I think one of the only songs that Paul was able to accomplish on that same level was Let It Be. For me, that is Paul’s greatest song…not Yesterday.

Also, George Harrison was a greatly underrated musician. Something and While my Guitar Gently Weeps are beautiul, classic, and versitile songs.

There are MILLIONS of people who are better at said instruments then Paul ever was.

This alone does not make them better than Paul, so why would it make Paul “better then Lennon?”

Glad you listened carefully to the Beatles, and got what they were saying.

Enough said…

Many others mention John’s solo work.

But very, very few mention Paul’s, and when they do, it’s for his bass playing, not his sappy, cold, and banal lyrics.

It does not take Hendrix, Bonham, or Mozart to play better electric, drums or piano than Paul.

I also concede that there are more than two good songs on Band, actually overall it’s pretty solid.

I just think side two is lame, IMO.

So no, I don’t think Mind Games is better than Band, never said it was.

I just think it’s somewhat overrated based on one great song and a couple solid songs.

“Band on the Run is okay, but to me, there are two good songs on it and the rest is filler.”

I mean, come on, it gets to a point where it’s just comical. Are you proposing Mind Games is better than Band on the Run?

Look how much effort you have put into calling me a lunatic and accusing me of masterbating.

At leasts my posts are about John and Paul, the subjects of this discussion.

“Gabe McC, you are worse than a fool–hill or no hill. Much worse– you are nothing more than a shill for John…What a complete phony!”

“GabeMc, now you’re in 2 year old territory [probably always were]: Waah waah! Did someone take your blanky away?!”

“…no one wants to play your ridiculous list crap with you. It’s just pathetic, if not downright psycho.”

“I said you were a phony, a fool and a shill for John.”

“Anyway, do you think that “guy’s” mommy ever lets him out of the basement for fresh air?”

“he HAS to try to prove (more BULLY) something or someone to make up for inadequacies elsewhere (besides the clear mental deficiency).”

“If the truth were known, despite Paul’s superior musicianship, I would probably have said I’d prefer John’s songs most of the time since many have more “bite” lyrically, but after reading this nut-case’s posts, I’m seriously reconsidering.”

“One thing’s for sure, you clearly can play with yourself better than Paul since that’s what you’re doing in full view of anyone who cares to read.”

“It’s been fun Ammar–let’s hope GabeMcMusicGod gets the mental help he so desperately needs.”

“Normal if you are a lunatic! And he just illustrated my earlier observation that in effect he is playing with himself on this site, and judging from the frequency and rigidity of his comments, he is using viagara to do so.”

“Hey Ammar–You should be more respectful to that lunatic…”

“The one thing beyond argument is that the crazed-out momma’s boy basement confined lunatic on this site–no names please–is one motherf’ing fool. From now on I just suggest we agree with anything he posts and hope he jerks off elsewhere…”

“All hail the lunatic GodMc! I wonder how he posts so much when he’s wearing his strait jacket. He really is quite amusing–for a total nut-case. I hope his basement is rubber-lined. His mommy should check his meds though.”

“I clearly stated more than one time here that I prefer John’s music to Paul’s more often than not, GabeMcGod might well ask why the only poster on this site that I ridicule is the most rabid John fan (John can do no ill; John is god; John’s excrement should have bronzed) there; his perverse “love” [and sicko need to tear down Paul while claiming he likes him] for John know no limits–even logic; he acts as if he’s John’s posthumous lover.”

Ammar claimed that because Paul sold more records then John, that was proof of Paul’s superiority, which I have disproven here at length.

Album sales and hits do not determine greatness all by themselves, if they do, then you would have to admit to some pretty lame people being better than John and Paul.

Here is a list of 10 acts who have sold more records in America than John Lennon and Paul McCartney COMBINED:

Linda Rondstadt 30 million
Dixie Chicks 30.5 million
Boston 31 million
Dave Matthews 32 million
Brittney Spears 32 million
John Denver 32.5 million
R Kelly 33 milloin
James Taylor 33 million
Bon Jovi 34.5 million
Def Leppard 35 million

Americans are the biggest Beatles fans in the world, yet these 10 acts have sold more records than John and Paul’s COMBINED solo works.

He said McCartney was “oblivious to anyone else’s feelings in the studio…”

BTW, for McCartney, the song’s run atop the chart was the longest of any of his post-Beatles works, (7 weeks) and second longest career-wise (behind “Hey Jude” which topped the American charts for 9 weeks).

Despite being Paul’s 2nd largest hit song EVER, and his biggest solo hit ever, it was only the 4th biggest hit that year, 1982.

So three people that year beat Paul’s best solo song ever.

Raven, I hope you are as young as you seem, so that you might someday learn to comunicate without child-like insults.

Ask your parents if they think it’s smart to call random strangers online lunatics.

Limp Bizkit 16.5 million
New Kids on the Block 16.5 million
Bryan Adams 17 million
Amy Grant 17 million
The Monkeys 17.5 million
Jewel 18.5 million
Kiss 19 million
Toni Braxton 19.5 million
Meatloaf 21 million
Jackson Browne 18.5 million

Pretty lame list of people.

So, tell me again how Paul is “better” then John because he sold more albums.

John Lennon 14 million albums sold after 5 years of recording.

Paul McCartney 15.5 million albums sold after 40 years of recording.

Cat Stevens: 15.5 million albums sold in the US.

Paul McCartney 15.5 million.

I guess Cat is as good as Paul McCartney, or is it the other way around?

So if you use album sales then I guess Jimi was a better songwriter than John and Paul were solo, yet he never had a hit song.

Am I getting through on the futility of using #1 hits and/or album sales to “prove” someone was “better”?

According to RIAA the Backstreet Boys have sold about as many albums in the US as Bob Dylan.

Dylan has made music for 48 years, the Backstreet Boys only 14.

Are the Backstreet Boys “better than” Dylan?

Michael Bolton has sold more albums in the US than Frank Sinatra.

Starting Over, Imagine, and Woman were all #1 hits for John in America after his murder.

Paul’s only two #1 hits in America since John was killed were Ebony and Ivory and Say Say Say, both duets with other popular artists.

So Paul has not had one single #1 song in America that he sang by himself since 1980.

Paul 15.5 million albums sold in the US.

Kenny G 48 million.

Celine Deon 50 million.

Phil Colins 33.5 million.

“…the numbers tell the story.”

John Lennon 14 million

Paul McCartney 15.5 million

George Harrison 10.5 million

John has done pretty well for being dead for the past 30 years.

Paul has sold only about 10% more albums with 4 times as many years to make music.

Paul had 30 more years to make music.

John had 10 years to make music, of which he took 5 off!

So the music John made within 5 years of the Beatles breaking up has nearly outsold Paul’s 40 year catalog.

Even Paul’s unrelenting commercial pop sensibilities could barely overcome the much less commercial music of Lennon.

This is straight from the RIAA site, anyone can go research it themselves.

Do “…the numbers tell the story.”

Jimi Hendrix only sold 22.5 million RIAA certified albums in the US.

So if the “…the numbers tell the story” we would have to place Jimi Hendrix below Jimmy Buffett (23 million), Motley Crue (23.5 million) Luther Vandross (25 million) and Enya (26.5 million).

So do “…the numbers tell the story?”

Pink Floyd 74.5 million.

The Rolling Stones 66 million.

“…the numbers tell the story.”

365 Top-Selling Songs of the 20th Century, it would have John and Paul about tied with two songs each on the list.

The Beatles have 3 songs on the list Stones 1 (Satisfaction), Floyd 1 (Another Brick in The Wall).

Interestingly, John has one Beatles song and one solo song on the list, while both of Paul’s best sellers were Beatles songs, one of which was a collaboraation with John (Sgt. Pepper) the other a true McCartney original, (Yesterday).

John’s songs were I Want to Hold Your Hand and Imagine.

So according to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and the National Endowment for the Arts, Paul’s last top seller was in 1967 at the peak of the Beatles, John’s was in 1971 after they broke-up.

You misunderstood me, I said Mull is co-credited to Denny Laine, never did I infer Denny Laine was comparable in any way to John Lennon. I never said Denny was even good, let alone better then John.

Made a fool of myself? Again?

Technically, more people in Britain bought Bohemian Rhapsody, Do They Know It’s Christmas, and Candle in the Wind 1997, so this is only a technical title bestowed on Mull and it is not actually the overall best seller not even in the UK let alone the world.

Three songs have sold more copies in the UK, but their generous writers gave the proceeds to charity rather then stock piling as much money as possible for themselves like Paul did ($1.2 billion).

Bing Crosby’s White Christmas (1942) has sold an estimated 30,000,000 copies worldwide.

Bing’s Silent Night (1935) has also sold 30,000,000 copies worldwide.

Bill Haley sold 25 million copies of Rock around the Clock (1954).

It’s Now or Never by Elvis Presley (1960) has also sold 25 million copies.

Baccarra released Yes Sir, I can Boogie the same year as Mull (1977), which went on to sell 18 million copies worldwide.

In 1978 The Village People released Y.M.C.A., a single that sold 12 million copies.

In 1976 ABBA struck gold with Fernando, which woud sell 10 million copies.

What was that about Mull of Kintyre being a “World Record” Ammar?

and

“…the numbers tell the story.”

If the numbers tell the story then certainly the Beatles did a little more than squat.

“I am not a big fan of the Stones, but I’d pick them over the beatles every time.”

“As to who was the better, Lennon or McCartney, the numbers tell the story.”

But do the numbers tell the story about The Beatles versus Floyd and/or the Stones?

Then listen to Their Satanic Majesties Request by the Stones, their attempt to out-do Pepper, nice try.

Both Mick Jagger and Roger Waters have cited John Lennon as a primary influence, and Roger Waters said his favorite album of all time was Plastic Ono Band.

Listen to Walls and Bridges for hints of things to come for Floyd.

Like the jazzy sax outro on Going Down ala Shine On, and the repeated refeneces to isolation, alienation, and walls, which sounds like another Floyd album of great acclaim.

John influenced Roger big time.

And Paul only had a good career untill 1983, since he has not had a #1 since in America.

Or to put it another way, Paul has only made 9 #1 songs in the US in over 40 years since 1970 and only 2 #1s since John was killed.

Both of Paul’s #1 songs since John died were duets with then very popular musicians.

So if you exclude duets with mega-stars, Paul has not had one single #1 hit in the US since John died.

Like I said, sales cannot determine if Paul was better than John because Paul’s songs were always more commercial and pop oriented, and lended themselves better to selling more copies than John’s heart wrenching, soul searching philosophical musical therapy.

It is your personal opinion, I wont discuss who was better Beatles or Stones cause it is not the right place, according to you numbers tell the story , I know Rolling Stones were one of the big fans and followers of the Beatles.but I will leave this now.

As for the blog subject there should be some monitoring and limits for attacking Legends like Paul, even if you are not a fan of the Beatles.
I thought this blog was made for a real MUSICAL discussion based on facts, there shouldn’t be any insults allowed to Paul or false accusations or any attacks to his personal family matters.
some respect is also needed to People taste in Britain or any part of the world.

my regards to positive people here Raven, Nona, Karen, Lydia, Jcostello and Anna…

Bohimian Rahpsody was released twice, the second was after Freddie Mercury’s death 1991, it was a CHARITY RELEASE raising money for Aids treatment, so “Mull OF Kintyre” remained NO1 Non-Charity single as I stated the first time.

So you dont care for John stealing “Come Together” but you accused Paul of stealing the first time. funny…and proves what an honest person you are. indeed everyone here knows what kind of human you are now.

As for not respecting UK chart or British people, you just proved you are an arrogant dregs again, and you dont worth discussion on any subject or anything.
so stay in your mommy basement.

John Cherry is about to release an updated version of his book.

I have my own opinions about the beatles, I don’t think they warrant the adulation that is heaped on them. I much preffer many other bands over the beatles. Certainly Pink Floyd are one. I know I am in the minority, but I don’t feel that the beatles did squat!

I am not a big fan of the Stones, but I’d pick them over the beatles every time.

As to who was the better, Lennon or McCartney, the numbers tell the story. Lennon had hits with his ‘Anthems’ but flopped in every other area.

Not a British #1 album though, so you can see how meaningless that can be at times, whether or not an album topped the chart in Britain.

The Canadian charts are more trustworthy than the UK, IMHO.

Vera Lynn topped EVERY single Beatles re-master in Britain, every single one was outsold by a collection of songs by Vera Lynn.

Remember, Paul co-wrote that song, it’s not all his or he would have taken credit for it believe me.

Havn’t you watched any Beatles documentaries, they agreed with me.

Bohemian Rhapsody has sold more copies in the UK than Mull, it’s true.

Mull is not a world record, just a British record, still good, but not global good.

True it didn’t chart in the UK, but Magical Mystery Tour was only a Gold record in Britain but has sold 6 million + in the US.

Don’t use the UK charts as the most important one, it isn’t, the US is, the Beatles knew that, I’ve heard it straight from Paul’s mouth many times.

So if Paul is better than John based on better record sales, I guess according to Ammar, Grease is better than all but three Beatles albums.

Paul’s best album EVER (Flaming Pie)could not outsell THE SPICE GIRLS in the US or the UK.

So, are the Spice Girls “Better than McCartney”?

But any way people can search and see what is the biggest selling single in the world and discover your lies as usual, as you did in many posts before. you cant help your hate to Paul.

remember and read well..”Mull Of Kintyre” was not released as an A side in US, in a decision made by Capitol, nevertheless it sold 6 million records world wide, and stand the biggest selling song in history. so eat your heart.

Another lie about John in the charts can easly
proven I will not go in detail but here is one example of your usual lies: “happy xmas”
The single was released in the US on 6 December 1971, but NEVER CHARTED ON THE Billboard Hot 100 charts.although it did in UK
This is one example only, I know lies are in your blood but you cant fool anybody here.

so you dont like English people taste in music…hmmm I wonder who likes you? who the hell you think you are coming here and insulting people and nations stupid???

now for the funny stealing tunes part, I wasnt going to get into this in respect to John’s memory but your usual lies made me do it…
(Take this GabeChapman it may serve you well) :

Who was brought to court for stealing a tune? Was it Paul? or John?
In 1973, “Come Together” was the subject of a lawsuit brought against Lennon by Big Seven Music Corp. (owned by Morris Levy) who was the publisher of Chuck Berry’s “You Can’t Catch Me”. This was because it sounded similar musically to Berry’s original and shared some lyrics (Lennon sang “Here come ol’ flattop, he come groovin’ up slowly” and Berry’s had sung “Here come a flattop, he was movin’ up with me”

I am glad you brought this idiot, use your brain, all your attempts to attack Paul failed and got back on you. looool

by the way, you love Paul as you said…its obvious….Chapman said he loved John also.

The Soundtrack to Grease has sold twice as many copies as Help! and Let it Be in the US and 50% more copies than Rubber Soul in America.

The 5 singles from Grease all charted higher in the US than Mull of Kintyre did.

Ammar, do you need any more lessons on how selling more records does not make you a better musician or a better songwriter?

While he was alive, EVERY song John released charted higher in America than Mull did, every single song, including 12 straight singles before 1975.

Even Woman is the Nigger of the World (1972) charted higher (#57) in the US than Mull did.

Hardly a World Record song, just a very very popular song in Britain, that’s it.

I like it, it’s fun, the bagpipes are very moving, but it is not a World Record, not by a long shot.

Looooool, as some people like to say.

I only speculated that the tune might be an ancient Scottish song, and I admitted I may be wrong about that, but Paul has an elephant’s memory about tunes, some of which he cant even find the original copy of, as like No Other Baby from Run Devil Run, Paul remembered the song, but not one person Paul knew could locate the original writer or singer, yet he knew it was a song that he didn’t write.

Paul originally wondered if he stole Yesterday, and he went around playing it to people to see if they knew what tune it was, cause it sounds like a standard, as does Mull.

Paul said in an Anthology interview that The Beatles were “the best pirates around”, in terms of using things they heard elsewhere.

Just because Mull sold more copies than any of John’s songs did in the UK only does not make John’s songs or John less in any way.

Paul’s songs were always more commercial and pop oriented, and lended themselves better to selling more copies than John’s heart wrenching, soul searching philosophical musical therapy.

Like I said, Flaming Pie was outsold in the US and in the UK by THE SPICE GIRLS.

Who in their right mind would make the logical leap that the Spice Girls are better than Paul?

Outselling someone means you or your music are more popular and/or marketable, it does not make you better as a musician or a songwriter.

Jay-Z has more Billboard #1 records in the US than Elvis Presley.

Is Jay-Z greater than Elvis in America?

I don’t know of anyone who would put Mull up against Bohemian, I would like to see that arguement, it would be amusing.

Mull was the first single to sell 2 million copies, in Britain only, Paul’s home country of 50-55 million people, certainly it is not the world’s most popular song, not by a long shot.

The best selling Beatles song in Britain was She Loves You, which makes me question the overall musical taste in Britain in regards to Beatles music, when you consider how many much better songs the Beatles recorded, She Loves You seems like an odd and adolecent choice.

you clearly hate Paul more than anything else on the world, for your holy information that always have lies about Paul and insults him: the song was flipped by Capitol to the b-side in US to “Girl’s School” so it wasnt the same song and it reached 33. that didnt change the fact that PAUL made the WORLD RECORD for non-charity songs with MULL OF KINTYRE that is not broken till now. so go cry in your basement.

as for your silly comment that Denny co wrote with Paul, you are insulting John here.
if Paul-Denny song beats all Paul-John Beatles records then Denny is better than John loool, you made a fool of yourself again.

the only no.1 song John made while he was alive was “whatever gets you”, its a very ordinary song but putting “Elton John” name (who was at the top at that time) on it made the record work, in UK by the way it was 38.
Paul made 8 no.1 singles in uk and us, not to mention his top5 songs, 18 Gold records all before John’s death.

John quit the music scene on 1975 cause he couldn’t make good music since 1971, no one at the top can hang his guitar for 5 years…while in late 60’s he made records solo and with the Beatles! If John had something he would have let it out…but he was unfortunately empty in 1976, the only song he did was for Ringo called “Cooking In The Kitchen Of Love” !!!
before releasing double Fantasy he was advised not to take adventure and embarrass himself, the album was boring, it was to benefit by John tragic sad death.

I advise you to shut up GabeChapman since you dont respect Paul Talent or personality, you dont even respect John statements, this is my last post in response to yours just because there was so much lies.

It didn’t take John 5 years to write his 7 songs for Double Fantasy, John himself said he hung his guitar behind his bed for 5 years, and when he started to write again he could do it with ease.

BTW, Mull of Kintyre topped out at #45 in America, on the EASY LISTENING chart.

Also, Paul co-wrote this song with Denny Laine and therefore cannot take full credit.

It’s a cool song, though I suspect the melody is borrowed from an old standard, though I could be wrong on that.

“”On October 1979 Paul was rewarded with a RHODIUM record by the Guiness Book Of Records. Paul is granted the distinction of being the most famous artist and songwriter and the biggest record seller of the world.
At that time, Paul is the writer of 43 songs which were sold each in more than a million copies.
He owns 60 gold records and this is the greatest number of Gold Records awards for an artist.
Paul is the seller of more than one hundred million albums and one hundred million singles.
Lastly he is the writer of the greatest number of songs covered by another singer.
his song “Mull Of Kintyre” on 1977 holds the world record till now for best single non-charity song, it beated even Beatles sales.”"

This all happened in 1979 while John was alive, and it didnt count his million seller McCartney2 1980.

this next song was another No.1 in 1980, one of John’s favorites:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV-3aGnF714&feature=related

rock on Paul

this should be monitored.and not let for an idiot to come here and say whatever he wants.
talking in the same way another idiot called Chapman did on 1980 when he killed John saying “I discovered he has a limo and living bourgeois life …not like what he say in his songs”
and by the way , he stated also that he likes John!

Raven, don’t you think John deserves to have someone passionately defend him?

As primary evidence, Carlin presents an appropriately unflattering analysis of McCartney’s work after the Beatles broke up in 1970. Despite occasionally great post-Beatles music he observes that McCartney failed to grow beyond the work he did with Lennon.”

“ ‘Neil Aspinall [original Beatles road manager and ultimate Apple manager] used to explain that it was John’s band,’ says Nat Weiss. ‘And at that point (in the mid-’60s) Paul was very conscious of wanting the approbation of John, in anything he did. I think Paul felt John was the cool one, the avant-garde one, the true artist. Paul is basically a very bourgeois, middle-class person. Extremely talented, for sure. But the rebel was John.’’

Not bad for 5 years work.

“He juxtaposes that with details of McCartney’s second marriage to, and nasty divorce from, Heather Mills, rounding out a portrait of a musical genius full of himself, an aesthetic adventurer who needs to run the ship, an insecure schemer who also is a bit of a bore.”

Paul SUCKS HARD on electric guitar.

Paul is LAME on piano.

Recent estimates put Paul’s fortune at 1.2 BILLION!!!

Way to fight poverty Paul, at least for those with your last name.

yes I forget the fact that this lunatic is “Telling us the truth”, he must be better than Paul, after all who the hell Paul is??

did you notice a new world record:
7 posts in a raw in 1 hour
and they contain lies, many of Paul albums in 70’s that got Grammy’s and world records did not appeal to this psycho anti-Paul
he represent a view against all the world and critics and musicians, and speak with such a hate language to Paul I didn’t see even in Yoko’s words.
I think Paul is tearing out his hair cause this lunatic is better than him and doesn’t like his music.

Paul can play electric guitar, drums and piano, but he is accomplished on none.

Go to a music school and watch 12 year-old kids play piano, electric guitar and drums better than Paul can, I know, because I teach them 5 days per week.

Paul’s skill is on bass and acoustic, not to mention his incredible singing voice.

Plastic Ono Band, Imagine, and Walls and Bridges are all very strong albums written and recorded before 1975.

Mind Games in John’s weakest, but still contains several strong tracks.

Rock-n-Roll is a cover album, and really does not factor into the John versus Paul debate in terms of their respective abilities to compose original songs.

McCartney 2 contains two good songs, and several childlike demos, again, rough and not of a professional quality.

Back to the Egg is horrible, and people thought that at the time, it might be Paul’s worst album EVER.

I don’think you can count Paul’s 70s solo live albums, since they contain numerous Beatles songs, none of John’s albums EVER contained a Beatles song.

Band on the Run is okay, but to me, there are two good songs on it and the rest is filler.

At the Speed of Sound is another with two good songs.

Plus, if we are to be fair, Paul’s stuff post-1975 should not even be considered, unless you are comparing late 70s and early 80s Paul to Double Fantasy only.

As far as not being received well after it’s release, John was killed 3 weeks after, which did not allow much time for buzz.

Rolling Stone thought it was one the the 100 greatest albums of the 1980s.

“The album itself was received with much interest, coming after such an extended break. The album debuted at #27 in the UK and the following week reached #14. In the US the album debuted at #25 and then rose to #12 and then #11.”

Not a bad reception by any account.

Using album sales to determine overall greatness is not intelligent, and does not improve you point.

Paul’s best album ever was Flaming Pie, IMHO, which was topped in sales in both the US and the UK by the SPICE GIRLS.

John’s best album was POB, which wasn’t a #1 in the US or the UK.

moderate albums:
Redrose speedway (No.1 also) 1973
London Town 1978

weak albums:
Wild Life 1971 ( charted 11 )

Paul made 8 No.1 albums, even his live album topped the chart with several millions.

John’s High rated albums in 70’s :
Plastic Ono Band 1970 (His best work)
Imagine 1971 (his only no.1 album)

John 4 weak albums in a raw:
Sometimes in Newyork 1972
Mind Games 1973
Walls and Bridges 1974
Rock’n’Roll 1975

John retires from music after that.(or because of that in one of his statements)
comes up after 6 years with half album & 3 good songs: Double Fantasy 1980
which people didnt receive well, then it sold very well because of his tragic death.

I agree with you , but to compare fairly you should choose from the 70’s era of Paul work to compare with John after the Beatles.

I made a simple comparison earlier for their albums in 70’s and here it is again after some “unhealthy” posts from the only sick guy here.
this is based on sales, critic reviews :

Don’t take my word for it, go ask an accomplished musician if he/she thinks Paul has anything compelling to play on electric guitar, drums, or keys.

40 years of solo music and all you can come up with is three good albums.

John did 4 good albums in 4 years.

ENOUGH Gabe Mc you’ve got to be kidding me. Do me a favor and come out with an album that beats one of Paul’s.

Band on the Run, Flaming Pie, Ram.

There. Go listen. Just as good as Imagine, Plastic Ono Band and Double Fantasy.

The funny thing is I’m a LENNON FAN and I’m arguing for PAUL.

http://rockguitardaily.blogspot.com/

interesting article about Paul.

Raven, do you think this sick understands that we dont read his words?!
its enough to read his name to skip the post.

One could argue that the author is not a true Beatles fan anyway, since he is trying to make money on his assertion that one Beatles was “better” than another.

How about this for a better title, “As Good as John.”

Instead of, “Better then Lennon.”

Paul may be the better musician, but I’ll bet he would rather be the better songwriter.

Being the better musician means NOTHING.

Hell, I’m a better musician then Paul is, and I know about 20 people who are better musicians then Paul is.

I slaughter him on guitar, destroy him on drums, and I could make him seem foolish on a piano.

And no, I don’t mean mindless shredding, metal drum pounding or classical piano.

I am just more versatile, accomplished, and creative on his “Big Three” instru,ents that often garner him so much praise.

So, am I “better” then McCartney, since I can play instruments better then he can?

Is somene who is more accomplished on those instruments “better” than Paul?

That is essentially the authors arguement against Lennon.