Beatles vs. Stones

This is a bit like comparing the Bee Gee's and Barbara Streisand.  

The Beatles and the Stones were very different bands.

To me the Rolling Stones are much more of a Rock n Roll band.

@waytoomuchstuff - I was thinking the same thing, but there were some parallels in career trajectory, especially in their earlier days. Like the Beatles put out 'Sgt Pepper' and the Stones replied with 'Their Satanic Majesty's Request'. And while I did really like about half the songs on 'Satanic Majesty's, the other half, uh, not so much, so Sarge beats out the Majesty for me. 

@larsman 😀

Actually, "Out of Our Heads" is the first Rolling Stones album to actually feature the Rolling Stones.  Prior to that all music attributed to the band was created as a side project by Paul McCartney who played all the instruments, including drums and sang all the vocals.  When Paul got tired of the side gig and wanted to devote all his energy toward the Beatles the record label hired a bunch of non-musicians who looked like rock stars to basically be the Rolling Stones.  Charlie Watts unique drum style is the result of him trying to sound like McCartney, a non-drummer, playing the drums.  The funny thing is that over time the Rolling Stones actually became a pretty good band.

Some people also think it was really McCartney on the early Led Zeppelin.  That sound far fetched to me, but it's possible.