Stones and Beatles Jagger McCartney compare bands

Stones and Beatles Jagger McCartney compare bands

compare and contrast the beatles and the rolling stones
Music Legends Paul McCartney and Mick Jagger compare and contrast the Beatles and the Rolling Stones to determine which was the best group.As you can imagine,both think their band was the best,i guess it's left for the fans to decide.
Funnily,both men have valid points in their summation.
Sir Paul said the Stones copied everything they did,while Sir Mick suggested Beatles were only around for a minute,while they have survived for decades.
In a recent interview with DJ Howard Stern on his radio show, Paul McCartney said: 'I love
the Stones but The Beatles were better.
'Their stuff is rooted in the blues. Whereas we had a lot more influences.
'Keith (Richards) once said to me, "You were lucky man. You had four singers in your band. We got one".'

McCartney, 77, also suggested the Rolling Stones began to copy the Beatles: 'We started to notice that whatever we did the Stones sort of did it shortly thereafter.
'We went to America and had huge success, then the Stones went to America.'
'We did Sergeant Pepper and the Stones did a psychedelic album. There was a lot of that,' he added.
Now Mick Jagger (pictured above performing with his band at age 76) has responded to McCartney's claims saying there was 'obviously no competition' between the two groups.

While speaking at Zane Lowe’s Apple Music show on Friday, Mick, 76, claimed: 'He [Paul] is a sweetheart. I’m a politician.
'The big difference, though, is that The Rolling Stones is a big concert band in other decades and other areas when The Beatles never even did an arena tour.
'They broke up before the touring business started for real...They [The Beatles] did that [Shea] stadium gig [in 1965]. But the Stones went on.'
'We started stadium gigs in the 1970s and are still doing them now.

'That’s the real big difference between these two bands. One band is unbelievably luckily still playing in stadiums and then the other band doesn’t exist.'
So there you have it guys,who was the best?Personally,i think it is very very close,but Mc Cartney and his boys were just something special,all those classics in such a short space of time.They were better singers and songwriters too,but what Jagger and his boys went on to do is equally incredible.To still be going now is just ridiculous,and hey they had a few hits as well.I must say though that as a live band,the Stones were definitely better.
the beatles vs the rolling stones compare and contrast

paul mcCartney and mick jagger compare who was best between beatles and the stones

Previous Post Next Post