Evening Standard, Hulton Archive LONDON (AP) - Miles and Jimi. Jimi and Miles.…
Paul McCartney Says Rolling Stones Jealous of Beatles' Singing Talent
- Posted on May 24th 2011 8:30AM by Chris Mugan
Keystone Features, Getty Images/Alexandro Auler, Getty Images
In an interview published on Tuesday, May 24, Sir Paul said the Stones' singer called the Beatles the "four-headed monster." He also reckons much of their success was due to good timing.
Quoted in the Radio Times (via the Daily Telegraph), he says, "I talked to Keith Richards recently... well, a couple of years ago, and his take on it was, 'Man, you were lucky, you guys, you had four lead singers,' whereas the Rolling Stones only had one."
He added, "So [for the Beatles] it wasn't just the frontman and the back-up band. We were an entity. Mick used to call us the four-headed monster. We would show up at places all dressed the same." Sir Paul also credits the Beatles' success to timing -- especially because they avoided one or two years of national service.
"A couple of years earlier, we would have been in the Army, and it's very doubtful that the Beatles would have formed," he says. "We would have been at Aldershot, or wherever, in various camps, and might not have even met."
Having seen UK artists fail to break the US, the Fab Four planned their conquest, delaying their arrival until they had a No. 1 there with 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand.'
"We saw a lot of British acts go to America, and come back not having had the great success we thought they would have," he explains, citing Cliff Richard as an example. "We were a bit surprised by that. But I remember my reaction: OK we have got to think about this."
- Filed under: News
All the Paul McCartney info you want to know
Paul McCartney, Anti-Gun Violence:…
SpinnerChris Jackson, Getty Images NEW YORK (AP) - Paul McCartney is adding his voice…
Hugh McCracken Passes Away: Guitarist…
NoisecreepElliott Randall, Facebook Hugh McCracken, a musician, producer, and arranger,…
The Beatles Song Charts: Every Track…
SpinnerPop Chart Lab We here at Spinner enjoy doing some deep research on projects,…
Add a Comment
Ringo could sing? OK........(subliminal message: Paul needs help)...... I always liked the way the Beatles evolved and grew as a band, but Paul has always had a big problem: John was the man in that band, and he proved it even after they broke up, heck, even after he was killed 30 years ago. If this is how Paul is trying to stay relevant, then he's even more pathetic than I thought. If I want sap, I'll listen to the Beatles. If I want rock and blues, give me Sir Mick and the Lads!!
June 19 2011 at 8:31 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyI don't think Paul was issueing a challenge, just stating a fact Mick would of liked some help in the vocal department. Let's not forget the Beatles encouraged Mick and Keith to write. Remember when they started they were covering the Lennon-McCartney penned " I wanna be Your Man".nt here
May 25 2011 at 2:22 AM Report abuse Permalink +1 rate up rate down Replywell well well sounds like little fag paul has a jealous problem.
May 24 2011 at 9:16 PM Report abuse Permalink -2 rate up rate down ReplyOf coarse the stones are better. Maybe Paul is jealous of stones,it seems that way to me.
May 24 2011 at 9:13 PM Report abuse Permalink -2 rate up rate down ReplyThe Stones Jealous of The POP Band lmao! how retarded can Paul be?
The stones r the best and have always been the best.
They sound horrible when they sing and its the other way around! It was the Beatles Jealous of the stones. and looks like they still are!!!
May 24 2011 at 9:00 PM Report abuse Permalink -2 rate up rate down ReplyWHAT A ******* JOKE??? LMAO!
Singing talent??????????????????????????????????????????
Yes Vicki,i agree rofl he must be sick in tha head 2 think those beatles could actually sing. I cant stop laughing!
May 24 2011 at 9:18 PM Report abuse Permalink -3 rate up rate down Reply
apollo c vermouth
Bob said...."The Stones are a Rock Band. The Beatles were a Pop Band."
Pop band? uhhuh. sure.
This is what fans of the Stones or Zeppelin or fans of others say so that they can lay claim that their guys were the greatest Rock&Rollers or greatest of some 'heavy dude' niche.
But just turning your amps to 11, ala Spinal Tap, doesn't really boost street cred.
Elvis was the 'King of' what? Chuck Berry played what? Buddy Holly? Little Richard?
You can't revise history or avoid the truth.
Bob boosts...."The Stones had 1-singer/1-front man and stuck with that formula."
Yeah, right like most others....'stuck' in a formula.
The Beatles, of course, weren't stuck in a formula.
It's always going to be, there's The Beatles...and then there is everyone else
I grew up with The Beatles! I loved each one as if they were my brothers or my first love!!! But needless to say they set the music & any band that followed would be 2nd to the Fabulous Four!
Sorry but the Rolling Stones would never fill the shoes of the Beatles!!!
The Beatles were a Rock n Roll band. Watch Live in Washington D.C for proof. The Stones were a Blues band. The Beatles continue to be discovered and appreciated by each new generation as a brand new band for the past 5 decades. Envy that.
May 24 2011 at 2:58 PM Report abuse Permalink +2 rate up rate down Reply
12 Comments