Biggest Debate in Rock N Roll History ?

[I. Spaceman]

The stones were great from 1966-1981 the beach boys at their peak are better than any other group at their peak and that's the truth. The horrible thing about it all was the boys had no longevity once Brian lost it :/ their music started becoming worse as the years went by.

The Rolling Stones were great well before 1966. They did blankety-blank SATISFACTION before that, fer cripes sakes.

I'm speaking as far as albums go

Albums aren't the be-all and end-all of rock and roll. And even then, The Rolling Stones Now! is one of the greatest rock albums ever.

that's true ...there's too many covers on that album

COVERS? As if that somehow makes a performance inferior to one that is written by the artist? Boy, you must really look down upon Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, The Ronettes, etc. Boy, come back in five years or something.

[Newguy562]

The stones were great from 1966-1981 the beach boys at their peak are better than any other group at their peak and that's the truth. The horrible thing about it all was the boys had no longevity once Brian lost it :/ their music started becoming worse as the years went by.

The Rolling Stones were great well before 1966. They did blankety-blank SATISFACTION before that, fer cripes sakes.

I'm speaking as far as albums go

Albums aren't the be-all and end-all of rock and roll. And even then, The Rolling Stones Now! is one of the greatest rock albums ever.

that's true ...there's too many covers on that album

COVERS? As if that somehow makes a performance inferior to one that is written by the artist? Boy, you must really look down upon Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, The Ronettes, etc. Boy, come back in five years or something.

I don't know any of Frank Sinatra's work..My favorite Elvis songs are the ones he did not his earlier cover songs ..
I just can't get into many covers it seems so unofficial to me and most of the blues songs the stones did seemed so inferior to the original it's an absolutely ridiculous way..

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

Beatles, no contest.

The stones were a different band, more interested in jamming then innovating.

[sparkydog1725]

And after FTTBA...

Guess I'm dumb: what does FTTBA stand for?

[Ron]

From there to back again.  I would muster more, but I'm still dumbstruck by Newguy saying he doesn't know Frank Sinatra. 

WHAT IN THE HELL ARE YOU WAITING FOR?

[Julia]

The Beatles and it's not even close

[Lonely Summer]

Peak value: the Beatles. Nobody else came close from 1962-1970.
Career value: the Kinks. I don't know of another band that can rival the high quality of their work from 1964-1993.

[Ian]

1993 is pretty generous…Lola (1971) is the last classic Kinks LP imho. But some people do like those 70s operas-like schoolboys in disgrace…me not so much

[Lonely Summer]

1993 is pretty generous…Lola (1971) is the last classic Kinks LP imho. But some people do like those 70s operas-like schoolboys in disgrace…me not so much

So you choose to overlook Muswell Hillbillies, Misfits, State of Confusion, Word of Mouth, Phobia? Compare the Kinks run of albums from 1970-1993 to what the Beach Boys were doing.