I know the topic is a source of endless scorn hereabouts but I thought these were interesting articles (including the two pieces arguing for each side)

[www.high50.com]

While working the general election 2 years ago when the candidates came in I asked them: Beatles or Stones, Oasis or Blur.

Beatles/Blur for middle class upwards, Stones and Oasis for working class people I thought and the candidates politics pretty much hit that.

Some pretty good quotes in the article. Thanks.

Quote
The GR
While working the general election 2 years ago when the candidates came in I asked them: Beatles or Stones, Oasis or Blur.

Beatles/Blur for middle class upwards, Stones and Oasis for working class people I thought and the candidates politics pretty much hit that.

Interesting - I would have thought it the other way round, certainly for Beatles/Stones.

I'm voting for the Stotles.

I rarely listen to the Beatles now, but that's most likely because I listened to them so intently in the past. When something new occurs, like the Anthology in '96, the Remasters in 2009, and the Harrison documentary last year, I'm very interested.

I listen to the Stones a lot, but I'm noticing that it's the newer releases since the Exile Reissue in 2009. I don't know if my listening would be declining if there were no new releases. I was already going to Flea Markets and hunting down boot CDS and DVDs to feed my hunger for new (or unheard/unseen) Stones material. Now that the vaults are opening, I can't wait.

There is no Beatles vs. Stones. There was only the Beatles of 1964 vs. the Dave Clark Five.