View from the Cheap Seats is kind of an extension of the newsroom. Whenever our three regular reporters, Calvin Daniels, Thom Barker and Randy Brenzen are in the building together, it is frequently a site of heated debate. This week: Which band was more influential, The Beatles or the Rolling Stones?
Frivolous fun
If ever there was a classic, frivolous debate, it is whether it is the Beatles or the Rolling Stones that had a bigger impact on music.
One must not forget, however, that music does not exist in a vacuum. I remember talking to Canadian blues man Drew Nelson about this very thing. I mentioned I had heard up and comer Tony D had stolen one of Drew’s riffs.
“No big deal,” he said. “I ripped it off from Stevie Ray.”
My point is that neither the Beatles nor the Stones were doing anything particularly original when they broke on the scene. Those of us of a certain vintage, ahem, didn’t really know where they were coming from, though, so it seemed like out of nowhere these great innovators had emerged. Little did we know they were riffing off Buddy Holly, Elvis and the other great 50s rock ‘n rollers.
Nevertheless, by the Beatles’ sheer popularity and later, experimentation, and by the Stones’ unequalled longevity and adaptability to shifting styles, they both remain monsters of the music industry.
For me, it’s a little like apples and oranges. Sometimes I feel like one and sometimes the other. The Stones were a little edgier and darker. The Beatles were a little more refined and poppy.
Ultimately, I have to give a slight edge to the Beatles. Their sound truly was more innovative and somehow the Stones always seemed to be playing catch up. The Beatles versus The Rolling Stones.
— Thom Barker
A battle of the ages
It would be a promoter’s dream having two of the most iconic bands in rock ’n roll history going head-to-head.
In terms of their position in the pantheon of the musical style I have to say they would top out as one and two in history in terms of bands.
The Beatles were an English band formed in Liverpool in 1960, and really created the buzz which ensured rock’s place in music, and its future.
With members John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Ringo Starr, the band created a catalogue of music which remains known and loved as we celebrate what would be their 55th anniversary.
The Beatles did not have the longevity in terms of a quartet, but they didn’t need it to be remembered.
Albums such as Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, Magical Mystery Tour, Yellow Submarine, Abbey Road and Hey Jude are still respected and loved.
The Rolling Stones tumbled out of Britain a couple of years behind The Beatles and are poster boys for longevity, as they remain active today. That alone provides the band with a boatload of creditability.
Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Ronnie Wood, Charlie Watts just refuse to stop rocking and in Jagger the band has arguably the most recognizable front man in rock history.
Beggars’ Banquet (1968) which – along with follow-ups, Let It Bleed (1969), Sticky Fingers (1971) and Exile on Main St. (1972) were The Rolling Stones at their best, an era where they were actually duking it out with The Beatles.
So which one is best?
Part of me wants to take the coward’s way out and call it a draw, but since I detest when awards are split to appease feelings and to spread the glory, I won’t go that route.
I respect the longevity of Jagger and crew.
But for me The Beatles caught my attention as I approached my teen years, probably their appearance on The Ed Sullivan Show, which while in 1964, I recall seeing when I was probably 12 in some re-run and going Wow!
So by the slimmest of margins, I pick Ringo and company.
— Calvin Daniels
A third contender
Which band is better: The Beatles? The Rolling Stones?
That really is a tough one, especially seeing as neither are at the top of my respective list.
Sure, they’re both extremely successful.
And yes, they’ve both reinvented music and continue to be relevant today despite coming together back in the early 1960’s in England (The Beatles hail from Liverpool while The Rolling Stones represent London).
However, I feel the need to add a third band to the list.
And that band is… Queen.
In my mind, Queen, yet another British band hailing from London, is far and away the Bret Hart of the music world… That is, the best there is, the best there was and the best there ever will be.
While they were no doubt inspired by both The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, and without the latter two the former one would probably not exist in the same way that it does, the fact remains that, while the Beatles and Rolling Stones reinvented music, it was Freddie Mercury and Queen that perfected it.
From Bohemian Rhapsody and We Are the Champions to Another One Bites the Dust and Fat Bottomed Girls, Queen has captured the hearts and souls of music lovers around the world.
Sure, The Beatles and The Rolling Stones have done the same.
But the fact remains that Freddie Mercury and Queen remain the King of the music world.
— Randy Brenzen
