

[@Lunatic4Bizcas]

Abbey Road is a great album, and I like the way the songs tend to flow into each other like a continual track. I also used to own the 'Let It Be Naked' album on vinyl, which I originally bought as a collectors item. Boy was that a mistake. I only opened the 7" Fly on the Wall, which actually came with a skip in one track. The stripped down version of those otherwise carefully engineered songs sound horribly boring and hokey. If anything, Phil Spector added his chops to what would otherwise sound like a moderate to mediocre effort. I thought that the album would accrue value, but boy was I wrong. I ended up selling it on Ebay for less than I originally purchased it for. Total lost investment.

[@paulmcshears8847]

Christopher Morris You probably don't want to listen to the Stones' worst album either, and I get the point you're trying to make, but I personally don't think that Abbey Road is their best. And about the message you gave to Denise, the Stones didn't copy the songs, John Lennon was on the front cover the Rolling Stones Magazine, on the first "copy" of it, but the better word would have been "issue".

[@beatlelennon9168]

the best the brightest the biggest THE BEATLES.

[@stefanjovanovic6840]

Elvis is the biggest

[@Miniike]

"What's so good about the Beatles?" "PAUL MCCARTNEY!" Good answer.

[@paulnottherealmccartney8558]

really

[@paulcachia3480]

No John Lennon

[@paulcachia3480]

LENNON

[@paulcachia3480]

Lennon all the way ,he Put thename in ROCK N Roll!

[@thebaobabs206]

+Paul Cachia Lennon and McCartney are great let's face it!

[@AstralFrost]

They're both great. In terms of songwriting, I'd give it to the Beatles. Their influence on music is clearly greater. However, I would give it to the Rolling Stones insofar as live performance goes.

[@pledgestone]

The Stones, all the way.

[@paulcachia3480]

The Fab 4 Forever and ever!

[@tzion4090]

1-The beatles 2- led Zeppelin 3-pink floyd 4-queen 5- the who 6- the rolling stones

[@romulo7779]

1) THE BEATLES 2) ABBA 3) RPM (BRAZIL) 4) KISS 5) JACKSON FIVE 6) THE SMITHS 7) ROLLING STONES 8) THE ANIMALS 9)THE CLASH 10) THE SHADOW

[@beatleboss6849]

The Beatles for sure

[@urwholefamilydied]

7:55 "largest audience ever".... if it were possible for all four beatles to play a show today... please... they could easily double or triple the ticket sales.

[@kevinwolf3918]

The Beatles are the best!

[@paulcachia3480]

This guy is an idiot a loser anyways so pay no mind!

[@paulcachia3480]

your shit!

[@gerardox6662]

Øyvind Kristoffersen Enjoy all of the Rolling Stones songs😂😂 a lot of shit repetitive.

[@lindadote]

simon templer ........arguing that the Stones longevity makes them better is just silly - 50+ years on, it’s The Beatles records that continue to sell. And I’d argue it’s the Stones who are so incredibly repetitive, have been for decades.

[@RyanSmith-ik9ii]

THE BEATLES!!!!!

[@paulinehallard4537]

Ryan Smith video

[@twinktoiletsbestfriendsmom4188]

Ryan Smith are fucking gay

[@VGHero]

simon templer U2 is awesome wtf u on

[@urwholefamilydied]

Not only are the Beatles better... but all four of them had ridiculously successful solo careers... even Ringo's was good. I'd love to see keith or jagger or ron wood do a solo career. Jagger needed keith to write a song, and keith needed jagger. Alone they couldn't even write a single song.

[@jamesmulligan7413]

Beatles by a million miles

[@YoshiHasSwagger]

Rolling Stones are okay but The Beatles were much more inventive, creative and talented. The Rolling Stones were still singing about girls while the beatles grew out of the boy band scene and literally made history.

[@YoshiHasSwagger]

And Satanic Majesties Request is just a bad ripoff of Sgt. Pepper. The Rolling Stones only proved they were copycats in '67.

[@abarb2158]

Beatles are very better

[@robertwiesler381]

The Stones are better They will live and play forever The Beatles are history, but the Stones are past, present and future

[@robertwiesler381]

@FiatDuster I do not think so, my friend

[@haywoodjblome4768]

@@robertwiesler381 It's not a matter of opinion, looking at it from a practical point of view of course

[@accam6734]

Beatles changed the world. The Stones didn’t.

[@petermontalbano6459]

Ladies and Gentlemen ❤️ THE BEATLES

[@ej36055]

The Beatles is the top artist of all time,confirmed by a magazine called Rolling Stones.You don't need more imformation than that.

[@keta7280]

i prefer the beatles, but i like the stones too

[@Perutti1]

BEATLES BEATLES BEATLES BEATLES BEATLES BEATLES....

[@urmom5885]

simon templer DICK

[@urmom5885]

simon templer bruh Idek understand what ur saying at this point lmaoooo but uh I like the stones way more than the beatles

[@jijor1]

THE BEATLES!!!!!!!REVOLUCIONARON THE MUSIC ROLLIGS NOOOOOOOOO!!!

[@shirifbousseba9430]

You can't decide if the stones or Beatles are better because their really different

[@wallyballjacker350]

The Stones & Zep for me. Easy.I put it this way, which band will I be listening to before I head for a night out, some dirty blues by the Stones, or "here comes the sun."

[@TheJoeisdabest]

Here comes the sun is a beautiful song

[@wallyballjacker350]

Joseph Fittzhenry I know.....and I never said it was a bad song. Just that I believe the stones have a better joyful blues sound

[@wallyballjacker350]

whiteshadow59 Give a fuck ya knobhead

[@whiteshadow59]

You give

[@wallyballjacker350]

whiteshadow59 to your mother? Yes I do

[@msanm5]

Sir Paul said: "The four of us were unusual. I talked to Keith Richards recently; well, a couple of years ago, and his take on it was, 'Man, you were lucky, you guys, you had four lead singers,' whereas The Rolling Stones only had one.

[@connorpatricknolanmusic1453]

This is so funny. My list of bands go 1. The Beatles 2. The Rolling Stones 3. The Monkees 4. The Who 5. The Kinks 6. Led Zeppelin 7. AC/DC 8. The Wings 9. Van Halen 10. George Harrison (solo artist)

[@romulo7779]

1) THE BEATLES 2) ABBA 3) RPM (BRAZIL) 4) KISS 5) JACKSON FIVE 6) THE SMITHS 7) ROLLING STONES 8) THE ANIMALS 9)THE CLASH 10) THE SHADOW

[@malcolml309]

1. The Beatles 2. The Rolling Stones 3. The Doors 4. The Byrds 5. The Velvet Underground 6. The Beach Boys 7. The Who 8. The Kinks 9. The Jimi Hendrix Experience 10. The Hollies

[@colin6603]

1. Ween 2. Beatles 3. Stones 4. Ramones 5. Minutemen

[@paulcachia3480]

Scrap stone cause they suck though....

[@luckasn8975]

What about queen they are one of the best bands ever

[@scoppato46]

BEATLESSSSS FOREVERRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@michaelkaminski3344]

If this were a fight , the Stones would be lucky to last 10 seconds.

[@thebaobabs206]

+Øyvind Kristoffersen Rolling Stones fans know how the battle would go so they "don't care"

[@Finnandfletch]

Good call.Its Mayweather vs McGregor.

[@democracyperson9900]

Michael Kaminski you must be the social media tough guy . It took me five seconds to read your post . Goodnight Hard man .

[@kroll1933]

Michael Kaminski if it was live the Stones would win

[@halt2045]

It took the Rolling Stones about 30 years to put out as much music as the Beatles put out in 6 years. The Rolling Stones are a great band. They're just not the Beatles.

[@SissyShamrock]

Leo said it best when the Stones went to the Beatles for a hit. "I Wanna Be Your Man" is a Beatles song.

[@paulcachia3480]

Yea The Beatles are forever and they will always be number1. Yea The Beatles are the best and they can't be beat.Yea yea yea.

[@willcarr9177]

The Beatles for sure! The Rolling Stones were lucky the Beatles split up because the Beatles were bigger and better than the stones! The Beatles are under rated these days and deserve more credit! I mean I am sick of tired of overplayed stones songs, they should be playing the Beatles because they don't get played that much, bottom line is Beatles are the best and will always be!

[@jomeusebio8681]

Beatles For LIFE

[@toddubow2599]

All 4 Beatles could sing and they had the two greatest singers in history in one group. That's really the difference because Jagger and Richards were just as good at songwriting.

[@kandalmichel2069]

The Beatles

[@deepdown.9822]

The Beatles !!!!!

[@urmom5885]

simon templer bro Idk who u are but I love you for going on every single comment about the Beatles and just arguing the stones are better LMFAOOOO

[@robbo9854]

simon templer they’re both great but the Beatles are the greatest they’re records and statistics speaks for themselves

[@FreshFromDaBasement]

Beatles in my opinion because they revoluionized music leading to somewhat great artists

[@ktcarl]

I like both bands. They each had their own style. It was a great time to be listening to rock n roll.

[@ZoeBeattle]

THE BEATLES

[@huboxgo]

Puedes imaginar una pirámide (La pirámide de la música). Pues bien, en su cúspide se encuentran Los Beatles... de allí para abajo se encuentra cualquier otra banda dependiendo de gustos.

[@male617]

I am a fan of the Beatles and I vote them over the Rolling Stones, but the Rolling Stones were also great. They didn't suck, and I agree that it is disrespectful to say that the Rolling Stones suck or the Beatles suck.

[@abdelter]

From 1960 to 1962, The Beatles gave over 280 concerts in Hamburg, where they also signed their very first contract and met a man named Ringo Starr. To walk in the footsteps of the young Beatles in Hamburg is to discover a city with an atmosphere as legendary as it is inspiring. 8 May 2013. Beatles very strong

[@nickevers9571]

Both bands have written a number of great songs, so in that respect its really up to your personal taste. Vocally it's not even close. The Beatle's bury the Stones in that respect. Jagger is good, but his range is limited and he gets to go it alone against Paul (with his incredible range) along with John and George. This is the probably the biggest gap between the bands. The same goes for record sales. The Beatles have far outsold the Stones, and the Beatles were all done in 1970. Musicianship would also have to go to the Beatles, not because the members of the Stones are not good, but because of the multi-talented Beatles... namely Paul and John. Not a real big gap there but tilted slightly towards the Beatles. The Beatles were also revolutionary in their music... constantly evolving. In the end,even with great songs on both sides, The Beatles win this one hands down.

[@SrPalomares]

THE BEATLES ARE THE BEST OF THE WORLD!!!!!!

[@michaeljosephjackson6306]

*lays back and puts sunglasses on*

[@callummiles2566]

+Michael Joseph Jackson Hold on, what about Elvis Mr CoolGuy?

[@ramilgonzales1190]

No doubt! The Beatles are more than The Rolling Stones! The Beatles they're just only 9yrs of being The Beatles,but Stones are more than 50yrs,can you imagine that.The Beatles are sold more than a billion of copys

[@superbendecido9]

Beatles for ever!!

[@Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

I don't drink, and haven't drank more than a few beers over the past several years, but a good way I think of giving someone an idea as to the distinction between The Rolling Stones and The Beatles is that people get drunk listening to The Stones all the time, not so much The Beatles. The Rolling Stones just seem like more of an adult, authentic rock group.

[@VMan29397]

Stones 10/10 they credited their sources and could actually play their own guitar solo's(Clapton plays the solo on while my guitar gently weeps) and revived the music careers of many african american blues artists and gave them recognition that they never had

[@guyfieri2173]

+VMan29397 George Harrison actually gave that guitar solo to Eric to be nice, but ok, just be a dick.

[@juan.orduz.musico]

Hey remember something. I like the Stones, but without Beatles, the Rolling Stones wouldn't be that famous. Remember I wanna be your man.

[@johnnycreepo]

When it comes to guitar players I'll take Richards/Taylor over Lennon/Harrison anyday

[@rangers94ism]

Yeah but I prefer Paul McCartney on bass. I think Paul was technically the best musician of all nine (4 Beatles 5 Stones) The drummers are a toss up. I like what both of them did. But neither are in the conversation when it comes to best drummer of all time.

[@Fonboid]

Actually, a lot of keith richards' solos sound a lot more complicated than they actually are, and keep in mind that he never sang while he played

[@GuadalupePicasso]

The comment about the Rolling Stones being creative without making mention of the sheer creativity of the Beatles over their short span of time as a band is intellectually dishonest. Seriously, starting with Rubber Soul all the way through Abbey Road, try and tell me that the Beatles weren't creative. Also, the Beatles never toured any album past Revolver, and they also broke up in 1970. So, while the Stones certainly deserve credit for the stats in regards to touring (hell, I've even seen them live; they're a fucking powerhouse, even as septuagenarians...... sans Ronnie Wood..... I think that he's "only" 79), it's not really an indication of their being more popular than the Beatles. If nothing else, record sales alone should answer this question.

[@nopadoln1857]

The beatles is a everything to me .

[@djskobie]

The Beatles always and forever

[@NewYorkPorkRocks]

Vote here for Beatles

[@KanonGoldensZ]

John Lennon

[@PauloiAugusto]

The Beatles = 10 Years The Rolling Stones = 50 Years The Beatles = The Best

[@Delboy0]

The Beatles are big because they were the first global musical group, but the Rolling Stones came after and held their own. If the Rolling Stones had come first we would have never heard of the Beatles. For me it is the Rolling Stones as they have more songs that stand the test of time. Personally I rate The Rolling Stones and Led Zeplin above the Beatles, but they got lucky and the were the first group at the of the TV media era.

[@ghettomist1575]

Beatles

[@AlanJPGR]

The beatles!

[@KLIMIXify]

I think, the two bands complete themselves, you can like the both.

[@beatlemania2006]

If I ever made a top 10 list of my favorite bands, it would be these: 1. THE BEATLES 2. The Monkees 3. The Hollies 4. Chicago 5. The Who 6. Pink Floyd 7. The Kinks 8. The Moody Blues 9. Yes 10. The Rolling Stones

[@urwholefamilydied]

Not even a competition. In fact, the stones aren't even the second best band in the world. Not to mention, the beatles ENTIRE recording career was SEVEN fucking years. Seven. That's unbelievable. The stones are still making records. So they're going on, what... 55 years? Even if you only count up to their last few good albums when they were younger... a 30 year career? And their output still isn't as good as a band that was around for 7 years. LOL.

[@felixmelendez5853]

The Beatles are number one

[@MrBronydash]

Why would people even argue about this. They're both great fucking bands there's no need to choose the "Best Band"

[@zamalreunion9767]

i really love both! i prefer the beatles little more for: - their compositions, 2 genious lennon/mccartney - they made 12 albums in 7 years and when you listen to them , there re no one song to get out! and we always discover new good songs...because they did more than 200 songs in 7 years! that s a lot to remember each time! - they are the pop rock music! where the stone are more rock n roll n more bluesy! - for lennon and harrisson 's memory! - for Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band!

[@supraludwick83]

of course, it's the Beatles! you will always play second fiddle Stones.

[@paulcachia3480]

Stones don't even come close to The Beatles

[@democracyperson9900]

supraludwick83 what the stones play second fiddle to a group that no longer exists ? Do me a favour !!!!!!!

[@fireorca9263]

Democracy Person the group hasn't been around for 47 years and still can not be out sold by the stones, the stones are second fiddle.

[@paulcachia3480]

Why u might ask, cause they suck to compared to most big bands like pink floyd led zepplin ac-dc, the who are even better with zac starkey on drums. Da , And if you want to here some real blues listen to BB king then. Yea yea yea.........................................................................................................

[@LCPD9111]

Hear that THE ONLY BAND TO HOLD THE TOP 5 POSITION IN THE BILLBOARD CHART

[@JohnSpawn1]

The Rolling Stones are my favourite band. The Beatles are the best band ever though. Anyone who disagrees is wrong, the Beatles' output destroys every other band.

[@alekacevski1486]

I’m glad I saw the Stones live before covid. I wouldn’t say they are the greatest rock band of all time but they are way cooler than the Beatles. Love from Macedonia 🇬🇧🇲🇰

[@haydenmckertish8020]

Stones all the way.

[@Jordan-hi8ph]

The Beatles

[@dudarego1]

as studio musicians, Beatles, but Stones are excelent in live performances

[@mrbiggs36]

You're right. The better band should be the one that is more talented, better songwriters, better singers, more influential, and more progressive in creating new sounds. That is the Beatles

[@thedominatior39]

The Beatles are better due to the fact the they wrote the Rolling Stones first number one songs I want to be your man

[@kevinwolf3918]

Yes!

[@jonahgeorge7918]

The Beatles offered to write I wanna be you man for the stones Did the stones need them to do that, no

[@johnkevin5614]

+Jonah George Jajaja the stones copied the Beatles during the 60s

[@travelingcam8239]

STONES By a light year

[@Mr.O-Town]

are you high?

[@Mr.O-Town]

simon templer it’s nice to see they let “special” people like you get access to a computer lol name one song in the stones library that’s better then the Beatles?

[@greekLAR]

I Think, that at 1967 when the Beatles recorded "A day in the life" with the symphonic orchestra, Mick Jagger was in the audience. Did you know what he was thinking? "Fuck you Beatles. We will always keep on rocking hard because....... we are not able to do stuff like those you do......"

[@msanm5]

So it´s worst then. Beatles did in 8 years more than Stones in 50 years. You´re smart.

[@romulo7779]

THE BEATLES = PELÉ. ARE THE KING´S

[@patrickgaffney1140]

Romulo Monteiro t

[@romulo7779]

1) THE BEATLES 2) ABBA 3) RPM (BRAZIL) 4) KISS 5) JACKSON FIVE 6) THE SMITHS 7) ROLLING STONES 8) THE ANIMALS 9)THE CLASH 10) THE SHADOW

[@Aqualung1971_]

Romulo Monteiro

[@farfelllee]

Well regardless of what anyone says: it's the Beatles.

[@charlessteenburgen]

I like the Beatles but I LOVE THE ROLLING Stones

[@jarredcole8854]

Simply The Beatles.

[@OMXRBUNBURY]

beatles en una decada cambiaron a la humanidad

[@theking-nz1ut]

THE BEATLES ( THE FAB 4 ) 👍👍👍👍 THE WINNERS !!!!!

[@sultanoftippoo3857]

Utterly pointless conversation. Both brilliant bands where people feel they have to join one tribe of fans or another. Same argument I’m sure cat and dog owners have between themselves. Just appreciate both bands are legends and have a little respect for someone elses taste in music.

[@Urweltmammutbaum]

Stones!

[@oscarrojas5561]

the beatles started the rolling stones with i wanna be your man reaching #1

[@histatimaniples]

how many covers did the beatles do on their first album?

[@XxaragornXx123]

histatimaniples 3!!! and yeah they werent even hits!!

[@johnkevin5614]

+histatimaniples jaja they started bye doing covers and at least they didn't copied the stones. The Beatles are the greatest band in history, they did more in 6 years than the stones have in 50 years+

[@vieatoz]

Within only 6 years, The Beatles had revolutionized the world musical scenes. People who said The Beatles are a pop band certainly not familiar with them. The Beatles are not a Pop or a Rock band since there's no boundary within their music. The Beatles are the music itself!

[@MrSweGibzon]

Children bicker while us grown ups sits in the sun and listens to both.