Queen or The Beatles

[SS2]

The Beatles went from Love me Do to A Day In The Life in only a few years, their musical progression was incredibly fast. Queen's progression was less radical but they still pumped out decent sounds between '73 and '80.

I like them both for different reasons. My sister is a huge Freddie fan and still can't accept the fact that he batted for the other side.

 

[viscount17]

I was around when the Beatles came out - never really appealed so most defintely Queen of the two.
I don't think the Beatles influencing Oasis is any recommendation either. though there are without doubt some classic Beatles tracks but they produced their share of dross.

I didn't get the Stones back then either but now I'm getting some of their back catalogue.

 

[bobmac]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_15G_tIl38&feature=related

 

[Golfmmad]

Have you forgotten, Wings - Band On The Run etc?

Golfmmad.

Thankfully yes


What a pile of crap they were

How very dare you

Each to their own eh Rob?

Golfmmad.

 

[Golfmmad]

I was around when the Beatles came out - never really appealed so most defintely Queen of the two.
I don't think the Beatles influencing Oasis is any recommendation either. though there are without doubt some classic Beatles tracks but they produced their share of dross.

I didn't get the Stones back then either but now I'm getting some of their back catalogue.

Again, it's all about opinions isn't it?

I voted for the Beatles but that doesn't mean I don't like Queen - far from it. I think they were one of the best live bands, and the great Freddie Mercury, the best front man ever. As has been mentioned, they stole the show at Live Aid, and U2 were pretty good too.

Queen, Beatles - difficult to call, with both from completely different eras.

Golfmmad.

 

[colint]

What's wrong with you people ? Beatles or Queen ? It's like asking Morecambe and Wise or Ant and Dec.

The Beatles are the most influential band in the history of popular music. Queen were great live, but how many real stand out tracks did they have ? half a dozen ?

 

[Adrena1in]

I voted Queen because there were more popular when I was growing up in the 70s and 80s, so I know more of their stuff.

 

[madandra]

Colin, are you at the wind up regarding the number of great songs Quedn had? Look up their discography and you will see it was nearer 20. The Beatles were depressing.

 

[colint]

Just looked through their list of singles, most of them tosh seperated every now and then by a great song. Unless of course you're included such classics as Flash and cheerful numbers as "Who wants to live forever", now there's a party starter if I ever heard one.

Compare that to The Beatles, 20 US number 1's, 17 British. I'm not saying Queen were bad, just not in the same league. In golfing terms they're Payne Stewart, everyone likes them, known for flamboyance, a few great results, and with respect better thought of because of an early death. The Beatles are Jack Nicklaus, rewrote the standards and almost every golfer / songwriter of the last 30 years was influenced by him / them.

 

[USER1999]

Trouble is, I can't think of a single Beetles song that I like. Over the last 40 years, they have mainly influenced me to turn the radio off.

 

[madandra]

Trouble is, I can't think of a single Beetles song that I like. Over the last 40 years, they have mainly influenced me to turn the radio off.

Well done that man


The Beatles came at a time where choice was limited but Queen modernised it even more so. Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody (1975) is generally regarded as the first "music video"
I guess it is a generation thing and there is not a right and wrong answer but ... Queen rocked .

 

[vig]

Toughie this Andy.
I grew up listening to Beatles.
Love Queen.
I have far more Queen on the Ipod so got to go with them.

What's next Elvis or Cliff?

 

[madandra]

"tumbleweed"

 

[haplesshacker]

As much as I like some Queen tracks, it would have to be the Beatles of the two. Though if it was Stones or Beatles. Stones wins.

Lennon and McCartney wrote some great tunes, though some were only given the proper treatment by other artists. With a little help by Joe Cocker (Woodstock '69 version), Live and let die, Guns And Roses. To name two.

 

[MarkE]

The Beatles, no contest.

Never liked Queen and especially not Mercury. They had a few good tunes (early stuff) but better than The Beatles? No way.

 

[DMC]

Got to be Queen,no comparison IMO.

 

[viscount17]

before you can say X were better because they had more No 1's than Y, you also have to look at the competition. you also have to consider just who bought the records to create the No 1's
- I've never considered them to be particularly discerning which probably explains why 'My old man's a dustman', 'Wand'rin Star', Ernie were all No 1's - and there's far worse.

I always rated Steppenwolf but it was hardly known over here until Easy Rider and Born to be Wild. Listen to Snowblind Friend sometime.

 

[evahakool]

Have to say its the Beatles for me ,although, Queen were a great band. John Lennon especially will be remembered as a songwriting genius when you listen to Help for example the lyrics are amazing when you consider he was only 18 or 19 at time.

 

[Wildrover]

Is this a serious question? Queen were good but come on, it's The Beatles all the way, and I grew up in the Queen era. As for the Monkees, I can't get my breath. The Milli Vanilli of the 60's.

 

[viscount17]

Have to say its the Beatles for me ,although, Queen were a great band. John Lennon especially will be remembered as a songwriting genius when you listen to Help for example the lyrics are amazing when you consider he was only 18 or 19 at time.

not quite - 24 or 25