So... I have said this before a number of times, and I would just like to see what other opinions are out there on the matter.

I am not a Beatles fan. I have never understood the fascination with this band. Sure, they had a few good songs, and they were a talented group... but they weren't even the best group out of England at that time (60's/70's).

Part for part... Led Zeppelin blows them away. Better singer, better guitarist, bassist, drummer... and the same goes for The Rolling Stones. Just 2 bands that were much, MUCH (in my opinion) better than the Beatles.

What say you?

Elton John. (He didn’t even need a band, just a piano)

I voted for Zeppelin in the poll, but I'm also a big fan of Pink Floyd and Black Sabbath 🌫

I do like the Beatles, in particular the musical progression from the early albums to later. Out of the the three provided I'm taking LZ easily

I would have suggested the Who included, and now that Rman brought up Sabbath... not sure which I'd pick at this point

Sure, sure... I was just picking the 3 most popular out of England, especially at that particular time, but probably still to this day.

I also like Pink Floyd, Sabbath and the Who. But I think we can all agree that the ones listed are likely the 3 most popular.

Yeah, I'd like to argue, but sales figures prohibit.

So stick with Zep as an answer
Footnote Sabbath as still sending shivers down my spine
Footnote 2.0 for my favorite live album of all time

I had the poster from the Paranoid album on my Geometry book in tenth grade.

Also had the posters from the Wish You Were Here album on my

Biology and Western Civilization books the same year 🌫

But I gotta agree, to the world at large(and myself), Zeppelin was in a class of their own ...

The Rolling Stones

Save your arguments, facts or figures.

---

R.S. +1

I voted for the Stones since they maintained a semblance of greatness throughout the '60s and '70s. Like many groups in the early days of the English Invasion, they were more of a singles band but after the death of Brian Jones and bringing in Mick Taylor, they transformed into an AOR group. Jagger and Richards had matured into a great songwriting team so even when Taylor left and replaced by Ron Wood, the Stones still put out good to great music. I don't feel the other groups in the poll matched the two decades that the Stones amassed.

With that being said, the Beatles were THE best band of the '60s but they formally broke up in 1970 so other than "Let It Be", there was no new music from the group. Led Zeppelin came out in the late '60s so their production in that decade was scant. Only 1 album released in 1969 so you can't say they were great in that decade. Plus, and this is just my opinion, but LZ burned bright from '69 to '75 and then lost much of their luster after that. For me, their music after "Physical Graffiti" was just okay, at least when compared to their recordings prior.

The Stones also had a huge edge when it came to live performances too. Never saw The Beatles live and all their '60s concerts were limited to well under an hour and in front of thousands of screaming girls so I wouldn't say they were a great live performance band. However, when I saw the Stones in January 1973, they put on a franking GREAT show and were arguably at their musical peak. Taylor was spot on with his solos, Wyman and Watts so solid as the rhythm section and of course, Mick was prancin' and dancin'. Keith was relatively coherent and energetic too.

Contrast that show with seeing LZ in 1970. Plant was basically yelling so loud into the microphone that it was making my ears hurt and Page was looking and playing like he was drugged out. I believe he was in his Speed (...the drug...) days / daze so he was franking skinny as a stick. At times it looked like he was gonna fall forward because his Les Paul was too heavy for him. I did not come away thinking it was one of the all-time concerts I had ever gone to. Years later when "The Song Remains the Same" came out, it was apparent that Page could never really replicate his guitar parts on stage because he had overdubbed so much in the studio. The movie also showed how bloated their stage shows were and 3 hours were just too much to sit through. They could have easily have condensed it down to 2 hours and people would be yelling for more.

So that's my vote and take.

^ What he said.

Zeppelin hands down with the Stones in a not so distant second.The Beatles have never even been on my top 500 radar.Pink Floyd owns the #3 spot IMHO with Sabbath hot on their heels.


Oh yea.........The Who blows too

Growing up I was always a Beatles fan. When I was a little kid I wanted to grow up to be either Paul McCartney or Buzz Aldrin. I do like Led Zeplin but never understood the facination with the Rolling Stones. Never thought Jagger was that great a singer. Sorry.

Cream
Blind Faith
Traffic

Easy for me. The Beatles were fun. Zep sounds like five or six other bands. The Stones are an institution.

The talent, sound, longevity, sincerity, and dedication to their music. True to themselves and while being other-worldly, seem to be regular guys.

As an individual talent though, for me it would be McCartney.

I voted Zeppelin.

Well you do have one redeeming quality

You, sir.. are a frankin' dumbass. Can't spell Led Zeppelin correctly and can't understand the "fascination" with a band that has far and away exceeded the depth, talent and longevity of a band you claim to be a fan of?

Go frank ya-damn-self. The Beatles suck. They were wildly over-rated and this absolutley scientific poll proves it.

I'll forgive you. Only because of his music with wings. And because anyone who doesn't like "Band on the run" is just stupid.

Yes, he doesn't like you.