Do you agree...?

Paul McCartney has said that he believes The Beatles were "better" than the Rolling Stones.

The two groups enjoyed a friendly rivalry in the '60s, seeming to take it in turns to supply smash hit after smash hit.

Redefining pop on a weekly basis, the bands spawned a perennial pub argument: who was better, the Beatles or The Stones?

To Paul McCartney, there's no question. Chatting to Howard Stern on SiriusXM, he claimed the Fab Four outstripped their rivals, as they utilised a broader array of influences.

“You know you’re going to persuade me to agree with that one,” he commented. “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.”

Continuing, Paul McCartney also claimed that the Rolling Stones would echo The Beatles' advancements.

He commented: “We started to notice that whatever we did, the Stones sort of did it shortly thereafter”.

“We went to America and we had huge success. Then the Stones went to America. We did Sgt. Pepper, the Stones did a psychedelic album. There’s a lot of that. We were great friends, still are kind of. We admire each other. … The Stones are a fantastic group. I go see them every time they’re out. They’re a great, great band.”

Join us on the ad-free creative social network Vero, as we get under the skin of global cultural happenings. Follow Clash Magazine as we skip merrily between clubs, concerts, interviews and photo shoots. Get backstage sneak peeks, exclusive content and access to Clash Live events and a true view into our world as the fun and games unfold.



Join us on VERO

Join the Clash mailing list for up to the minute music, fashion and film news.

Follow Clash: