Beatles vs. Stones

@unreceivedogma  Yes, but I was thinking along the lines of when they started at a writing team and suggesting Lennon/McCartney were out of the gate a bit sooner.  Once Jagger/Richards started to hit their stride with Beggars Banquet, there was not looking back.  IMHO, their work from Beggars though Exile, equals the best of the Beatles.  Different style of music, more soft rock vs hard rock, but both collections have stood the test of time and that's what really speaks to the quality of the songs.  

@bigtwin

I see your point. Two things:

- the first Stones LP was mostly covers of American blues compositions. It wasn’t until the 2nd to 3rd LP that originals by Jagger/Richards, at the urging of Oldham, I believe, started to predominate. Because they released their first 6 LPs within 2 years, there’s really not that much of a meaningful start lag behind Lennon/McCartney.
- Beggars Banquet, Let it Bleed, Sticky Fingers, and Exile on Main Street are thought of as the Stones canonic high point, but I throw Aftermath - the first LP with all original compositions - in there as well.

Well, I have like twenty-plus Stones Lp's and two Beatles.  

@unreceivedogma 

The first Beatles US single, She Loves You, was released in August or September 1963, followed by I Want to Hold Your Hand. The first album release indeed was January 1964. And the first public appearance was on the Ed Sullivan Show, 2/9/1964.

@unreceivedogma 

I agree Aftermath may be an artistic breakthrough because they wrote all the songs. But I see it as just a transition to much better songs ahead. The earlier albums had many great performances that were cover songs, with some originals too.