Great track. Saw them play this live in Bournemouth in 1964 when I was at school. Brian Jones was so cool with his almond shaped Vox pale green guitar, I clearly remember that. Bill plays a mean bass on this and it is SO much better than the Beatles version, they did wonders with it, turning it into a wild blues rock song when the Beatles made it sound like country and western!
funny.. mick jagger was, ehm, not that pretty, but then looks kinda cute... they -all- did back in the early sixties - was the same with the beatles! how come? funny.
beatles are amazing but I'd have to say the stones are better just because they have more albums of quality stuff. 2 bad the beatles couldn't keep it together as long as these guys did, some of their best albums came out after the beatles broke up!
Paul y John cedieron "I Wanna Be Your Man" a los Stones que la grabaron y publicaron en single (con "Stoned" en la cara B) antes que Beatles editasen el "With The Beatles" con "I Wanna..." como 4º corte de la cara B. Tecnicamente el original es de Stones y Beatles son los que versionean. Según yo lo veo tenemos dos grandes temas por el precio de uno. Es la misma canción pero la concepción musical es radicalmente distinta.
one must acknowledge Mick's supreme hauteur and giant mouth which got everyone's attention back in the day. As they used to say, Mick's mouth was so enormous - he could French Kiss Australia!! Indeed.
Beatles version is vastly inferior, in my opinion. This is a screaming r and b version, Stones style, wild and dangerous while the Beatles original is pure pop.
no mames las dos versiones son buenisimas pero me encanta mucho la de los stones aunsiendo bleatle maniaca de corazon me encanta brian jones komo toca su guitarra
@ecermusic: Of course the can ! That's not the point.The problem is that, as far as i know, they recorded it after the Stones, and were not able to compete with the Stones on that specific song. Their own ! For the rest, even if I am a Stones fan, I can easily admit that The Beatles were generally more talentuous and creative. But this is a mistake. That's all !
@aguycalledsteve well i don't know The Beatles version is better because listen to this one, listen carefully, forget about all the bass bulls***, listen carefully, now listen to The Beatles version. sound different? of course, this version sounds so empty, almost as if it's flawed, now The Beatles version has solid sound and it just sounds better
Still cannot understand why the Beatles recorded that song. A real mistake! They sound like a ridiculous 'ballroom' band, compared to the Stones... That's the difference between rock and pop. That's all...
@yooperwholigan13 hey i recomed you... the spider and the fly , who's driving your plane , i'm a king bee , happy , plundered my soul , you gotta move , let it bleed and the whole taylor legacy, feed your ears pal !!
@yooperwholigan13 work up with Time on my Side, Little Red Rooster, Tell Me, than move into Mothers little helper, Heart of Stone, Last Time, Route 66, all over Now, than move into Sympathy fo the Devil album.....
then Let it Bleed ......tons of stuff.... Satisfaction, As Tears go by, Paint it Black, Play with Fire,.....
The STONES doing PUNK in 1964!!!....(talk about being ahead of your time folks) AND THE STONES DO IT BETTER THAN DEM BEATLES!.....Its much more nasty & erotic ....
Great track. Saw them play this live in Bournemouth in 1964 when I was at school. Brian Jones was so cool with his almond shaped Vox pale green guitar, I clearly remember that. Bill plays a mean bass on this and it is SO much better than the Beatles version, they did wonders with it, turning it into a wild blues rock song when the Beatles made it sound like country and western!
RodRollingStone 2 months ago
love brians guitar :)
MeinKanalWirdFamous 4 months ago 5
funny.. mick jagger was, ehm, not that pretty, but then looks kinda cute... they -all- did back in the early sixties - was the same with the beatles! how come? funny.
JPGRism 4 months ago
Keith looks like George Harrison
blutocampbell 4 months ago
Brian Jones forever!
vnrhoades 4 months ago
that hollow-body bass sound!!
plfdjack 5 months ago
beatles are amazing but I'd have to say the stones are better just because they have more albums of quality stuff. 2 bad the beatles couldn't keep it together as long as these guys did, some of their best albums came out after the beatles broke up!
slimjimm8 6 months ago
The guitar solo of Brian Jones is incredible, great slide!!!.The Stones version is better, more energy, punchy!!!
donohuelegacy 7 months ago
:D this sounds so funny, i'm used to the beatle version.. but this one actually is very awesome as well xD
i guess i love both the versions then :D
Caspisan 7 months ago
i like both versions
themarioman360 7 months ago 2
Paul y John cedieron "I Wanna Be Your Man" a los Stones que la grabaron y publicaron en single (con "Stoned" en la cara B) antes que Beatles editasen el "With The Beatles" con "I Wanna..." como 4º corte de la cara B. Tecnicamente el original es de Stones y Beatles son los que versionean. Según yo lo veo tenemos dos grandes temas por el precio de uno. Es la misma canción pero la concepción musical es radicalmente distinta.
nowherecloser 7 months ago 2
1/11/63 is the date.. from Bill Wyman's book
maffia182 7 months ago
This is so much better than The Beatles version. just sayin.
PerseusDCW 8 months ago
one must acknowledge Mick's supreme hauteur and giant mouth which got everyone's attention back in the day. As they used to say, Mick's mouth was so enormous - he could French Kiss Australia!! Indeed.
MsJollycholly 8 months ago
ma fome esta version MEJOR LA VER DE LOS Beatles
TheNarny 8 months ago
The two bands respected each other and were good friends. There wasn't any competition between the two. Why can't people understand that?
Teknosun 8 months ago 9
Beatles version is vastly inferior, in my opinion. This is a screaming r and b version, Stones style, wild and dangerous while the Beatles original is pure pop.
RodRollingStone 8 months ago
@RodRollingStone ''wild and dangerous''...you're an ignorant.
msanm5 8 months ago
@msanm5 Yes, it was (quote) "wild and dangerous" in the context of the times. So Rod is right and you are wrong. Simple.
sodacypher 8 months ago
Funny how Keith behaves like a Beatle towards the end of the song.
jmbenard 9 months ago
no mames las dos versiones son buenisimas pero me encanta mucho la de los stones aunsiendo bleatle maniaca de corazon me encanta brian jones komo toca su guitarra
tampikosita 9 months ago 4
The Stones version is more rawer and carries that bit of danger.
ebf1957 9 months ago 3
People don't seem to realise that there can be more than one good band in the entire history of the world.
alienspratley 9 months ago 5
imagine what would happen if beatles lasted 40 years ???? OMG, treasure that would never been discovered :)))..... great stones, great beatles
0652411 9 months ago
@ecermusic: Of course the can ! That's not the point.The problem is that, as far as i know, they recorded it after the Stones, and were not able to compete with the Stones on that specific song. Their own ! For the rest, even if I am a Stones fan, I can easily admit that The Beatles were generally more talentuous and creative. But this is a mistake. That's all !
aguycalledsteve 10 months ago
@aguycalledsteve well i don't know The Beatles version is better because listen to this one, listen carefully, forget about all the bass bulls***, listen carefully, now listen to The Beatles version. sound different? of course, this version sounds so empty, almost as if it's flawed, now The Beatles version has solid sound and it just sounds better
savage642 9 months ago
@aguycalledsteve ya but it was written by lennon and mcartny
700utuber 9 months ago
@700utuber but the
stones paly it much better it´s more rock n drug not like fuckin fag pop beatle
burroughsification 8 months ago
how much higher could a bass go?
zeppelinrising 10 months ago
stones took the john and pauls song and rockafied it. beatles did it later and made it sound girly
dudilsta 10 months ago
The Beatles are better
olekos123 10 months ago
Best ever band!!! The Rolling Stones!! Love Love Love my rolling stones!!
imaStonesFan 11 months ago 5
@imaStonesFan The Beatles version
savage642 9 months ago
@imaStonesFan Beatles all the way
savage642 9 months ago
lol i wanna be your man lolololol
ToZZker 11 months ago
McCartney y Lennon componen.
Stones publican la canción original.
Beatles versionean a los Stones. I'm Beatles fan.
nowherecloser 11 months ago
I love BOTH versions. So there :P
ssparrow331 11 months ago
Brill! Vinyl LPs are consigned to the loft but you can guess my age from my response? I never was a Beatles fan.
020djm 11 months ago
Damn this song is short.
DJDansound 11 months ago
esta bueno
flooormm 11 months ago
Excellent.
Butterfly1Blue 1 year ago
The Beatles version is too jumpy. Love them both but love this version better
naracol 1 year ago
Still cannot understand why the Beatles recorded that song. A real mistake! They sound like a ridiculous 'ballroom' band, compared to the Stones... That's the difference between rock and pop. That's all...
aguycalledsteve 1 year ago
@aguycalledsteve Well they actually wrote it. They can perform their own song at their discretion.
ecermusic 1 year ago 4
I like this guitar solo for how RAW it sounds! Like he was drunk when he played it! The sound Pete Townshend would imitate later
notfragile33 1 year ago
Perfect song...when I'm tired and I listen a rolling stones song I feel full of energy!
cause rock ( I love rock) is true music...not this pop what the 95% of teens listen...thank god I am in the other 5% :DDDD
Thanks for uploading! Awesome song!
GreekPa1nk1ller 1 year ago
The rollings stones are stealers!!
Shame on Mike Jagger!
Beatlesandchopinlove 1 year ago
@Beatlesandchopinlove Lennon/McCartney gave this song to the stones you idiot. Why are there so many Door Knobs in the world???
demonsbutterfly 11 months ago 4
The rollings stone have stolen this music to the Beatles.
Shame on Mike Jagger
Beatlesandchopinlove 1 year ago
this version is very rock! but i like more the beatles' version
Artulost 1 year ago 4
This is a really great cover. I love The Rolling Stones just as much as The Beatles.
pbpaula86 1 year ago 5
Beatles version is better, though it's a crapy song none the less, Rolling Stones are a much better in my opinion.
joezetank 1 year ago
like this better than the beatles one.
andy86i 1 year ago 8
Why can't we just agree that both the Beatles and the Rolling Stones are great bands?
bsh6478 1 year ago 63
new stones fan everybody! any suggestions of videos? preferably early stuff
yooperwholigan13 1 year ago
@yooperwholigan13 hey i recomed you... the spider and the fly , who's driving your plane , i'm a king bee , happy , plundered my soul , you gotta move , let it bleed and the whole taylor legacy, feed your ears pal !!
badboyboogie77 1 year ago 4
@yooperwholigan13. All of them, man. All of them....
TheRoute19 1 year ago
@yooperwholigan13 work up with Time on my Side, Little Red Rooster, Tell Me, than move into Mothers little helper, Heart of Stone, Last Time, Route 66, all over Now, than move into Sympathy fo the Devil album.....
then Let it Bleed ......tons of stuff.... Satisfaction, As Tears go by, Paint it Black, Play with Fire,.....
crpdst2003 1 year ago
The STONES doing PUNK in 1964!!!....(talk about being ahead of your time folks) AND THE STONES DO IT BETTER THAN DEM BEATLES!.....Its much more nasty & erotic ....
FOSEEBOY 1 year ago 5
@FOSEEBOY Hahahahahahaha!! I disagree with you, The Beatle are way better even if the Stones out lasted them, Beatles Music LIVES!!!
1979cl1 1 year ago
@FOSEEBOY If this is punk Revolution 9 is heavy metal
drrobertoboogie97 1 year ago
I Love This video
Thank you JulietteMorrison6
laurentlaurent65 1 year ago 6
beatles do so much better!!!!! i dont realy like the stones either
MrCrunchypuff 1 year ago
la neta esta chida pro de los beatles es mucho mejor pro a mi me gusta mucho los
rolling stones pro ay qe saber perder
EDVHcheche 1 year ago
As much of a Beatles fan I am, I absolutely love this version. I love the bass line!!
Plunkett1916 1 year ago 88
@Plunkett1916 What I love about it are Brian Jones' slide guitar chords.
SugarInHisBlood 11 months ago 3
@Plunkett1916 Haha! You took the words right out of my mouth!
RingoGeorgeJohnPaul2 10 months ago
Bout time somebody put the stones version of this amazing song up!
BakerBro14 1 year ago 3
Both Versions are good
Metalfanseries 1 year ago
Like BOTH versions
kenfig 1 year ago
beatels do it better!
MrBeastlyDom 1 year ago
beatles version is way better. just sayin.
kookie43 1 year ago 50
@kookie43 that is your opinion, Stones version is more raw and has better bass
kpax45 1 year ago
@kookie43 It depends on the style you like... beatles have...relaxing music ... rolling stones are more flame me up :P
I can't find the right words right now to tell you what I mean..."hoe you understand" what I mean hahah
GreekPa1nk1ller 1 year ago
@kookie43 how can you say that when brian jones, bill wyman and keith richards totally rock this?
jsXanatos 1 year ago
@kookie43 No Stones much better
Calaitafan 11 months ago
@kookie43 yeah
franguaful 11 months ago
@kookie43 its really really not!
clashboy1977 10 months ago
@kookie43 How? It's fucking shit compared to this?
PrimalStones 6 months ago
love it. great footage!
WhoTheRollingBeatles 1 year ago 5