Beatles vs. Stones

@cd318 While watching Get Back. I noticed several times they had the Stones Beggars Banquet LP in the studio with them, among others.  

@bigtwin At a birthday party for Mick Jagger in ‘68, at a really popular joint in London called the Vesuvio Club, the place was going crazy listening to an advance pressing of the upcoming Stones LP, Beggar’s Banquet that Mick had brought along to play on the house system.
Paul McCartney arrived and handed an acetate of the upcoming Beatles single, Hey Jude/Revolution to the club’s owner, saying, “here’s our new one, see what you think of it.”
After everyone went crazy for the Beatles single, asking it to be played repeatedly, Mick, according to some attendees, seemed peeved. Paul does say that Mick was also quite impressed with “Hey Jude.”

@tylermunns  I have to believe there was a lot of mutual respect between all those guys, if not outright friendship.  McCartney/Lennon were, IMHO, a little further ahead of Jagger/Richards in their songwriting.  The first Beatles LP was +/- 3 years before the Stones.  

Yes, I think each group recognized the different talents of the other one. The Beatles wrote great songs. The Stones were more focused on the music, the sound, the beat. The Stones had the advantage of longevity. The Beatles were basically done by 1969. That's when the Stones' best music was just starting.

If you prefer pop, you choose the Beatles. If rock and roll is your thing, it's the Stones.

Similar quandary as Duke vs. the Count in my mind, Not really apples to apples, all had different musical aspirations/goals I believe.

Bottom line, it’s all good when played on hi hf! 😀