Stones vs Beatles

Stones are hands down the bad boys.

I remember reading Spanish Tony describing hours long, full body blood transfusions to clean up before touring in the US. Hardcore.

The Stones were much more blues influenced and had more accomplished musicians. The Beatles were much more pop and sold lots of records. Originally Posted by oilfieldscum

???? The Stones were mostly influenced by early rock and roll, particularly Chuck Berry. Listen to "Get Your Ya Yas Out". They are introduced as the greatest rock and roll band, do two Chuck Berry songs. Keith Richards took Berry's guitar licks and added his style to them.

Led Zeppelin was the blues oriented band.

???? The Stones were mostly influenced by early rock and roll, particularly Chuck Berry. Listen to "Get Your Ya Yas Out". They are introduced as the greatest rock and roll band, do two Chuck Berry songs. Keith Richards took Berry's guitar licks and added his style to them.

Led Zeppelin was the blues oriented band. Originally Posted by Oralist

The stones were heavily influenced by Muddy Waters (where they got the bands name from), Howling Wolf, and Bo Diddley. It doesn't get much more bluesy than that.

I dunno why you keep trying to interject Led Zeppelin. The subjects of this thread and the Beatles and the Stones.

Mick Jagger was the one of the ugliest muthafuckas in rock music but he was getting all kinds of pussy from all races of women. Originally Posted by kerwil62

Was?

Mick "No Fucks Given" Jagger has (or will shortly) a kid 2 years younger than his great grand kid.

Was?

Mick "No Fucks Given" Jagger has (or will shortly) a kid 2 years younger than his great grand kid. Originally Posted by cabletex7

My bad, that old bastard is still slinging dick! Probably got stock in Viagra AND Cialis! LMAO!!!

Another interesting thing is the media and fans got real interested toward the end, looking for hidden
meanings in Beatles songs, and reading into them. John Lennon said, "They're just songs."