Which is better, Apples or Oranges?
Some people prefer apples and others prefer oranges, but it’s hard to make an argument that one is objectively better. I love both bands and having to pick one as best would be akin to having a mother pick her favorite child.
Both bands are great and have stood the test of time. Fundamentally, The Beatles were a pop band, while The Rolling Stones were a rock and roll band. Both bands, like most other English bands in the 60’s and 70’s, drew from similar influences of American blues and early rock and roll; Keith Richards and John Lennon were both heavily influenced by the guitar playing of Chuck Berry. The Beatles, having come before, likely influenced The Rolling Stones (see Their Satanic Majesties Request).
The structure of both bands were a bit different. The Beatles had three excellent vocalists, guitar players and song writers and a great drummer, so roles were not very strict. In The Rolling Stones, most songs were done with Charlie on drums, Bill on bass, Keith and (Ronnie/Brian/Mick Taylor) playing guitar and Mick singing most songs and playing rhythm guitar on a few. The Beatles had three frontmen, while The Rolling Stones had one.
The Beatles have sold more albums than The Rolling Stones. Both bands had significant cultural influence, but The Beatles probably edge out The Rolling Stones in this respect as well.
If you really have to ask, please, do yourself a favor:
1. Listen to Abbey Road, The White Album, Sgt Pepper’s, Revolver, etc…
2. Then listen to Exile on Main St., Let It Bleed, Some Girls, Sticky Fingers, etc…
3. Form your opinion on which band you think is ‘best’.
source : quora