i'm going to have to disagree with that by a long-shot, LLC -- the stones are, in my opinion, the third greatest artists to ever grace pop music (the beatles being the first, dylan being the second). furthermore, i think the san francisco scene was filled with bloated, pompous, misguided freak-out music that was all surface & no substance. the grateful dead are one of my top three most hated groups of all time, & i think pink floyd's post-syd work is highly over-rated, marred by being unbearably pretentious & bombastic; janis joplin was an incredible vocalist who suffered from not always having a first rate set of material, & hendrix obviously needs no introductions (best guitarist to ever walk the earth, hands down). therefore, i think the stones' general praise ahead of such bands is most definitely justified: keith richards is the greatest riff-writer in the history of pop music - there will never be a guitarist who wrote as many instantly memorable, effortlessly classic, life-affirming pop hooks; mick jagger's arrogant, macho yet flamboyant swagger was the perfect foil for keef's eye-of-the-storm, almost paradoxical elegant on-stage persona. records like sticky fingers & exile on main street (both would be on my list of the 20 greatest albums ever recorded) are down & dirty, weary, druggy hazes filled with so much heart & soul, & songs that absolutely explode with energy, even below the utterly beaten surface. rock & roll has always been about heart & soul, & to me the stones absolutely exemplify that better than almost any other band.