The 76- year-old rocker made the comment as he reacted to Sir Paul McCartney’s idea that atrioventricular bundle was better than the Stones.
Whilst the ‘Live and Let Pass away’ vocalist confessed he a big fan of the Rolling Stones – whose present line-up consists of Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Charlie Watts and Ronnie Wood, he still thinks his own group were better.
He stated: “The Stones are a fantastic group, I go and see them every time they come out because they’re a great band and Mick can really do it, the singing and the moves and everything, Keith, Ronnie, and Charlie, they’re great, I love them. Their stuff is rooted in the blues, when they’re writing stuff it’s to do with the blues, whereas we had a little more influences. Keith once said, ‘You’re lucky man you have four singers in your band, we’ve got one’. I love the Stones but I’m with you, the Beatles were better.”
And Mick has actually now reacted, insisting his group are a “big concert band” and are still “lucky” to be carrying out arena shows – unlike The Beatles, who have actually given that dissolved.
Talking To Zane Lowe for his Apple Music show, he added: “There’s undoubtedly nocompetition He [Paul] is a sweetie. I’m a political leader. The big distinction, however, is that The Rolling Stones is a big show band in other locations and other years when The Beatles never ever even did an arena trip. They separated prior to the touring business began genuine. The Beatles did that [Shea] arena gig in 1965.
” However the Stones went on. We began arena gigs in the 1970 s and are still doing them now. That’s the real big distinction in between these 2 bands. One band is incredibly fortunately still playing in arenas and after that the other band does not exist.”