The Beatles vs Pink Floyd

[ZombieJimC]

Beatles

[WannabeMego]

I like them both for different reasons...but...

Back to the Original Question:

If you were stranded on a deserted isle with a record player...

I would have to choose The Beatles simply because of the Variety and Volume of Songs.

...and I'd probably kill myself eventually listening endlessly to 'Comfortably Numb'...alone...on a deserted island...by myself...

[TomStrong]

Great topic Mikey. I love them both but they are so different. I listen to them both on a daily basis but on an island (pun intended) I'd probable go with Floyd because I hope it would help me accept my fate of being marooned.
As an aside I intensley loved David Gilmour's solo album from a few years ago called "On An Island" . The live version called "remember That Night" is wonderful. Gilmour's plays both the new album and old favorites, it has my favorite version of coming back to life. David Crosby and Graham Nash sing backup beautifully and David Bowie helps on Comfortably Numb. If you guys haven't heard it it's well worth it.

[MysteryWho]

I think it depends on the era. Syd Barrett Pink Floyd is my favorite and beats everything, but a lot of later Floyd wouldn't stand up to Beatles at their peak on say, Revolver. I read a story once that Piper at the Gates of Dawn and Sgt. Pepper were being recorded at close to each other in separate studios. The rumor is that Pepper was influenced by the psychedelia of the Floyd recordings the Beatles heard. But it may not be so, who knows. Comparing the Beatles and Floyd might also be a simple case of "Apples and Oranges"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MMMN0VZmYw

[osker55]

You just a big beatles fan and not so much a floyd fan even tho you like them both and the opinion is too the person not everyone

[spacecaps]

Well, no, a lot of Floyds stuff is obscure, especially compared to the Beatles. Heck albums like Meddle, Clouds, Relics, Saucer Full of Secrets, Atom Heart Mother, even Animals are all all relatively obscure in Floyds own canon compared to The Wall, Darkside, and Wish You Were Here. A lot of Floyd fans are fringe fans whereas they know specifically only those last three albums. I'm sure there's a lot of "Pink Floyd" fans that are more familiar with the art work of Dark Side more than the content itself. I'm not saying Floyd is bad. I like both bands but can't see comparing them in the same category is all. Beatle albums for the most part are all iconic and even if you only know the poster but don't' know what's on say Abby Road, you can at least identify some of their work. I don't think a song like Be Careful with that Ax Eugene is an "all the time" listen and most "fans" of Floyd wouldn't even be able to tell you what the name of the song is let alone who the band was. A lot of Floyds stuff is....out there. As for later work, after Waters left, Floyds biggest album was what, The Division Bell? Their new album, which is mostly instrumental, kind of came and went with out much attention. Everything they've done has been mostly mediocre compared to the Wall or Darkside. The Beatles on the other hand have Let It Be, Abby Road, Hey Jude, Revolver, White Album, Rubber Soul and Sgt Pepper. Even their second tier albums like With The Beatles, Please Please Me, Yesterday & Today, '65, For Sale, Magical Mystery Tour, Hard Days Night and Help are all tough to beat. Plus it comes down to just having better songs on the whole just going by the question asked, which is "Which discography would you rather listen to?" and for the reasons stated I don't think Floyd even comes close to the Beatles.

[osker55]

There both pretty good i love them both but it be a hard one to choose i love them the same

[Mikey]

A lot of Floyds early work is obscure and far out and a lot of their later work (like their new album) is irrelevant. .

That's your opinion... but not everyone's

[megojim]

Floyd and not the barber . . .

[spacecaps]

What's the criteria here? I don't think these bands are in the same league as one another. I mean Floyd is a great "albums" band with very few individual songs that hold up on their own whereas pretty much everything the Beatles have done (albums, singles, early work vs later work) is classic. A lot of Floyds early work is obscure and far out and a lot of their later work (like their new album) is irrelevant. Floyd vs Bowie would be a tough choice, but they can't come close to the Beatles.

[drquest]

Same for me, Beatles

[Iron Mego]

Beatles. Pretty much the Beatles vs. anyone and the Beatles will win with me.

[Mikey]

If you were stranded on a deserted isle with a record player and only could choose either The Beatles or Pink Floyd discography - which would you pick ?

PS, the record player is run by solar+coconut power

I'd have to go with Pink

How about you ?