And Jagger on All You Need Is Love
At least, he was amongst the assorted set of artists in the studio when it was broadcast live on âOur Worldâ
Well, Ringo had to step up and show Mick what a truly great vocalist could do with the song! 
Iâll get me coat and be on my wayâŚ
1 Like
Well Lennon and McCartney didnt consider it good enough for them⌠good enough for zringo and Jagger thoughđ
1 Like
zringo ??? Bloody iPhone keyboard 
Serves you right for taking the mickey out of one the greatest singers and songwriters of all time. Hail hail Octopusâs Garden!
1 Like
What⌠Ringo ?
All jesting apart I think they (Beatles and Stones) are both brilliant⌠but compelled to vote for Beatles in the poll above
It was a joke, Alan. Iâm sure Beatles fans have a sense of humour! Paul and John certainly had when they let him included that track on Abbey Road. 
Yep ⌠understand it was a joke⌠I just misinterpreted it on initial reading⌠my response was intended to be also
1 Like
My other observation on Beatles vs Stones is that the Stones sat-in on some of the Sgt Pepper sessions and their subsequent album was âTheir Satanic Majesties Requestâ; largely considered a less than stellar derivative of the Beatles recent work. I happen to enjoy TSMR, then again Iâm a big fan of âPiper At The Gates Of Dawnâ. Not to extend the argument, but Iâd have Floyd ahead of the Stones, possibly The Who and LZ as well.
The Stones have been a band for almost 60 years and to me still havenât approached the quality of musical lexicon The Beatles amassed in 8 short years of recording.
They were all good mates from early onâŚ
I guess we could debate, for ages, the merits of different bands. I love the Stones, and all the bands you mention too (though probably The Who, least) And a while load more, too. But for me The Beatles eclipse them all.
1 Like
For âwhileâ, read âwholeâ⌠iPhone keyboard again 
Stones for me. Beatles music was played to death for years.
If the stones broke up after Some Girls- might have been very close.
What would have happened if the Beatles would have been around as a group for 40 more years? The Stones kept producing well after their âgolden period â from letâs say 1967 through 1974
The Beatles never had a chance to become mediocre
And I really love the Stones- Gimme Shelter and Sympathy For The Devil rank amongst the greatest rock songs ever written (IMHO).
David
1 Like
I love both bands but if I had to choose just one the Beatles would edge it for me.
I never got to see the Beatles but have seen the Stones twice.
Beatles for me. From age 10 to 12 I practically listened to nothing else, so they are seared into my DNA. I was wondering how many Stones songs would make it into my combined Beatles/Stones Top 10 - I think âGimme Shelterâ would be the only one - and what a song! - but I could easily fill that list with Beatles songs. Current personal Beatles fave tunes are âBaby Youâre A Rich Manâ and âIâve Got A Feelingâ (this latter - I think - because of the final rooftop concert footage).
1 Like
Another vote for the Fab Four. For me the Stones were always a singles band and I couldnât really get into their albums apart from Sticky Fingers.
Stu
I REMAIN a stones fan and although the poll shows a clear majority for the Beatles unfortunately these voters have been misled and did not understand what they are voting for. In view of this we need to have a second peoples vote in order to decide this issue. This issue being the most important that the voters have had to make since 1945.
8 Likes
We never even bought a Beatles album until they started reissuing them as CDâs in recent years (1, Love, etc.). My wife and kids all love the Beatles but I am now and always have been a Stones fan. I also enjoyed the Keith Richards documentary on Netflix.
2 Likes