Sounds like an interesting book. I also agree with Karen, but that’s without reading the book. So I’d like to see what he bases his views on.

I didn’t mean anything by not being able to discuss the matter, I just didn’t/don’t understand how you can compare their careers when they are totally different. I don’t think John was a God nor do I think Paul is. I could be wrong, but I thought I heard or read somewhere along the way that John taught Paul how to play all of the instruments he does. John’s way of writing and his music was very different than Pauls….I just don’t see how we can compare them. They are both, IMO, very talented “all around” musicians. But the fact that Paul is still alive and making music is still a fact….None of us know what John would have done after Double Fantasey, we were robbed.

I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to imply you had said either of them were gods, Karen. 🙂 I was actually responding to another comment(the one in the article about Paul being talented and John being a deity), I just combined it all into one response.

I still think it’s perfectly fine to compare Paul and John – LOTS of songwriter/musicians have careers of varying length and it does not stop critics from comparing various artists among them(for example comparing a long lived classical composer to a shorter lived one). John’s death certainly has never stopped people from comparing Paul and John, when the negative outcome is for Paul. It’s only fair that it work in the other direction as well.

“I could be wrong, but I thought I heard or read somewhere along the way that John taught Paul how to play all of the instruments he does.”

Whoa? That’s a weird one. LOL I think it’s very safe to say that is definitely wrong. I don’t know who came up with that, but John didn’t even know how to tune the guitar when he met Paul. Before Paul joined the band, they used to have to go and find someone else to tune their guitars for them. As I recall it was one of the first things Paul did when they met at the Woolton Fete in 1957, Paul knew how to tune a guitar, while none of the Quarrymen did. So doing a mean rendition of Little Richard songs and 20 Flight Rock, knowing the lyrics(and writing them down) and guitar tuning were some of the abilities that got him a foot in the door.

Yeah. Paul is definitely the better musician, as far as being able to play instruments. I’m sure Lennon would even agree with that. Paul was a great innovator in bass playing, and Lennon acknowledged that. Even George Martin said that of all the thousands of artists he’s recorded over the years, there were only 2 who could play so many instruments competently. Stevie Wonder and Paul McCartney.

As to who was better? They were both extraordinary composers, and to have them both in the same band was a cosmic stroke of luck. They both made each other better. I don’t think anybody can deny that. But it’s impossible to say who was better.

Oh, Mr. Barrett–

Does anyone remember how all this John v. Paul stuff started? Both of them probably said that they competed with each other in writing songs. True enough, but widely misunderstood. And John certainly wrote and released “How Do You Sleep at Night?”. I will have to suggest that that song gave permission to a couple of generations of would-be critics to destroy McCartney’s reputation whenever the opportunity presented itself. And that’s where we find ourselves now.

The premise of your discussion on Saturday simply perpetuates the enormous waste of time the whole John v. Paul non-controversy has been. People spend time and energy arguing about who won. Both of them won, and the fans all won. They taught each other, and each urged the other on to greater risks and rewards. They’re both first rate artists, and the fans are forever grateful.

If we could put aside this fruitless and almost meaningless argument, we could set about a serious investigation of both of these artists.

Instead of arguing about who won a non-existent contest, why not discuss what made Lennon Lennon and what makes McCartney McCartney? What were their individual strengths and weaknesses? Let’s use adjectives rather than a point score. Let’s try to think, for a change.

Paul McCartney won the game a long time ago. Long before Lennon’s untimely departure. Admittedly, I have always been a McCartney fan. But,The Beatles songs most people tend to remember, are McCartney Beatles songs. Mccartney was so involved in almost every aspect of the Beatles Recordings. Especially, since 1966, when they stopped touring, and became strictly a studio group. Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band Album, could almost be called, “The Paul and John Show”. And, in that order. And, with good reason. First, since the album was McCartney’s concept to begin with. Second, At times , McCartney was practically co-producing the album along with George Martin. Third, And writing songs too. McCartney to date, wrote more number 1 hits for The Beatles than Lennon did. And, this is easy to check. Since Lennon himself indicated in his last interview with Playboy Magazine. That whoever sang it, was the one who wrote it. Now, that may not have been true in every instance, but enough to prove my point. Paul McCartney is a Brilliant Artist. Simply put. And, it does no good for Lennon Fans to trash him. It ultimately, won’t change McCartney’s accomplishments. McCartney was the driving force of The Beatles. And, particularly, since 1966.

Just one more point, about “Paul has had many more years to fine tune and grow with his writing and voice abilities that John did not have”

It has always been my understanding that music is mainly a young persons medium. Mozart, for example, did a marvelous job at such a young age. While it’s true that he died very young, you could arguably say that he had already done the best work he would ever do even if he had lived to his 90’s. Most memorable music is done by people younger than 40.

While this is a point which can be argued, it is undeniably true that a singer’s voice it’s at it’s peak well before 40 yrs old. There’s no way that John would have “fine tuned” his voice any better after 40 than it was in his 20s By forty most singers can only hope to preserve what they can for as long as they can. Age is a singers worst enemy.

Oh and forgot:

“Sadly, this was always made at Paul’s expense, even when people who were there like George Martin and Geoff Emerick stated time after time that it was Paul who was mostly in charge inside the studio”

Also Norman Smith(hope I have that name right), who was their head engineer before Geoff Emerick(pre-Revolver), said the same thing. I don’t have the exact quote but I remember him saying something like “Paul was the MD even then” meaning way back when they first started showing up in the studio.

So it made me laugh when I read a review for Emerick’s book acting like Emerick’s comment in that regard was coming out of nowhere – I wanted to say “You dolt, Emerick’s predecessor said almost the exact same thing, hey maybe it’s because it’s true?”

LOL…this is fun. I am sorry I had the wrong information, because I know I had read about it a very long time ago; I must have gotten the “who” mixed up. Thank you for righting my wrong!

Anna, I would have to disagree, have you heard Neil Diamonds’ voice lately? He is still great and he’s in his 70’s. We, sadly, will never know what John was capable of.

As I said, I love both John and Paul and maybe it’s just that “I” would not be able to choose who is better between the two. I can say that none of John’s songs bored me as some of Paul’s did. As someone on here said, “Paul was more melodic”. I agree, and maybe I am a rocker at heart? But John’s song “Mother” has got to be one of my most favorite of his. Edgy with soul and feeling.

I was discussing this with someone this afternoon, I had also used the “better painter” analogy. Strange….

Here is what Norman Smith, engineer until Rubber Soul, said [his thoughts were later to be echoed by Geoff Emerick too]:

“I don’t want to take anything away from anyone, but production of the Beatles was very simple, because it was ready-made. Paul was a very great influence in terms of the production, especially in terms of George Harrison’s guitar solos and Ringo’s drumming . . . The truth of the matter is that, to the best of my memory, Paul had a great hand in practically all of the songs that we did and Ringo would generally ask him what he should do. After all, Paul was no mean drummer himself, and he did play drums on a couple of things . . . . it was almost like we had one producer up in the Control room and another producer down in the studio. There is no doubt at all that Paul was the main musical force, He was also that in terms of production as well. A lot of the time George Martin didn’t really have to do the things he did because Paul McCartney was around and could have done them equally well . . . most of the ideas came from Paul.”

Paul McCartney has released something like 24 solo albums, not counting the various live albums. McCartney probably would have been better served by releasing half that many. Only one album rises to the level of top-notch—“Band on the Run”–and that was a long time ago. It seems like so many McCartney albums had two or three decent songs, with the rest forgettable or even–as McCartney himself once said–“rubbish.” “Chaos and Creation” of a few years ago was his best in years, but there have been only a few interesting albums like that. “Flowers in the Dirt” comes to mind, when he collaborated with Elvis Costello.

On the other hand, it’s hard to imagine John Lennon, had he lived, evolving into the type of spectacular live performer that McCartney has become. John might have done an occasional live gig, but it’s hard to conceive of him doing long tours with the whole rock-star entourage trailing behind him. As a live performer, Paul’s musicianship is first-rate and on brilliant display–actually, it’s almost too good sometimes. He strives too hard to perfectly recreate his songs in concert. A little more variation and informality would be interesting.

The Lennon solo legacy is about equally disappointing. It’s full of ups and downs, and I don’t know if there is one singularly great John Lennon album. Maybe “Mind Games.” I liked the acoustic Lennon album of a few years ago a lot. But most of the albums are uneven if intriguing. Think “Walls and Bridges” and “Imagine.” It’s interesting, though, to compare the rawness of Lennon’s “Live Peace in Toronto” with any of McCartney’s slick live albums. On balance I’d take “Live Peace” and then, as is so often the case with McCartney, pick and choose certain tracks from his live albums. Just one: “Your Loving Flame,” given a really nice rendition a few years ago–the US tour, I think. Another comparison is the cover albums they did–John’s “Rock and Roll,” and Paul’s “Run Devil Run,” for example. That would make a nice double CD if you think about it.

So they weren’t as strong as solo artists as they were collaborators. How could they be? None of the four Beatles could equal, much less top, what they did as a group.

John’s solo career was way better than Paul’s, in terms of albums.

Plastic Ono Band, Imagine, Double Fantasy are all FANTASTIC albums.

But in the end, of course you can not say who was a better musician. They are equal in my mind.

I agree with everything that has been said by everyone here. I said to someone yesterday, “To me, it’s like comparing Paul with Kanye West if they are to compare John and Paul”. They are two totally different artists. Thanks for all the discussions. I love the Beatles, all of them.

I love John Lennon. When I was a kid, I idolized him. And while I personally never cared all that much for Paul (he’s a little self-centered and I don’t like that he’s constantly trying to rewrite history), I’m starting to really appreciate that he had a lot more to do with many of The Beatles songs than I wanted to give him credit for.

The truth is, though, John and Paul were Yin and Yang. They balanced each other. And when you threw in George and Ringo to the mix, you got something really special.

As solo artists, though they put out a lot of amazing music, John and Paul also put out a lot of crap. And I’ve always felt that Paul needed John saying, “You can push it more here,” or “you can do better,” just as John needed Paul saying “this is too simple, try this melody,” or “wouldn’t it be cool with this bassline? Let’s try that here.” And if we’re going this far, they also could have used George and Ringo more, too. I’ve always thought that John’s “Oh, My Love” off of Imagine wouldn’t have been half the song it is if it weren’t for George’s guitar work. And even in the Beatles catalog, I’ve always thought that “The Ballad of John and Yoko” (while cool) could’ve had a fuller sound if John and Paul had some input from George and Ringo.

A great example of John VS Paul is in their Christmas songs – Look at “Happy Christmas (War is Over)” VS “Wonderful Christmastime.” John’s is extremely deep – almost making you feel bad about enjoying yourself (“so this is Christmas, and what have you done?”) and Paul’s is extremely trite, but very melodic and enjoyable. What if they had combined the two approaches? You would have had one amazing super Christmas song. The mind boggles at how incredible it could have been.

I don’t really see the reason to compare John and Paul. We all know that Paul can play more instruments and Paul has a better vocal range, but the way John can play a rhythm guitar is masterful, and his voice can send shivers down your spine (think A Day in the Life, or You’ve Got to Hide Your Love Away).

And you know what? If we’re being honest here, there are plenty of musicians that are better than John and Paul, George and Ringo. But very few, if any, that can write songs the way they did. We were just blessed that they all found each other and that they were given the opportunity to share their immense talents with the world.

Musically, when taken at face value, Paul was slightly more talented, or practiced, but even Paul is no virtuoso, not by a long shot.

If you insist on ranking the two, you should start with the songs, as in, “How many truely great songs did each write with the Beatles.”

Since Paul is two years younger than John, one should consider John’s work through 1975, when he essentially quit music, and Paul’s through 1977.

The great thing is this, it’s subjective to the individual.

Personally I think John wrote more great songs, with the Beatles and solo.

Look at the Beatles albums through Help!, they are heavily dominated by John, it is only on Revolver that Paul is approaching status as an equal with John, and I would argue that Paul out does him on Revolver and Pepper, with A Day in the Life being an obvious exception.

Paul is weak on Magical Mystery Tour, both are solid on the White album and Abbey Road, but Lennon is weak on Let it Be.

I think the only fair answer is this, that at the end of the Beatles John and Paul were EQUALS.

I think John’s solo work circa 1970-1975 is vastly better than Paul’s during that same period, but different enough as to strain proper comparison.

Intellectually, Paul is not even close to John, IMHO, Paul is intelligent, but not a genious as was Lennon.

IMO Paul lost all intellectual credibility, as did others, after 9/11, when he wrote that jingoistic song “Freedom” and jumped on the “kill muslims at all costs bandwagon.”

John would NEVER have done that, and would have been disgusted at Paul’s lack of a moral compass.

FYI: Paul barely gats more votes than George on the Rolling Stone poll.

http://www.rollingstone.com/community/polls/29776878/results

I saw Paul in Vegas this summer, 4,000 seat show at a Casino, I was standing around row 8-12, dead center, the sound was horrible, never had to stuff tissue in my ears before at a show, and I’ve seen plenty, Paul was AMAZING.

Imagine singing Helter Skelter at 67 years old, in your ENCORE!

Nobody can touch Paul for performing skill, nobody, he is as good as anybody.

His band sucks though, IMO, Paul’s ego gets in the way of him having truley great musicians onstage with him. Linda did alot for his taste in bandmates and it was best when it was just Paul and an acoustic guitar onstage.

John had a much better eye for talent then Paul, as George came through Paul, and George was not very good untill 1966.

And there is more than just “bad cop” syndrome to the fact that the other three Beatles really didn’t like Paul after the break, while the three of them often recorded together.

After John was murdered, and George wrote All Those Years Ago, Paul and Linda sent their contribution to the song, some generic harmonies and disco keyboards, in from L.A., refusing to work in peron with George and Ringo.

When the Beatles were inducted to the Hall, Paul refused to go, 18 years after the break-up.

Paul finally worked with Ringo on Flaming Pie, 27 years after he sued to dissolve the Beatles.

OH Lord, let’s not go there into their personal lives. Why do things like this always have to get nasty. #1. This is all your opinions and what has been written in a book or said in the media. #2. Not one of us know what John or Paul thought about anything. Unless…..

Anna, do you know Paul personally?

Karen, I thought you’d ask that question to Gabe, after all, s/he was the one who started about “The moral compass”

Gabe was the one who started to get personal. I didn’t want to go there, but I found the post so personally insulting to Paul: “jumped on the “kill muslims at all costs bandwagon.” Coud he be ANY more insulting?

But apparently that post was OK, but me defending Paul gets the heated response.

No, Karen, I don’t know Paul personally -but I guess you knew that already. Please quote what I said that made you think I did.

Funny you didn’t ask gabe in he knew John….

“Not one of us know what John or Paul thought about anything.”

Listen to How Do You Sleep from Lennon’s Imagine Album. It gives you some idea of what John thought of Paul. That’s George on the killer slide guitar solo.

Anna, for the record, I love Paul, no matter what he does, I will always love him, he is the greatest living legend.

Well, IMHO Paul’s medley in abbey road is the best piece in modern music. Sgt Peppers was his concept. Yesterday, Hey Jude, Let it Be, For no one, Blackbird are their best songs

What Paul has to do with the effects of war? He’s not responsible for any of it. Using that to put him down is absurd. I’m glad the Palestinians in One Voice don’t agree with you

And your mention of Julian is so casual. Have you heard him say that the pain he felt growing up that John had so much peace and love for the world, but none for him?

Do you really feel that having great wealth is somehow more immoral than abandoning your child?

Julian was not only abandoned emotionally, but also Cynthia struggled financially to raise him, while John was living the life of a king at The Dakota.

Some Hippie values, eh?

The only reason the other Beatles didn’t have as much money as Paul was because they didn’t invest as well. However, they all live(d) lives of extreme luxury, not just Paul. It’s not like any of them made personal living sacrifices to spread their wealth. John and Yoko had a refrigerated room at the Dakota for their fur coats. Humble, huh?

Karen, It’s ok. Don’t worry about it

Anna, I’m sorry if I offended you with the question. As I read Gabe’s comment it didn’t enter my mind to ask him/her. And I really wasn’t trying to be sarcastic. I thought, “Well, maybe she does know him?” That’s all. I do apologize. My whole point was the personal lives should not be brought up…IMO….Gabe, do you hear??? : )

How is “the sound you make is Muzak to my ears…” open for interpretation?

Also, Crippled Inside from the same album is about Paul.

Anna: Yes Paul’s medley at the end of Abbey Road makes the record, it’s amazing, and one of the most beautiful things ever.

“Sgt Peppers was his concept. Yesterday, Hey Jude, Let it Be, For no one, Blackbird are their best songs.”

Pepper was Paul’s idea, but are the best songs on the album his?

Yesterday, Blackbird and For No One are just Paul, as in, there are not other Beatles on those recordings, so, not really Beatles songs as much as Paul solo songs while he was still a Beatle.

Hey Jude is just Paul and Ringo, John and George were asked not to play.

Well, Ringo did record with Paul, 27 years after their break-up.

They could barely stand Paul when the three surviving Beatles recorded Free as a Bird and Real Love.

George and Paul got into a fight over lyrics on Free as a Bird, Paul telling George to sing lyrics he didn’t want to sing.

Listen to the recording, you will hear what Paul sings versus what George sings.

If the original topic is: Who is, or was, the better musician, I said Paul.

I think John was a better songwriter, a more intelligent person, and the guiding spirit of what was and still is, The Beatles.

Tune in on Saturday. I will b on th panel to bring my take on ths John vs. Paul deal. Personaly imma an Elvis man…now he was rock & roll. IMO u cannot compare th 2 because Paul has had more time to add to his legacy, unfortunately John never fully excelled his talent. ” Imagine” if Lennon was still alive. Thn who is th best musician?? Both great musicians. ..but last week someone went on to call The Kings of Leon a bubble gum band…WHAT!..Y always hate on th ones tht become successful.

I’ll tell ya like Kat Williams said “these haters were promised good stuff, along th way they never got it…now they’re mad” LOL.

I came in late so I didn’t know th name of th dude who said it but..go on hater. Kings of Leon cleared over 6 mill copies sold. Thts some good bubble gum.

Tune in it should b interesting. Lennon vs. Paul…I say George Harrison and Ringo Star. Haha. Let’s get it!

OK, Gabe, I see that you want to keep going, and don’t want to agree to disagree

You said:

“If the original topic is: Who is, or was, the better musician, I said Paul.

I think John was a better songwriter, a more intelligent person, and the guiding spirit of what was and still is, The Beatles.”

I’ll agree with you that Paul is the better musician; on your other points I’ll disagree.

I’ll also agree with you on the abandonment of a child issue, because it happened to me too…..

Anna, I do agree to disagree, I’m glad you are passionate about Paul, he deserves great fans like you, and me.

I’ve seen Paul twice, he was absolutely amazing. The show could be much better but Paul is nearly flawless.

If you havn’t seen him, it’s worth selling the subaru for, lol.

“Yeah he did say that, to the potentially psychotic transient living in his garden cause he thought John had all the answers”

Yet, he invited him into his home? I don’t know Gabe. If you take one thing he says and twist it to how you want to make it, you’ll be inclined to do it with everything he said.

I obiviously don’t know as much as you all do. I wasn’t even alive when they were the “Beatles” LOL! BUT, I do have brothers who are die-hard fans…I was even punched in the leg everytime I got who was singing wrong! But I AM a true believer in “believe nothing you read and only half of what you see”. Anyone can twist things to make it fit their agenda. If you didn’t hear it come right from a person’s mouth….I wouldn’t believe it. JMHO!

Well said, Karen

My favorite Paul albums are McCartney I and II, Ram, Flowers in the Dirt, Off the Ground, and Flaming Pie.

I just can’t bare to listen to post-Linda Paul, it’s just too sad, but Chaos and Creation is quite good.

I think Jenny Wren is as good a song as ANYTHING he has ever written, even Yesterday.

I wish Paul would do acoustic shows in outdoor amphitheaters, he is so incredible on an acoustic.

“Who anyone prefers is totally subjective and it’s a waste of time and insulting to both of them.”

You are right, and wrong, in the same sentence.

Yes it’s subjective, no it’s not a waste of time to talk about your favorite band, and no, they wouldn’t be insulted, unless they were insecure about their talents.

I still say Ringo is the most UNDERRATED musician of all time.

IMHO, he is the only Beatle who approaches true virtuosity on his instrument.

True, Paul was more interested in the ins and outs than John, but remember, during that same period leading up to Revolve John was inventing, flanging, phasing, feedback and backward guitar.

So it is dead wrong to say that John was not as innovative or creative as Paul, complete rubbish.

Gabe – Do you think that John or George gave all their money away? Why are you picking on Paul for having money? Both John and George were wealthy. You are very much in the John is god camp. As for the song Freedom – what is wrong with it. Wouldn’t you fight for yours? So it was ok to fly three planes into buildings and the ground? I would think even John (who claimed to be for peace, but was not in his personal life) would have been upset with what happened in NYC that day.
As for who is the best it is a silly argument. John said in interviews that he loved and respected Paul. People like you do not want to hear that though. You only want to hear what John said that was a slap at Paul. John was a bully. A big nmouth bully. Olivia Harrison said that George was close with Paul too. She said she remembers George restringing a uke to be left handed because Paul was coming over for dinner. They always played together after dinner. That doesn’t go along with your beliefs though does it?
The Beatles would have not gotten where they were without Paul.

John Lennon was a great songwriter and innovator and perhaps one of the first punk/alternative musicians of the time.

Paul was a pop genius and a great songwriter too.

In the End John Lennon had a greater influence because he wrote from the heart, the street, and in a passionate way while Paul was looking to be number 1.

Paul had more number 1 hits and he was a hit machine, but Michael Jackson and Britney Spears are hit makers too.

You know that shows you know very little about Paul’s solo career, also I hear plenty of Paul McCartney influence around – whenever they say a band has “Beatlesque” melodies, well considering Paul often came up with the most famous ones….

Paul wrote poppy silly songs sometimes, but he also wrote plenty of deep songs. If you aren’t willing to really look, of course you aren’t going to see it.

As for Happy Christmas, I don’t see how you can the songs – John’s is freakin’ depressing, Paul’s is fun. I know what I’d rather be singing around the Christmas tree.

“in a passionate way while Paul was looking to be number 1.”

I find this absolutely hysterical – who toured college campuses in the UK, in the early 70’s, for FREE to get his new band up to speed? It also had the benefit of exposing him in his “new form” without making people pay for it, which let’s face it, is always going to be appreciated. That was Paul. Doesn’t sound like a man doing something for the money, it sounds like a man doing something because he loves it and wants to try and do it right. He may not have always succeeded but if you think Paul isn’t passionate about music – clearly you haven’t paid a bit of attention to Paul McCartney.

As for alternative? Paul’s first 3 albums after the Beatles were actually pretty alternative. RAM is very eccentric, McCartney and Wild Life are very lo-tech and have all sorts of weird little bits on them. Lots of great guitar work. They definitely were not set up like “regular” popular albums. As for looking to be No. 1? He didn’t even release any singles from his first album, the McCartney album, and both Maybe I’m Amazed and Every Night(both songs that are “from the heart” IMO) certainly would have qualified and probably done very well if he had – it’s kind of too bad he didn’t as I’m sure having those two songs as hits probably would have given a more positive light to the time period in terms of his career.

Oh and Gabe, I didn’t notice if anyone pointed it out to you but Paul worked with Ringo long BEFORE Flaming Pie. They worked together in the 80’s quite a bit and Paul did contribute songs to Ringo’s solo albums just like everyone else.

Also you seem to not be considering the circumstances, why in the world would Paul want to work with people who’d been calling him a no-talent hack tyrant? Because that is essentially what John in particular was going around doing. Say what you want but Paul never attacked any of them publicly, with regards to their person and talent, the way John totally trashed and insulted Paul to just about anyone who would listen at the time.

And you know what, I think it says far more negative about John that he went on that attack as viciously as he did than it says about Paul. John went out on a frontal assault to destroy Paul’s professional reputation and malign, and at time outright lie, about his contributions to the Beatles, and nothing Paul did warranted that. He also totally over-reacted to things – Too Many People didn’t come close to warranting How Do You Sleep. (And IMO Too Many People is by far the better song)

Paul has “more money”(though probably not as much as the rumors say, at his divorce he wasn’t worth a billion but let’s face it half a billion ain’t nothing to sneeze at either LOL) because he invested wisely. The Eastmans knew what they were doing and frankly the other Beatles would have been better off choosing the Eastmans than Klein and they’d probably have managed to keep Northern songs too. Why did they choose Klein? It was for petty reasons really – when you come down to it, they chose Klein to stick it to Paul and because John chose style over substance(oh wait but he’s the deep one, right?).

“I was always John and always will be. John chose Paul, not vice-versa. “Lennon & McCartney,” not “McCartney & Lennon” as Paul lamely tried out. John was a full-out genius, Paul was only the best musician. Nothing against Paul, but John was the leader in ALL ways”

Actually on the first album, all the original compositions were originally credited to McCartney/Lennon. Brian’s favoritism toward John got that changed on all subsequent albums(I assume on all subsequent pressings of the first album as well, I haven’t checked).

John chose Paul, well John was older at the time and he already had a band. However Paul got in the band because he could do things John could not and it was only once Paul joined that the band stopped just being John’s gang of buddies, regardless of talent. So Paul pulled John forward a bit. Paul is also the one who started writing songs first. John started writing songs to compete with Paul, whereas Paul first started trying to teach himself to compose his own songs without impetus from John.

So to me that points to Paul really having been at least as much the leader musically from the start. So ultimately the band was at least as much Paul’s as John’s. Paul also brought George into the group, he was Paul’s friend(let’s see George on guitar, Stuart Sutcliff on bass – hmmm…who had the talent there). Paul is the one who got things done, even Brian Epstein knew that, he knew if he wanted something to get done, he had to get McCartney on board, especially if it was something that wasn’t going to be popular.

To quote myself: “However Paul got in the band because he could do things John could not”

Because let’s face it’s pretty hard to move forward as a band if your so called “leader” can’t be bothered to remember song lyrics and can’t be bothered to try and learn to tune his own guitar. It was because that McCartney “kid” came and in basically kind of put him to shame by being able to do that with seeming ease that John even started, thus another early impetus point to McCartney.

“So intelligent that someone like Klein was able to fool and manipulate him.”

Yeah. I mean obviously John was a smart and being smart doesn’t necessarily mean having common sense but yeah…John was, I think, blinded by his own ego and sadly I think his misguided, in this case, competitiveness with Paul and it caused one heck of a mess. Paul had his own blind spots but this one of John’s went way further than just interpersonal relationships within the band.

So it’s OK to take one song to measure their careers? (noting the comparison between “Happy Christmas” and “Wonderful Christmastime”

How about changing the songs to “Maybe I’m Amazed” and “Oh Yoko!” Which one is deep, full of meaning and emotion, and which one is the “trite”, “poppy” one?

Would it be fair to measure their careers based on these two songs?

down, Anna, down!! I said the two songs exemplified the point I was making in that particular sentence.

“How about changing the songs to “Maybe I’m Amazed” and “Oh Yoko!” Which one is deep, full of meaning and emotion, and which one is the “trite”, “poppy” one?”

I think both are “deep, full of meaning and emotion.”

Just my opinion.

Let’s just say that I have learned to appreciate John’s talents in a different way than the dumb-struck teenager I was when I started out as a Beatle’s fan. I still love Paul, have lots of his music and must say LOVE the majority of his music. There is some music I skip over, but the same goes for John. I was lucky enough to see Paul perform live in Las Cruces New Mexico several years ago. Wow, talk about showmanship and talent! Yes, his voice was great. If given the option, in an imaginary world, of seeing Paul or John in concert, you can bet I would pick Paul. There is a part of me that loves silly love songs and there is a part of me that loves to imagine.

Ok Gabe, so Lydia, Nona and I aren’t true fans? Why?

It is clear John formed the Beatles! It was his band and more importantly the defining songs are John and Pauls’ too. All you need is Love is a defining Lennon beatle song!

Also, did you all know that John came up with the Ob Li Ob li Da piano? Give Lennon his due John lennon was a GENIUS!!!!!!!!!

“All you need is Love is a defining Lennon beatle song!”

Hey Jude is a defining Beatles song, Let it Be is a defining Beatles song. Yesterday is a defining Beatles song. Lots of songs were defining Beatles songs depending on your taste.

“Do any of you know why the Beatles were not just another fun and happy 60’s band?

It is because of John Fucking Lennon you idiots if it were not for him the Beatles would have been June and Spoon pop for the masses.”

That’s the most ridiculous thing ever – the reason they moved above that is largely because of Sgt Pepper and Sgt Pepper was Paul’s idea. I was reading about the absolutely massive effect Sgt Pepper actually had when it was released. There were radio stations that rather than just picking one song to play, would simply play the whole album repeatedly after it’s release. And Paul’s varied output of all different types of music is one of the big things that made them so eclectic and so appealing to so many different people. That is one of the things that set the Beatles apart.

Let’s face it, they all were part of it, but the idea that Paul wasn’t absolutely pivotol to all that is just ignorant. Paul was the main one who had a sense of focus on THE BEATLES during all that time.

“Also, did you all know that John came up with the Ob Li Ob li Da piano? Give Lennon his due John lennon was a GENIUS!!!!!!!!!”

Actually I mentioned that in one of my first posts, John came in and played the opening piano as a faster tempo – did you know that Paul came up with the opening mellotron line to Strawberry Fields?(In fact Paul seems to have had such an effect on that song that John later used it as one of his paranoid examples of Paul “sabotaging” his work). Did you know that Paul brought in most of the tape loops used in Tomorrow Never Knows? Did you know that Paul changed the whole erm…tempo of Come Together?

Guess that makes Paul a genius too, huh?

As for forming the band, as I already pointed out by examples – Paul had every bit as much effect on what the band became after he joined. He brought in George, he really pushed to have George in the group in fact, he taught John how to tune his guitar and the band didn’t start using guitar chords until Paul joined the band(Eric Griffiths confirmed that with a statement he made at a Beatlefest in 1998). They wouldn’t have gotten anywhere as a rock and roll band if they hadn’t started using those guitar chords.

As I recall John didn’t name the Beatles, Stuart Sutcliffe actually came up with the name initially, John’s contribution was changing the second E to an A – so does that mean the Beatles were Stu’s band?

i’m in chile. i think john lennon is god he was the face and spirit of the beatles.

come together!

“. I think John is the better musican than Paul because John’s music was more right for that time and still is today. Don’t get me wrong, Paul’s music is moving to, but not like John’s music. Everybody has to remember though, that Paul had a band to back him up with his music. John on the other hand just had session players and half the time John played all the instruments.”

Hmmm…come on everyone knows that there are some whole albums where Paul McCartney played all the instruments(unless there was an orchestra on a song)–from the beginning of his career to his most recent album. Hell even on Band On The Run, his “biggest” solo album – it was just him, Linda and Denny Laine doing the recording. Obviously Linda wasn’t adding much when it came to instrumentation, esp at that time, Laine did his part but Paul played a large number of the instruments on that album.

In fact that was one of the “problems”, John even commented on it once – if Paul wasn’t in the mood to wait, he would just go off and do a whole song by himself. While the Beatles were still together I think the closest John came to that(besides Revolution #9) was The Ballad of John and Yoko, where he wanted to get it done right now but George and Ringo weren’t available – so he was able to use Paul’s abilities to his advantage, John sang and played guitar and Paul sang harmony and played bass, drums, piano, and maracas. And even one knew nothing about his solo career everyone knows that Paul is more than capable of playing lead guitar given he played a few of the Beatles most memorable guitar solos.

So Randy me thinks you are so desperate to believe John Lennon is god, that you are applying some of McCartney’s traits to him.

As for more right for the times – again, given that most of the ideas that made The Beatles “of the moment” actually came from Paul, I’d say that is very hard to argue.

I think this is stupid John Lennon was a great songwriter and Paul is good too. Why do we argue?

My favorite songs by the Beatles

Hard Day’ Night
Help
Come Together
Day Tripper
Hello Goodbye
All you Need is Love
Let it be

Please enjoy John and Paul and stop this arguing!

As The All Music Guide says in their excellent Beatles biography “That it’s difficult to summarize their career without restating cliches that have already been digested by tens of millions of rock fans, to start with the obvious,they were the greatest and most influential act of the rock era and introduced more innovations into popular music than any other rock band of the 20th century.”

“Moreover they were among the few artists of *any* discipline that were simultaneously the best at what they did *and* the most popular at what they did.” THey also say as singers John Lennon and Paul McCartney were among the best and most expressive in rock.

Also on an excellent site,The Evolution of Rock Bass Playing McCartney Style by Dennnis Alstrand,Stanley Clarke,Sting,Will Lee,Billy Sheehan,George Martin and John Lennon are quoted saying what a great,melodic and influential bass player Paul has always been’

And Wilco’s John Stirratt was asked in Bass Player which bass players have had the most impact on his playing and the first thing he said was, Paul McCartney is one of the greatest bass players of all time,if you listen to what he was tracking live in the studio it’s unbelievable.” “With his tone and musicality he was a huge influence,he covered all of his harmonic responsibilities really well but his baselines were absolutely melodic and inventive.”

And in an online 1977 Eric Clapton interview,ERic Clapton In His Own Words he says that there was always this guitar game between John and George,and he said partly because John was a pretty good guitar player himself.He played live with John as a member of John’s 1969 Plastic Ono Band.

And there is a great online article by musician and song writer Peter Cross,The Beatles Are The Most Creative Band Of All Time and he says that many musicians besides him recognize Paul as one of the best bass guitar players ever.He too says that John and Paul are the greatest song composers are among the 2 greatest singers in rock and that John,Paul and George were all excellent guitarists and that George is underrated by people not educated about music but that ERic Clapton knew better,he also says that both John and Paul played great leads as well as innovative rhythm tracks.

John Lennon co-wrote,sang and played guitar on one of David Bowie’s first hits Fame in 1975.Brain May,Ozzy Osbourne,and Liam Gallagher and many more call The Beatles The Greatest Band Ever.

Also on MusicRadar Tom Petty,Joe Perry and Richie Sambora in What The Beatles Mean To Me all say how cool and great they thought The Beatles were when they first saw them on THe Ed Sullivan Show in Februar 1964 when they were just teen boys,Richie was only 5.Tom Petty said he thought they were really really great.

Robin Zander of Cheap Trick said he’s probably one of the biggest Beatles fans on the planet.Brad Whitford of Aerosmith said that a lot of that Beatles influence comes from Steven Tyler’s collaborartion with Mark Hudson both whom are absolute Beatles freaks and he said I guess the goal is to try and emulate probably some of the best music of the last 50 years which has to be The Beatles.

Well, it all comes down to opinions and individual tastes, but we all agree that THEY, were amazing, all FOUR of them.

Nona and Anna…you Rock, I will only add few things cause you said it all.

Paul was the best, composer, singer and musician..
he did McCartney just to demo he can make an album all by himself playing every instrument.

John and Klein were afraid Paul’s solo album will effect the sales of “Let It Be” they wanted him to postpone the record.

Paul being the most beatle wanted the beatles to continue saw the band breaking and Klein trying to screw him, decided to seek freedom and sued klein through others,which made George and Ringo stand against him.

after the others saw the reality of Klein, who sued George and John and stole their money, they were friends again by mid 70’s

Paul did compose and play in Ringo’s album 1973 and 1976 “Six O’clock” and “Pure Gold”

Paul jammed with John with Stevie Wonder and Harry Nilsson around 1975, John was going to record with him in “Venus and Mars”, Yoko knew and prevented him.

John Retired 1975 after 5 disappointing albums, and even when he came back in 1980, some critics advised him not. to avoid embarrassing himself . his death changed that all, made him the hero..

Paul in mid 70’s was on top again with great success and many million sellers album ,he was very much in public eye, someone was carrying Beatles picture and made a question to young people “who are those three guys standing with Paul McCartney?”

again the tragic death of John made him looks like the hero in some people eyes.and put him ahead for sometime, till people can listen again and compare.

oh, and for “How Do You Sleep?” John is a very clever person, very good with lyrics, after hearing “Ram” which Paul made hidden messages on him, he decided to hurt him as much as he can, attacking his personality and mostly his talent, knowing Paul is very sensitive for this, part of lyrics was put by Yoko and Klein.and he did hurt him, cause Paul loved John and adored him. Paul response was only “Dear Friend” on “Wild Life”.

Paul will always be the best.

Plastic Ono Band is one of the seminal albums of the 1970s,and Imagine is incredible.

Mind Games and Walls and Bridges are two of my all-time favs.

Band on The Run is usually considered a 5 star album and unlike most of Lennon’s albums, some of Paul’s albums opinions are revised – because of bias, RAM was absolutely skewered by critics when it was released(though it was a hit in terms of record sales). NOW, critics often consider it a fantastic album full of great and eccentric sounds. Which it is – but because “Paul broke up the Beatles” as the story went back then, he was treated horrible in the aftermath of the break up and his work was treated unfairly.

by the way from Imagine I like Imagine, and how do you sleep (Musically), Oh My love is beautiful and Jealous guy is good,
George Guitar playing made (Oh my love and How do you sleep) works
but the rest of the album is fillers and contains the silliest lyrics from the beatles lyric man like
“I don’t wanna be a lawyer I don’t wanna lie”
“In the middle of the shave I call your name..oh yoko”

this album might be good and enjoyable but not groundbreaking and influential at all

while Plastic Ono Band was a great album, his only fortunately, he was still under the Beatles power maybe .

after the break up both John and Paul needed each others to bring the best of them like they used to be, through time…John needed Paul much more than Paul needed him.

Worst song on Help!, The Night Before-Paul
Worst song on Rubber Soul,You Won’t See Me-Paul
Worst song on Revolver, Dr. Robert-John
Worst Song on Pepper, Lovely Rita-Paul
Wost song on Mystery Tour, another of Paul’s bad ideas, Your Mother Should Know-Paul
Worst song on White Album, Rocky Racoon-Paul
Worst song on Let it Be, Two of Us-Paul
Worst Song on Abbey Road, Maxwell’s-Paul

Ammar, sounds like you place two of Paul’s and two of John’s as being great albums circa 1970-75.

Did Paul invent feedback (I Feel Fine), backward vocals (Rain), backward guitar (I’m Only Sleeping), flanging (Tomorrow Never Knows), art rock (A Day in the Life), progessive rock (Happiness is a Warm Gun), punk rock (I Want You), and grunge rock (Plastic Ono Band)?

Also, for those of you who think Paul is so multi-talented as to play all the rock instruments, he is not amazing on lead guitar, piano and drums, he is solid on piano, elementary on drums, and horrible on lead guitar, horrible.

Paul’s strengths are bass and acoustic guitar, he excells at nothing else really, though his piano playing is solid, it is rarely if ever inspiring.

John’s guitar solos on For You Blue and Get Back are among the best Beatles guitar solos.

John is ROCK.

Paul is POP.

John is a word person.

Paul is a music person.

Both could sing and write equally well, and fortunately, they complimented each other perfectly.

Paul tended to sing flat and round, John was sharp and edgey. Paul was uncompromisingly upbeat, John could make you feel sad.

It is impossible to say who benefited more from the other, certainly number 1 hits or albums is not the measure.

Jay-Z just passed Elvis Presley as the solo act with the most number one Billboard albums (11), but no one in their right mind would ever compare the two.

you seem to hate Paul more than anything else on earth..lool

most of what you wrote can be wrong or very personal views.

when I tried to read worst song in Beatles…I was surprised…”The night Before” is great song with Beatles mark of Paul(or John in other songs) and John(Or Paul)with George backing him. much better than “Its only Love” which John himself hated.
most of Beatles fans cant see any worst song in any Beatles project…cause everything they did was Great…there is always a least favorite but it is personal for everybody so you cant generalize your opinion for that.

As for naming Paul Beatles songs to compare with John or George..are you serious??loool
the songs you choose are among my favorites but Paul made the best ever songs in history specially with the Beatles..many of them equal and passes the songs you mentioned.

Guitar solos loool.., Paul’s Taxman solo is so great and hard,even Eric Clapton couldn’t do it live with George, as for John’s “Get Back” its good but any guitar beginner can do it for you.
“For you Blue” solo has nothing memorable about it. while “Sgt Peppers” intro from Paul is far strong and remarkable..
Paul is better on guitar solos than John but he is not a soloist, he is just creative, and the greatest melodic bassist in the world.(by the way John admitted that sometimes)
and yes I like the end solo of Paul much even more than the others, by the way they play that song like that : Paul then George then John.

for your information: “I feel Fine” feedback was done incidental without any planning, the guitar hit the amplifier. and yes “Tomorow Never Knows” loops was done by Paul! sorry to disappoint you.
backward guitar on “I’m only sleeping” was by George not John.

Paul invented the drums pattern for “Ticket To Ride” moving the song to another place.

you said Paul sang flat looool
you know why I like Paul singing, cause there is no limit to his voice, he can sing “Yesterday” then “I’m down” at the same recording session, his voice is so romantic and dreamy in Ballads then powerful and hard like no one else.
to mention one powerful no…”Helter Skelter”,”Sgt Peppers”,”I’ve Got A Feeling”, “Do It In The Road” and many more you will find Paul’s on every album.

the great thing about the Beatles vocals is John and Paul were great performers, everyone of them has a unique sound, in rock and Ballads

still Paul made the high harmony notes not John..and sang with more variation and higher pitches, example: “Oh! Darling”

Paul skillfully wrote Rock and Ballad songs …as a matter of fact he did more Rock than John during (and after) the Beatles, his rock songs are more distinctive than John

you defend the lyrics of John on some Imagine songs, you cant use these excuses, or any silly word song can be defended the same way. they are just silly sorry, yes John is great lyricist but he lost it after Plastic Ono Band.

John AND Paul were both masters of their crafts.

This revision of Beatles history is going too far when it has Paul teaching songwriting to John, drums to Ringo, and presumably he taught Jimi how to play guitar while he was between takes of “Another Girl”.

Oh yeah, Paul was also the first man on the Moon, not Armstrong as previously thought.

Oh and about Ringo’s drums, John himself said that on Ticket to Ride, Paul was responsible for how Ringo played the drums. That doesn’t mean he could do it himself but he made Ringo do it until he got the sound Paul described and showed him as well as he was able. And Paul DID, when the band started, show John how to play guitar chords. John was playing banjo chords(4 strings), besides not knowing how to tune the instrument.

To make a good point, I ask this; What did the four Beatles do immediately after the break-up.

John released his GREATEST work EVER, one of the greatest albums of all-time, and 4 other very good albums all in the first 4 years after the break, and all without one word of input from Paul.

Ringo was the first with a #1 song with Photograph, and Harrison’s triple album All Things Must Pass was epic, critically acclaimed, and quite good if not well produced.

What great works did Paul do in the first 5 years after The Beatles broke up?

For the record, yes, Paul taught John plenty, and John said Paul was a “f**king amazing songwriter”, as well as one of the most “influential and innovative” bass players who ever lived.

I agree with John.

first you laughed at the idea that Paul taught Ringo the drumming pattern in Ticket to ride, then when Nona told you that John stated that (and this is how I learned that fact) you come up to say well this just sounds like a bossy and overbearing bandmate (Paul)
cool up, what do you want exactly?? either ways you don’t like Paul…you just hate the guy

even if you can play “Taxman” (lool)this is not the idea you may be a good guitar player, watching you tube lessons, but I am talking about CREATION here, Paul is not a soloist but he comes with great musical ideas,that brings the song up, the solo of Taxman is great idea and not easy to play, go ask Harrison or Clapton.

again you change your words about facts, first you said none of the other 3 played with Paul on record in 70’s, then after facing you with facts you say “oh well not george or John”, so what do you want exactly??

do you know that George and John didnt speak together from 1975?? till his death they didnt talk together?? who is the bad guy here? Paul also??
John was intending to go to studio with Paul while recording “Venus and Mars” but Yoko prevented him.

Paul was the musical director to some point yes, thats what made the Beatles songs what they become, Standards.

how many people can compose,play and sing a whole album with all instruments and become masterpieces and no.1 on 1970?
and then do it again on 1980?

the songs you listed of John, can be good but many of them are very ordinary songs, if anyone here will list Paul’s only good songs of same period you will be more angry, they are much better and have longer life.

If you are comparing John,George and Ringo solo work all together to Paul’s work after the beatles, then you are admitting how Strong Paul is.

stop attacking the man, if you don’t like him that much don’t listen to his songs.you should thank this man for what he gave us all those years, a real Legend, if you are a real musician.

This is complete craziness. I understand that when someone listens to the Beatles, they naturally pick a favorite. My favorite is John and its most because I’m fascinated by his choice of lyrics and his quotes are just awesome. But, John being my favorite does not blind me. I understand Paul was the better musician, John understood Paul was the better musician. By the way, just because Paul was the best musician it doesn’t mean John, George or Ringo can’t be your favorite.
It’s great to see such avid Beatles fans, but please don’t attack either of the two personally. Read John’s 1980 Playboy interview. He says that they were friends no matter what the media would ever make out of it. If John was alive he would not want people attacking Paul (who he announced one of his life mates). And I’m pretty sure Paul would be furious if he saw anyone attack John’s personal life. Yeah, they fought, but they made up, like best friends do.
I tend to favor John because of his straightforwardness and his deep personality. Just my opinion, Rain is better than Paperback Writer. Strawberry Fields is better than Penny Lane. All you need is Love is better than Hello Goodbye. A Hard Day’s Night is better than Can’t Buy Me Love.
She Said She Said is better than Got to get you into my life. And your bird can sing is better than For No One.
I like Paul and I love his music, but I tend to favor John more. Their solo careers never touched what they did with the Beatles. Instead of comparing whose better, why don’t we comment on the effect they had on each other. Together, they were the best songwriters of all time. Separated, they were just two other musicians.

“Plastic Ono Band” is better than “McCartney”.

“Imagine” is better than “Ram”.

“Wild Life” and “Red Rose Speedway” are boring and totally forgetable.

“Band on The Run” is the most overratted album of the early 70s, great song, but a lame album.

“Mind Games” and “Walls and Bridges” are better.

Paul only made one good album with Wings (1971-79), IMO, “Venus and Mars” from 1975, and only one good solo album during the entire decade, “Ram” in 1971.

In my opinion, John outdid Paul’s entire decade of the 1970s within 4 years (1970-74).

There you have it, Paul made three good albums in 20 years, John made 4 good albums in 4 years.

Who is better?

Lennon was always considered the leader of the group, as McCartney explained: “We all looked up to John. He was older and he was very much the leader – he was the quickest wit and the smartest and all that kind of thing”.

Plastic Ono Band is one of the greatest albums of all time, name one Paul album that attained legendary status, just one.

Like I said, anyone, name one single Paul album that is an accepted masterpiece.

I think Paul’s best albums are Ram, Venus and Mars, Flowers in the Dirt, and Flaming Pie.

I didn’t say Plastic Ono Band was “better” than the Beatles, but John thought it was “the best thing” he’d EVER done.

Plus, he had Ringo, so it was 1/2 Beatles wasn’t it?

I said Plastic Ono Band is one of the greatest albums of all time, and then I asked if there was a Paul album that had similar stature.

There isn’t. John had Paul’s entire career outdone before 1971 was over.

Paul’s best album was 1997s Flaming Pie, IMO.

jcostello said: “Let me ask you, since when is the Plastic Ono Band better than ANY of the Beatles albums? Are you crazy?”

Have you ever listened to Plastic Ono Band?

This is not just my opinion, it is accepted FACT that POB is one of the seminal works in the history of rock post-1969.

It may not be better than a Beatle album, which is your opinion, but it is better than anything John ever did with the Fabs, at least according to John.

“You should check YouTube for John’s thoughts on Paul, you don’t seem to know what they really are.”

Read John’s 1980 Playboy Interview and see how very wrong you are…

Well, give a good listen to John’s work through 1974 and then Paul’s, it’s all a matter of opinion to some but I would say this:

Some people might prefer Boys to Men to The Beatles, it is their firm OPINION, doesn’t that suggest Boys to Men might be as good or even better then The Beatles by your logic?

Opinion cannot make one artist “better” than another, history decides that based on the music’s influence, and John is 10 times more influential and innovative than Paul ever was.

I do too love Paul, I don’t have to prove it, I have EVERYTHING he has EVER released and I havbe shelled out insane amounts of money to see him play, he rocks.

Like I said, listen to Plastic Ono Band, Imagine, Mind Games then Walls and Bridges.

Then after a day or so listen to McCartney, Ram, Wild Life, Red Rose Speedway and Band on the Run.

John’s solo catalog easily outdoes Paul’s.

As far as me being hard on Paul, he’s a big boy. And a big Lennon fan as well.

Afterall, this thread is a debate that starts with Paul being “better then Lennon” does it not? Shouldn’t John fans get an opportunity to fight his side of the case?

Would Paul want a one-sided arguement that he was better then the rest of his band? I hope not.

jcostello said: “I think if he were alive today, he (John)would agree that his work with the Beatles could not be touched.”

Another opinion not supported by knowledge of John and based on a GIGANTIC assumption.

John was much more proud of the solo work he did after the Beatles broke up, rightly so.

looool Raven
you reached my point exactly.. 🙂
that guy loves Paul, blind love indeed loooool

I guess even ordinary John fans reached that point like mr.”jcostello”

For me I would like to discuss any person here musically upon facts in a mature way. ignoring anything otherwise.

I do too love Paul, don’t care what you say, I’m still gonna love him.

Hey Raven, I was just kidding about the “don’t care what you say…”, glad you picked up on the joke about being childlike.

See, in a debate, one side tries to convince the other.

Your arguement is like, “you’re wrong, and you’re dumb too.”

Still waiting for that list of groundbreaking Paul songs pre-1975…

Oh yeah, and still waiting for that ONE definitive Paul album, is there even one?

Hey Raven, what do you think John and Paul would think of your namecalling?

Besides, I didn’t start the whole “who is better” discussion, the author did.

John was WAY BETTER then Paul, everyone knows it, even, and especially Paul.

Ammar–I said I wouldn’t addrsss “him” again so I will address you: Did you know that that “guy” was actually the proverbial 5th Beatle?! Really, he was there when it all happened and John confided in him about everything and gave him the meaning of life, and Paul said to him, “Whatever John says is correct, because I’m only the inferior half of the partnership and mostly just shine John’s shoes and tune his guitar….” Anyway, do you think that “guy’s” mommy ever lets him out of the basement for fresh air?

looool Raven..

I am glad that “guy” gave us the enlightenment that we all missed, but you are wrong on one thing…that “guy” knew everything even better than John. in his opinion Paul was the 5th Beatle..

whats funny not just that he lies about facts, but when I and other mature people here like Anna and Nona corrected some of his informations he didn’t like these facts, I mean either way he will be against Paul.loool

and answering your last question: No, that “guy” was never let out of the basement. but he was always with John, maybe he was Yoko. 😀

Simon Barret and John Cherry, you’re both idiots!

If Paul is better than John then wouldn’t Paul’s music be better then John’s?

It isn’t, not by a LONG SHOT!

Good luck listing 20 great Paul tracks, let alone 20 great Paul tracks pre-1975.

The debate centers on who was the better musician, not the better songwriter, a fundamental mistake.

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, by far.

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

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

Simon Barret thinks Paul has been a greater influence on music then John was, what a joke!

Hey Simon, go ask some actual musicians who was more influential.

Paul’s best stuff is acoustic pop and folk, not rock.

Raven…that guy situation is getting worse…I really think he needs treatment.

yes I see what you mean that you prefer John on Paul music it is as natural as I do that for Paul, but you are right if there was some psycho who will think Paul was the Beatles and John was shining his shoes (that made me cry out laughing by the way ) and come to say he is personally better than John I will reconsider my thoughts also. 😀

what that idiot is missing is that playing the instrument technically like a robot or much faster is not considered a music talent…the important thing is creativity , George or Eric Clapton maybe better Guitarist than Paul or John, but what Paul and John did is Creating ideas and melodies that no one reached, Paul did that on many instruments more.

my apology to Yoko who seems an angel compared to this “MCGod”

I wish everyone would just shut up..I love both and they are both unique and special. Cant compare the two.

“You’d think that people would have had enough of silly love songs…”

Paul never lived up to his potential.

John’s music was better in part because he was smart enough to have some master musicians help him realize his songs, unlike Paul, who by insisting on doing it all himself, lacked the input from a neutral source and the musical proficiency of real, professional musicans.

Ammar, Medicine? No, it’s completely normal for someone to post 5 times in about 6 hours with no intervening responding posts by anyone else. 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.

The debate centers on who was the better musician, not the better songwriter, a fundamental mistake, and essentially meaningless given that they both wrote popular music, a genre where musical ability is not required.

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.

another 3 in a raw posts in 90 minutes

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

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

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.

The only people who think Paul is great on electric guitar, drums and piano are those who do not play these instruments.

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.

To Jcostello : dont waste your time replying to this sick, he just think of himself as a God who lived with Paul and John and knows everything and Paul job in Beatles was holding John’s Mic.

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 :

Hey Ammar–You should be more respectful to that lunatic–after all he’s such a fanatstic musician [he himself has told us so–it must be true], and he plays so many instruments perfectly–all with his head up his rear end!

I like all 7 of John’s songs on Double Fantasy.

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.

Anyone who does not know Walls and Bridges should really check it out, it’s very, very good, and may well be the best Beatles solo album, at least while John was still alive.

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.

Hey Raven, I love Paul, really I do, but seriously, you don’t seem to know the difference is between someone who can play an instrument and somene who is accomplished on that instrument.

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.

loool Raven

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.

Well one thing Paul was better at is stock piling cash.

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

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

Paul SUCKS on drums.

Paul SUCKS HARD on electric guitar.

Paul is LAME on piano.

“Regarding McCartney’s wives, Carlin doesn’t gloss over Linda Eastman’s faults as a performer, but also celebrates what she meant to McCartney as his partner of more than 30 years.”

“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.”

John had 3 #1 abums in the US and 2 #1s in the UK.

Not bad for 5 years work.

BTW, this is supposed to be a “lively discussion” but namecalling, are we on the playground?

“…he (the author) also offers a complex portrait of an artist whose insecurities were fanned when he was in the presence of talented musicians with strong artistic visions, but who did his best work when around them.

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.”

Simon
All people who were posting here (john or Paul fans)are not posting anymore.
I am sick of this lunatic, whenever I come to find healthy discussion of healthy people I found this GabeChapman insulting Paul McCartney not only as a musician but as a person.

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!

John and Yoko took a 5-year break starting in 1975 to RAISE THEIR SON, and to try and be good parents for once.

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.

Mull of Kintyre does not hold any World Records, it holds ONE record in Britain, and only because the proceeds from the 1991 re-release of Bohemian Rhapsody were donated to charity.

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.

Mull of Kintyre peaked at #78 on the US Billboard Chart.

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.

Not just a loser but a big lier idiot GabeChapman..

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.

Happy Xmass (War is Over) reached #3 on the US Billboard Charts.

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.

Yeah, John was sued, so was George, big deal.

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.

I didn’t say Paul did in fact steal Mull, I wasn’t meaning to accuse, I just think it sounds like an old scottish song he, or Denny Laine may have unconsiously borrowed from.

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

To prove that the British are not to be trusted when it comes to where Beatles albums chart just look at the Beatles remasters.

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

October 18, 1957: Paul plays his first live gig with the band at the New Clubmore Hall in Liverpool. Playing lead, his performance was so weak, he is demoted to rhythm guitar.

Just because I love to pour gasoline on fires…

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.

Simon..

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…

So if #1s tell the story, or if numbers are used to determine greatness then I guess Paul has not been a great songwriter for the past 30 years.

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.

By Ammar’s test of greatness (hit songs and album sales) any artist with more than two #1 hits since 1980 are greater than Paul.

Simon Barret said: “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.”

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

Ammar, Mull is a UK non-charity record the first single in the history OF THE UK to sell 2 million copies IN THE UK, not a world record, not even the UK’s best seller overall, just the first single to reach 2 million copies sold in the UK.

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?

If numbers tell the story then according to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and the National Endowment for the Arts list of the:

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.

If hits determine musical greatness then how would you explain the fact that Jimi Hendrix never had a hit single. Purple Haze got to #3 in the UK and his cover of ‘Watchtower got to #20 in the US, that’s the best he did in America, #20, yet he was clearly the greatest American musician of the 1960s.

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?”

RIAA:

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.”

Paul’s last hit that wasn’t a duet was Coming Up, and yes, John did like the song very much, it helped inspire him to write again.

More on using album sales to determine greatness:

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.

Cat Stevens recorded 11 albums in 11 years and sold as many albums in the US as Paul has in 40 years and 22 albums.

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?

John is clearly America’s favorite Beatle, the Rolling Stone poll has him at 40% with Paul’s weak 27% barely beating George’s 24%.

I was only doing a good job of showing that album sales and/or hit singles are not always the best indicators of someones overall greatness.

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.

I may or may not be as young as I seem to you but you are even more ludicrous than at fist blush. There were no insults; they were obvious truths. When someone posts about 20 or more posts in a row(and has done similarly in the past), it is fairly obvious he needs serious mental help. And that someone is anything but a random stranger; we all know GabeMcGod quite well! And since 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.

Raven, go on insulting and namecalling, they don’t effect me, they only make you seem mean and child-like.

Yeah, sometimes the numbers do lie.

Raven, Look at how many words you posted to try and slam me, this is supposed to be about John and Paul, of which you have next to nothing to say.

I unfortuntely looked at this site again and I just saw something funny”

“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?

Raven, I never said I was a wonderful musician, I said I can play electric guitar, drums and piano better then Paul ever has, lots of people can, he is not that remarkable on them.

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

When they were young, Paul wanted to be Little Richard, John wanted to be Elvis.

Enough said…

Raven, you would make Paul very proud!

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

Paul is so stingy, he won’t even fork out the 30 million pounds to save Abbey Road.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/kschlichter/2009/10/27/the-worst-song-of-all-time-imagine/

Whoa! Almost after two years of you guys fighting it over.. Read all the Posts in 3 hours..Anna’s Posts seem ages away! Anyway You guys cant compare two legendary Acts! You Just cant! Yes Plastic Ono Band was a Classic Album! Imagine was Vintage Lennon. Paul has had more musical talent. so what? It just comes down to Personal Taste! I like Lennon more! But hey only Just!