Mick Jagger responded to Paul McCartney’s recent claims that the Beatles were “better” than the Rolling Stones. McCartney’s initial comment came during his interview with Howard Stern on his radio show last April 14. Stern stated that the Beatles were high-caliber than the Stone, and McCartney agreed, suggesting that they had a more “varied sound.”
“[The Stones] are rooted in the blues. When they are writing stuff, it has to do with the blues. Whereas, we had a little more influences,” McCartney explained. “There’s a lot of differences, and I love the Stones, but I’m with you. The Beatles were better.”
“That’s so funny. He’s a sweetheart. There’s obviously no competition,” Jagger responded when asked about McCartney’s comment by Zane Lowe of Apple Music. “The big difference, though, is and sort of slightly seriously, 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, Madison Square Garden with a decent sound system. They broke up before that business started, the touring business for real.”
The frontman also added on how the dawn of stadium touring makes any contrasts between the Stones and the Fab Four.
“That business started in 1969, and the Beatles never experienced that,” he noted. “They did a great gig, and I was there, at Shea stadium. They did that stadium gig. But the Stones went on, we started doing stadium gigs in the ’70s 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.”
Both Jagger and McCartney recently participated in the One World: Together At Home benefit event, performing from their homes.