Can't we all just get along? Isn't it enough we all live in a world where the music of the Beatles and Stones music exists? Well, the world doesn't like good news as much as legends beefing so here we are. Fresh from revealing revelations about the Beatles split, Paul McCartney has now set the cat amongst the pigeons again in the Beatles Vs Rolling Stones debate.
“I’m not sure I should say it, but they’re a blues cover band, that’s sort of what the Stones are,” he has told The New Yorker in a new interview for a wide-ranging feature. “I think our net was cast a bit wider than theirs.”
The first part sounds like a broadside, even if the second part is a fair point. But McCartney is a Stones fan and enjoys going to see them live, despite previously suggesting the Beatles were the better band.
“You know you’re going to persuade me to agree with that one,” McCartney said when Stern began stirring the Beatles Vs Stones pot in a 2020 interview. “They are rooted in the blues. When they are writing stuff, it has to do with the blues. We had a little more influences. … There’s a lot of differences, and I love the Stones, but I’m with you. The Beatles were better."
So, two of the greatest bands, one still touring and both very different. Settled?
"They said 'You’re not leaving!' I said, 'I am leaving, I’ve left,' and they wouldn’t believe me": Bill Wyman talks cash, chaos and quitting in new interview
“You have ideas that you think wouldn't suit the band - like this song that sounded like U2!”: How a happy accident led to one of Iron Maiden's greatest songs
