Pop culture obsessives writing for the pop culture obsessed.
Pop culture obsessives writing for the pop culture obsessed.

Beatles or Stones? Paul McCartney weighs in

Illustration for article titled Beatles or Stones? Paul McCartney weighs in
Photo: Victor Blackman (Getty Images)

An icebreaker adopted by awkward dudes everywhere, the debate over whether the Beatles or the Rolling Stones were the better pioneering English rock band will rage on until a meteor turns us all into dust.

Advertisement

Well, the discourse took on some new texture on Tuesday, when, during an interview with Paul McCartney, Howard Stern asked the singer to weigh in with his take. McCartney, unfortunately, didn’t go rogue and say The Kinks blow them both out of the water—instead, he declared the Beatles triumphant, saying what separated the two bands was the Beatles’ abundance of diverse influences, whereas “their stuff is rooted in the blues.”

He does, however, acknowledge that it sometimes felt like the Stones were, at least from a career perspective, following in the Beatles’ footsteps. “We started to notice that whatever we did, the Stones sort of did it shortly thereafter,” he said. “So, like we went to America and we had huge success.Then the Stones went to America. And then we did Sgt. Pepper, the Stones did a psychedelic album [Their Satanic Majesties Request]. There was a lot of that.”

Advertisement

Still, he was quick to lavish praise upon the Stones, saying “we admire each other.” Perhaps he hasn’t heard what Keith Richards thinks of Sgt. Pepper’s?

Listen to the excerpt from the interview below.

Send Great Job Internet tips to gji@theonion.com

Randall Colburn is The A.V. Club's Internet Culture Editor. He lives in Chicago, occasionally writes plays, and was a talking head in Best Worst Movie, the documentary about Troll 2.

Share This Story

Get our newsletter