My good friend John Cherry has just published a book Better Than Lennon, in it he analyzes both musicians in both their Beatles and post Beatles career. He poses, and answers the question of who is, or was, the better musician. John Lennon is no longer with us, but Paul McCartney most certainly is.
I read Better Than Lennon, and I have to admit that I tend to agree with John Cherry, McCartney while not having a perfect career, has been a more significant influence on music than John Lennon. But, I also watched an interesting DVD, Composing Outside The Beatles. This DVD tends to sway in the opposite direction, Lennon was the master, McCartney the student.
The panel for this program have been carefully selected. And I am sure that the fireworks are going to fly high.
John Cherry is the author of Better Than Lennon, and he will be defending his decision that Paul McCartney is way above John Lennon.. You can read my review here.
Billy James is the owner of the PR company Glassonyon, many of his clients are classic bands from the 70’s and 80’s, oh, and he is a huge Lennon fan. I suspect the sparks will fly! Billy reps many bands, the vast majority are household names. He is also an author, I believe that he has 8 books in print, and they are all about music. You can check out Glassonyon from this link.
Randy Pratt is the owner of the record label Hyperspace, his label specializes in promoting classic artists and their new material. He is also the front man for the band The Lizards, and a walking music encyclopedia.
Trace Hacquard is an author and music lover that has recently published a book posing the question… Is rock dead? You can read my review of Deadlines And Delusions here. Trace took three months in the summer of 2006 and prowled the country looking for rock.
Armando Aldazabar is both an author and a music producer. His books are very ‘drug centric’, and drugs seem to be a common theme in the music world. Armando is the young pup of the group. But he is just as opinionated as the rest of us! His books Cocaine Memoir and What You Are Turning Me Into are stark reflections on today’s world.
I have to admit that I am rubbing my hands and doing my best impression of Clint Eastwood, I suspect that someone will ‘Want to make my day’.
This is going to be a great discussion. We have it set for 1pm central (2pm eastern) on Saturday Jan 9. The link to the program is here, or, just point your browser at www.blogtalkradio.com a few minutes before 1pm central, you will see the listen live button on the front page.
This is one program that no Beatles fan will want to miss.
To wet your appetite, try this interview with Trace Hacquard.
I know this is going to be a wild program, I just got off the phone with Randy Pratt, his comment… “McCartney is the musician, Lennon was the deity”
Simon Barrett
297 users commented in " Lennon vs McCartney – Beatles vs Beatles – A Lively Discussion "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackI don’t understand how anyone can say that Paul is better than John, especially since John is dead. It’s an opinion, of course, and everyone is allowed their own. I just don’t get how you can compare the two when one’s career ended so abruptly and the other is still ongoing? Where is the comparison?
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.
What does being a deity have to do with music? 😉 I see Paul as a musical god too – I think the problem is, he’s so good, he makes it look easy.
I don’t see what John Lennon being dead has to do with it. If anything that is precisely the problem. John died and because of how he died, he got deified. No one is supposed to discuss it, no one is supposed to say “Hey you know what, let’s think critically”. You know Double Fantasy didn’t get universally loved when it was first released, while John was alive, very mixed reviews – would people really think he was such a god compared to Paul if he had lived?
Is there never supposed to be discussion on the subject? First it was “Well John has been killed, we can’t talk about him in anything but hushed terms of amazement, how can you possibly compare them, it’s bad taste to speak ill of the dead”, now it’s “He’s been dead for years, how can you compare when Paul’s had 30 more years to make music(::secret whisper::besides, everyone knows John was the genius)”. So can this EVER be talked about? Or is it forever off limits.
I know the book that Cherry wrote follows Paul’s whole career but I think, critically, even a book that just followed the years while they were BOTH alive, could very fairly come to the same conclusion. Naturally it’s subjective but it always has been.
I’ve been planning on getting this book(I’ve heard it’s pretty short though–so I’m not sure I want to spend the money), however I came to the same conclusion as the title a long time ago. There are plenty of “John is God, Paul sucks” books out there, what is so bad about having one that makes a case that hey, maybe Paul has a lot more going for him than he’s been given credit for and that maybe, just maybe, he’s actually better?
I just hope there is more than just one person(Cherry) who is sympathetic to the McCartney side in this live discussion. 😀 Otherwise it will seem like a gang up.
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.
BTW, I am an avid fan of the Beatles, all of them. There still wasn’t an answer to my question. Paul has had many more years to fine tune and grow with his writing and voice abilities that John did not have, that’s the fact I just can’t get over…..maybe if the book does only concentrate on what they did when they were both alive….??? That’s about as far as it could go, IMO. Thanks for the responses.
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.
I am an avid McCartney fan, but I am pretty amazed at all the people who want to compare the two. I don’t think it should be “John OR Paul”, it should always be “John AND Paul.”
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.
“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, where did you hear such lie? In fact, John wanted Paul in the band because Paul knew how to tune a guitar, and it was actually Paul who taught John how to play it properly, being that Julia didn’t teach him right. John did not start writing songs until he met Paul, but Paul had written songs before meeting John.
Paul plays more instruments than John ever did. I thought that it was a well known fact that at least musically, Paul was miles ahead than John ever was. Just listen to their post-Beatle work. Paul music is much, much more melodic and complex than John’s. (and I’m talking here about the period where they were BOTH alive).
Paul even made contributions to such well known “John” songs as “In my life” and “Come together” (the tempo and bass is what makes that song what it is).
Yes, John was put on a pedestal and made out to be a “perfect saint” and a martyr. 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.
I’m happy that books like this are starting to emerge to finally give Paul the recognition he deserves.
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.
Forget the premise, it is flawed. George Harrison’s All Things Must Pass is the record by which all Beatle solo careers must be judged. Say what you will about Lennon and McCartney — they never reached the heights of this album. ATMP is like a Russian novel or an Orson Welles film: multiple listens only add to the experience. The album gets better and better and there is so much depth to the lyrics and music. You folks argue all day about L&M, but in the end, Hari-song will be the victor.
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.
Paul taught john the chords to guitar. Lennon only knew Banjo chords, his mother had shown him. That is one reason john wanted Paul in the Quarrymen. Paul was already quite accomplished.
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.
Yeah, Anna, basically Paul got into the Quarrymen because John realized he was better than anyone in the band at the time. In turn, Paul got George into the band(Paul knew George from when they had both lived in the Speke council development and attented Liverpool Institute together). Paul was also the one who was always pushing to get a better sound(and no, it didn’t necessarily make him the popular one, so he got to be kind of the “bad cop”, however it certainly shows that it should have been no surprise that he kept doing the same thing once they were successful).
Just logic says they had to be better than everyone else, they were both much younger than John – Paul was 21 months younger and George was 28 months younger, which is a big deal during the teenage years. The only reason a 17 year old who is out of high school puts a couple of 15 year old high school kids in his band is because he knows they are better. I think at the time, he probably felt the age thing was enough to keep him in the leadership position.
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?”
Bottom line, it’s like saying who is the better painter…Van Gogh or Monet. ( I hope you know which painter represents which Beatle. It should be quite evident.)
It simply comes down to a matter of taste. I love both, but, give me Van Gogh any day.
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….
Karen, I haven’t heard Neil Diamond lately, I’m glad that he is sounding good in his 70s; however that wasn’t my point. What I was saying that a singer’s voice won’t improve with age (quite the opposite). Mr Diamond may be sounding almost as good as he once did, but no way he is singing any better than when he was in his 20s or 30s
John hadn’t done anything for five yeas when he released “Double Fantasy”. The funny thing about that album is that it was filled with the type of music he was always critical of Paul for making. The album was all sugar and sentimentality -hey, there’s nothing wrong with that, I like those types of songs, but John always looked down to those type of albums, because in his POV his music dealt with superior themes and more important matters.
There was nothing political, new or revolutionary about “Double Fantasy” It was about romantic love and family.
And what’s wrong with that? Nothing, but he thumbed his nose at Paul’s sentimental lyrics for years, and then after a long absence he comes back with songs like “woman” “Starting Over” and “Beautiful Boy”.
I’m a Beatles fan, and I DO like John up to the point where he hooked up with Yoko. But I believe that since his death Paul has been treated unfairly, and that’s why I’m glad books like this when he gets the credit he deserves are finally being written.
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.”
Clearly, McCartney was more prolific (John being dead or not) and was more versatile with his skill with percussion, melody development, harmony and overall production. Had he lived, there is no way Lennon would have been so disciplined for making so many albums and for doing so many tours.
Lennon, on the other hand, is clearly the hard rocker and more of a creative genius. During the Beatles days, Lennon would have to whip up 5-6 songs in a few days as McCartney had already written his and was pressing to record. Lennon could also simply cut to the chase, go to the piano, and bang out the first chords for Obla Di Obla Da, while the other just stood around.
We can work it out is a classic co-composition. Perhaps the only thing purists will agree is that their music would have always been better collectively than solo.
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.
“During the Beatles days, Lennon would have to whip up 5-6 songs in a few days as McCartney had already written his and was pressing to record. Lennon could also simply cut to the chase, go to the piano, and bang out the first chords for Obla Di Obla Da, while the other just stood around.”
There were times Paul did that too. That’s why he was always taking the guitar solos.(I exaggerate, obviously he didn’t always take them or even often take them but on the few occasions when he did…) Because he could come up with it quick and get it done–George worked for hours trying to get a solo together for Taxman and Paul ended up coming up with it pretty much on the spot. It didn’t take Paul days to come up with the changes for “Come Together” either, he pretty quickly saw what the song needed – it’s just sometimes it’s easier to see what someone else’s thing needs than your own, like an editor – speed this up, slow this down. John sped up the pace on the opening of Ob-la-di Ob-la-da.
I wouldn’t say that shows how he’s MORE of a creative genius, as Paul on occasion did the same thing. Neither does speed of writing – a lot of those just thrown together songs actually sound kind of thrown together, it’s not like they are all of superior quality – the ones that are usually took a fair bit of work outside and inside the studio, just like some of Paul’s songs. As George Martin once said, it bothered him when Lennon, while describing what was to be Let It Be said something like there was going to be “none of your nonsense”, is that John’s songs often required the most of that “nonsense” in the studio. His songs often took a lot of work to get their final form, it’s not like they arrived in the studio ready to go.
As for Paul, well Paul’s always writing apparently, I think he once said it was like an addiction, it’s just something he always does, he kind of can’t help himself. 🙂 So naturally Paul always had songs to bring in, just based on how he worked. It doesn’t mean the individual songs took any longer for him to write.
That simply shows different working styles – Paul’s a self-described workaholic and always “working”(though he also has said he doesn’t really see music as work so much), John would sometimes procrastinate and then do it all at once. It’s like in school – just because one person keeps up on their school work and the other person procrastinates to the last minute, it doesn’t make the one who gets it done last minute smarter – it just means different working styles. Some people are more self-motivated than others. Paul’s one of those people they mention in the employment ads “Looking for a motivated self-starter….” 🙂
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.
Everybody needs to remember, George Martin said it best.
John is a word person & Paul is a music person. Thats the difference.
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.
If the discussion is about who is the finer songwriter after The Beatles broke up. This debate gets kind of redundant. George Harrison’s post Beatles work is, was far superior to either John or Paul’s despite how great they were. He wrote soul music to enliven the heart. I guess he didn’t possess such a strong ego. So that kept him out of the limelight a little more. But real musicians know the truth.
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.
People…this is pointless! They were BOTH FANTASTIC…the likes of which we will never see again….but to debate who was better is utter nonsense!!! And, I think that they’d both agree!!!
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.
When you consider that John carried the Beatles when Paul and George were not good songwriters, you might conclude that a Beatles band without Paul or George would have still been great and famous, but imagine the Beatles without John.
FYI: Paul barely gats more votes than George on the Rolling Stone poll.
http://www.rollingstone.com/community/polls/29776878/results
Also, George was every bit John and Paul’s equal by 1968, and I personally feel his song Within you Without You from Pepper is the album’s second greatest song.
Which is a good point I think for Pepper which Paul often get’s too much, if not all the credit for. The two best songs on the album are not Paul songs, IMHO.
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.
McCartney is the better musician. He plays several instruments and is very good at all of them. He is also much better with melodies than Lennon. Lennon was a better lyricist. McCartney also has a better voice with much more range. You can’t include anything McCartney has done after 1980. Lennon could have been much better but he was very lazy compared to mcCartney who is still a workaholic. I still love them best when they played together!! The best band ever!
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.
John carried The Beatles when Paul wasn’t a good songwriter? And when was that? Paul had the biggest hits and the most A sides in The Beatles
As for putting Paul in a bad light saying the “other three didn’t like him” you are really cherry picking stuff to put Paul in a bad light.
George and John had screaming fights. John wanted Eric Clapton to replace George, he said it out loud. John stopped speaking to George because he felt he dissed Yoko (I can’t say I blame George) John was also furious that George didn’t say much about him in his autobiography and they never spoke after that. Paul visited John often at the Dakota, and when he stopped they spoke regularly on the phone. When John died he had recently talked to John.
Paul was really there for George when he was dying.
As for Paul suing, if you know The Beatles story well, you know that it was Paul who did all he could to keep the band together. He sued because of the Klein matter, and years later the others realized he was right about Klein all along.
So, you think “Paul lost all moral compass” over a song? He has NEVER jumped over the “kill all muslims bandwagon” Are you even aware that Paul is a spokeperson and supporter of the One Voice Movement, which is half Palestinian, half Israeli? Would they want their support if what you say was true?
I always get a laugh when I hear “John would have never done that” It is so easy to say that about the dead. “John would have been disgusted at Paul’s lack of moral compass”
Tell me, was John disgusted at his own lack of moral compass, esp regarding the way he treated his own son Julian?
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?
Sorry, it was meant to say “this is all your opinions “on” what etc….”
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….
“John carried The Beatles when Paul wasn’t a good songwriter? And when was that?”
It’s a matter of opinion of course, but IMO, the Beatles records through Rubber Soul are CARRIED by John, he always has the best couple songs on all those early albums. Most Beatles singles through 1965 were written by John.
“He (Paul) has NEVER jumped over the “kill all muslims bandwagon.”
Maybe I exaggerated for effect, but the song, “Freedom”, written after 9/11 is a call to arms, or war, and jingoistic by any definition.
I’m glad he changed his tune, 8 years, 2 wars, and 3,500 dead American soldiers later.
And yes, I agree, John treated Julien poorly.
“As for putting Paul in a bad light saying the “other three didn’t like him” you are really cherry picking stuff to put Paul in a bad light.”
Look at the solo catalogs, you will see.
John played with George and Ringo and vice versa, but the three NEVER played with Paul.
If Paul was such a great musical director, then wouldn’t the other three like working with him, at least enough to do one song in a decade? They didn’t.
“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.
Also, Paul is worth 1.5 BILLION dollars. He has Picasso’s in his guest house.
Amasing that kind of wealth is miserly and frankly, a crime against humanity.
Some hippy values hey?
Anna, for the record, I love Paul, no matter what he does, I will always love him, he is the greatest living legend.
Like I said, I think the only fair answer is this, that at the end of the Beatles, John and Paul were EQUALS.
They are different enough that this question always comes down to a matter of personal taste.
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
And they were (are) all human beings. Great in some aspects, flawed in others
Gabe, I think it’s best if we agree to disagree. Neither of us will change the mind of the other
And fter all, we both love The Beatles, don’t we?
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??? : )
Gabe said:
“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”
It’s still only your interpretation of what he was saying…..
How is “the sound you make is Muzak to my ears…” open for interpretation?
Also, Crippled Inside from the same album is about Paul.
Karen, like I said, it’s OK, don’t worry about it 🙂
I’ll admit I was a bit putt off by your post because Gabe started on the personal stuff and I felt you singled me out in your reply. But I get your point 🙂
Regarding “How Do You Sleep” John said years later that the song was more about him. He also called Paul his best friend on the Cavett (SP) show, and called him his brother shortly before he died
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.
“Regarding “How Do You Sleep” John said years later that the song was more about him. He also called Paul his best friend on the Cavett (SP) show, and called him his brother shortly before he died.”
John lied about How Do You Sleep to avoid dissing Paul when he didn’t feel like it.
Steel and Glass, with the identicle chorus is John writing about himself.
Yes, Paul and John were friends, I never debated that. My point was that John NEVER wanted to record with Paul post-Beatles, and he didn’t not one single song with Paul, neither did George, or Ringo.
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.
Anna said: “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?”
Not casual, but Paul and John’s parenting skills are not on trial, this is about if Paul was better than Lennon.
I said no, because Paul chose destruction after 9/11, which was not very Beatle of him.
Speaking as someone who was abandoned by their father much like Julien was, and John before him, no, having obcene amounts of money is not worse, abandoning a child is about as bad as it gets, IMHO.
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.
Ok, Anna, now I’m going to ask Gabe:
Gabe, did you know John personally? How do you know he lied about what he said? And haven’t you ever said or written something about someone or to someone that you later regretted? I am not saying that they may not have “hated” eachother, but most likely it was a “love/hate” relationship. Maybe they were both jealouse of the other’s abilities? John wasn’t a Saint, nor was Paul…
As you said Anna, they were/are human beings that make mistakes. And for pretty much everyone, fame and fortune WILL change a person. Still, what they did in their personal lives is irrelevant.
I feel cheated because John was murdered. I personally liked his voice to Paul’s. I think it’s all just a matter of who “you” like more.
I also remember John saying in “Imagine” (the movie) that he basically wrote his songs about himself (or his family)…not really speaking about anything or anyone else. He said that if it related to you or someone else, it was just basically “you” putting it there.
Anywho…..
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!
Please Please Me through Rubber Soul go to John. 1962-1965
Revolver is a close one, but I might have to give it to Paul, John was taking a little too much LSD I think, with three strong contributions from George. 1966
Pepper I’ll give to Paul, it’s only right. 1967
Mystery Tour is all Lennon, both George and Paul are weak. 1967
The White album is a two way tie, again with great songs from George. 1968
Let it Be goes to Paul, with great songs from George, Lennon is weak. 1969
Abbey Road, I call a three way tie and wish John and Paul would have liked All Things Must Pass enough to give George his deserved third song on the album.
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…..
“I also remember John saying in “Imagine” (the movie) that he basically wrote his songs about himself (or his family)…not really speaking about anything or anyone else. He said that if it related to you or someone else, it was just basically “you” putting it there.”
Yeah he did say that, to the potentially psychotic transient living in his garden cause he thought John had all the answers.
I know John lied because I know John, I’ve earned it, trust me, i’m a diehard Beatles fan, maybe the biggest ever, lol…I’m sure we all feel that way, that’s how good they were!
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.
Gabe, I’ve been lucky enough to see Paul twice. The best shows I’ve ever seen.
Just by this thread you can tell how much I admire and love his music. Despite the enormous build up I had in my head about seeing him (my entire life) He didn’t disappoint. He was beyond fantastic!
I hope I get to see him perform at least one more time.
“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!
My sentiments exactly!!!
Well said, Karen
Thank you, Anna.
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.
How bloody stupid this whole thing is. The Beatles (all four of them) comlimented each other. Both John and Paul were talented and innovate song-writers and both could sing ballads or rip out a great rock vocal. John made some outstanding music and social commentary in his lifetime and Paul still does. I thank them both (well George and Ringo too) for adding enormous joy to my life and providing the world with such an enormous body of work, together and solo. They both conributed. Who anyone prefers is totally subjective and it’s a waste of time and insulting to both of them
“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.
“When you consider that John carried the Beatles when Paul and George were not good songwriters, you might conclude that a Beatles band without Paul or George would have still been great and famous, but imagine the Beatles without John.”
Paul was a good songwriter for as long as John was, he started writing songs before John did. John started writing songs so Paul wouldn’t be outdoing him. In fact many people think that while Paul only had three songs on Hard Day’s Night, those three songs were more striking than most of John’s, “Can’t Buy Me Love” was used in a pivotol scene and “And I Love Her” and “Things We Said Today” showed a maturer side to the song writing the Beatles were capable of. I wouldn’t exactly be squealing over the quality of “Beatles for Sale” either, another John led album. Quantity ain’t quality, as I’m sure many a Lennon fan who complains “But Paul’s released more albums and has had more years” would agree.
I personally think it just yet another sign of their different working techniques – everyone from Martin, through Smith and Emerick agree that Paul was highly interested in learning how to MAKE the songs, I think it’s pretty obvious that a lot of Paul’s energy during ’64 and perhaps early ’65 was devoted to learning HOW to be able to put his musical ideas into practice. When he did, he went off like fireworks and actually I kind of think that maybe that sort of did Lennon’s head in a little though he’d never have admitted it. He probably let Paul and George in the band, being so good, because at the time he did his age would keep him “in charge”–they were enough younger to not be any kind of a threat, well once you reach the mid-20’s the age difference really doesn’t work that way anymore. And I actually think it probably didn’t help that the album that was treated as a happening and hailed as a work of brilliance was done under Paul’s steerage. I think as much as Brian’s death that may well have added to Lennon’s withdrawal. Because it’s well known that John had a problem with giving up “leadership”, any group he was in he had to see himself as top dog.
He’d give you plenty of room to play(thus the fact that he tended to be more easy going with regards to how his songs got done and so was probably considered easier to work with) so long as you never got the idea that anyone but him was the leader. Problem is Paul saw himself as an equal(with very good reason he most certainly was). More than that, esp. with Yesterday, a lot more people around them and in the press were acknowledgeing they were equals or perhaps even seeing Paul as the one out push the envelope as well.
You can see it in the quotes about the studio from Norman and Geoff – do you think John didn’t see that there were people who felt like Norman and Geoff did? Do you think John didn’t see Paul living there in London doing and seeing and then comparing it to himself living in the suburbs and feel himself somehow “lacking”, after all he felt he was always supposed to be at the forefront.
Paul wanted to know everything about the studio, he wanted the details, he had ideas and he wanted to get to the point where he could put them into practice. So during that 18 month period up to maybe Rubber Soul, he focused a lot of energy on experiencing and learning, on absorbing. John wanted something to happen, but was often quite happy to leave the details up to others in the studio, including Paul.
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.
Beatles For sale rocks, IMHO.
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.
Paul Rocks!!!
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.
Look at “Happy Christmas (War is Over)” VS “Wonderful Christmastime.” John’s is extremely deep and melodic while Paul writes a trite pop song with no depth.
JOHN LENNON ROCKS!!!!!
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. Oh, and it was John that saw George and Ringo got a piece of the Lennon-McCartney publishing, not Paul.
“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.
Nona is saying it like it is. And Paul has so much feeling, so much emotion in his voice -how can anyone try to deny it? There’s a reason why “Yesterday” is the most recorded song in history. People were amazed that such feeling and maturity could emerge from the voice of a 22-year old. Yesterday was also the first time people saw art in their music.
“For No One” “Yesterday” “Elenor Rigby” Blackbird” “Let It Be” “Hey Jude” “Golden Slumbers”. Trite and Poppy Songs?
John used to be furious that whenever he went to places and was recognized, the above mentioned songs would be played to him. Songs he had nothing to do with. But those are the songs people think of when they think about Beatles music.
As for Klein. John wanted him because Klein knew the lyrics to some of his songs, and because he swore like a sailor. Yes, really deep, and intelligent. So intelligent that someone like Klein was able to fool and manipulate him.
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.
Haven’t read all the posts, but plan on it. Ever since I can remember, I have always been a Paul fan, Interestingly enough, now that I have reached the “age of wisdom” as I like to see it, I have gone back and read articles, watched documentaries and listened to their music with a new ear. As a result my whole view point has changed in terms of the amount of talent John had versus Paul. The early Beatle years, both John and Paul were putting out “pop ditties”-catchy, fun, sing-a-along music. As their evolution progressed, both McCartney and Lennon matured, but in very different ways. Both have incredible talent, but I now see John’s point when he made the statement about Paul’s post-Beatle music being “a bunch of silly love songs”. The concepts and language of Paul’s music could be trite, silly a lot of the time, punctuated by some really lovely, artistic peices. He is really more of the Pop music genre, while John was more rock and roll. I like the comment in one of the posts comparing John’s “So this is Christmas” and Paul’s “Wonderful Christmas time”, which reallly exemplifies this point. John was really ahead of his time. I used to think he was a nut, but looking back now on his comments and his lyrics he was really right-on with alot of his views. His messages were tainted by his lifestyle and the way he communicated them. He was the tortured artist of our time, an angry soul expressing his deep pain through his music. Paul had deep pain as well, but he was more sentimental about it than John. Both lost their mothers as children, but Paul’s mother passed away from illness and John’s mother pretty much abandoned him and later died when hit by a truck. You can see how each ones losses was played out in their music. Anyway , trying to say who was better is fruitless. They are both huge talents in very different ways – this is like making me choose between Chocolate Cake or Creme Brulee…just can’t do it! Love them both!
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?
To me, it seems you all are going by their personal lives and their problems with eachother than what they accomplished musically. I started to research Beatles’ songs and I came across this link, it’s from wikpedia; for which I am not a real fan, but it shows that John Lennon was a musical genious. To me anyway. Every song that I love was written by John Lennon, with a few exceptions where Paul had done so. And George as well. I was also reading numerous articles on this very subject. John and Paul were/are two totally different writers and it’s only someone’s opinion who is/was better. It’s whatever type of music you generally like that will make up your minds, at least it should be. I feel you all are going beyond the music into their personal lives. Take that out and then try to make a decision. I doubt you all can, from these comments I can see the depths of the dislike you have for both “men” and not “musicians”. This all is, of course, my honest opinion.
The link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_Beatles_songs
down, Anna, down!! I said the two songs exemplified the point I was making in that particular sentence.
Two better examples are Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane, written and recorded during the same time period, late 1966, the first two tracks they made for what was to be a concept album about their childhood, which later evolved into Sgt. Pepper, which, interestingly, contained neither song.
John and Paul are too different to say which is better, they were both incredible, and they both helped to change popular music, and the world.
One should more correctly say they prefer one to the other.
Anna is a true fan, good for you girl.
“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.
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.
sorry bout that double post…..oooppppssss! My bad.
Ok Gabe, so Lydia, Nona and I aren’t true fans? Why?
Karen, I think Gabe was just responding to the “Down, Anna” comment.
Thanks, Gabe 🙂
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!!!!!!!!!
Who says all Beatle fans like silly happy music?
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.
I am the Walrus!!!!!
“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?
The Beatles vs Beatles is stupid. it doesn’t really matter who was the greatest beatle. But if there is going to be a debate on who is the greatest, i would have to John. 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.
John Lennon is and always will be the face of The Beatles and The British Invasion.
i’m in chile. i think john lennon is god he was the face and spirit of the beatles.
come together!
Paul and John are both great. Period. But GabeMc is a complete fool (though not the one on the hill)
“. 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.
“It’s a matter of opinion of course, but IMO, the Beatles records through Rubber Soul are CARRIED by John, he always has the best couple songs on all those early albums. Most Beatles singles through 1965 were written by John.”
No they weren’t. Throughout the Beatles FIRST pivotol year(when Beatlemania was born), it was an even split – the single that got their foot in the door was Paul’s, their second single which got them their first no. 1 was John’s, the next three singles were totally co-written(From Me to You starting with John’s first line, She Loves You born from Paul’s initial idea–make the song about a third person, “She Loves You”, instead of “I Love You”– and I Want To Hold Your Hand where Paul came up with the inspirational chord and John liked it) and Can’t Buy Me Love was McCartney.
John had the next 4 singles, starting with a Hard Day’s Night and ending with Help! but Paul’s influence was very strong on the two after that – Ticket to Ride(he had the lead guitar and came up with how Ringo played the drums) and Day Tripper which was partly co-written(Paul wrote some of the verse) and which has a shared vocal, with Paul’s taking lead on the verses.
Day Tripper was part of a so-called Double A Side with “We Can Work It Out”(another shared with Paul writing the bulk and John giving the what they called “middle eight”)–basically they sent out the single to radio stations, play whatever song you want”(and as radio play after the initial plays is often affected by requests…). “We Can Work It Out” proved to be the bigger single, being their biggest single since “Can’t Buy Me Love”, much to John’s chagrin as he’d been pushing for Day Tripper to be the single and the double A-side was done to mollify him.
As well, while Yesterday was not released as a single in the UK – it was in the US where it was a huge hit. And the song did soon go to no. 1 in the UK, only by another artist named Matt Munro who covered it. 🙂
From that point on Paul dominated – they released 11 more singles in the UK and Paul was the writer of 8 of them.
As for John always having the most memorable songs on the the pre-Revolver albums – well some people think “I’ve Just Seen a Face” from Beatles for Sale is the stand out track, including George Martin. “Every Little Thing” though sung by John is actually a McCartney composition and that was considered a bit of a stand out on the album as well. It’s one of their earliest songs to contain an unusual instrument as well(the timpani). Yes actually covered it on their debut album. Baby’s in Black, a song that featured in the live shows pretty prominently, is a co-written song, so it is as much Paul’s as John’s. But overall Beatles for Sale is considered to be possibly their least memorable album, because it was recorded in a rush in the middle of a tour.
And goodness knows Rubber Soul has just as memorable songs by McCartney and McCartney came up with the album title, I’d hardly say it was “driven by Lennon”.
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!
Oops, I meant “I’ll Follow the Sun”, I’ve Just Seen a Face is from Help!. 🙂
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.
And George Martin himself said in an online interview I found around 2002 said that he has worked with many different music artists but that he has never known or worked with anyone as brilliant as The Beatles!
He says in his biography All You Need Is Ears refutes that he was the one who had most to do with The Beatles music. He admits most of the ideas came from them.
And if anyone ever reads the excellent book,The Beatles Recording Sessions by Mark Lewisohn which is a very detailed music diary of of every recording session in their amazing only 8 year career, which has interviews with their recording engineers,tape operators,George Martin quotes,and a very good interview with Paul in the beginning,they would see how truly creative,and innovative especially John and Paul were in the recording studio and that most of these great musical ideas came from them.
George Martin was also once interviewed on a rock station Beatles program and he said what is clearly obvious and true, John Lennon and Paul McCartney were incredibly talented people, they both were extraordinarily talented song composers and great singers.
Well, it all comes down to opinions and individual tastes, but we all agree that THEY, were amazing, all FOUR of them.
And it is fitting that the GREATEST band ever would have the GREATEST fans ever, all of us!
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.
Those 5 Lennon albums are not dissappointing to John fans, not in the least.
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.
Name one Paul album form the 1970s that critics consider groundbreaking and influential. Good luck…
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.
Paul’s High rated albums in 70’s :
Band On The Run 1974
At Speed Of Sound 1976
Venus And Mars 1975
Ram (is now highly considered by critics) 1971
McCartney 1 1970
Back TO The Eag 1979
Wings Over America (Live) 1977
McCartney 2 1980
moderate albums:
Redrose speedway (No.1 also) 1971
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)
comes up after 6 years with half album & 3 good songs: Double Fantasy 1980
which people didnt receive well, then sold very well because of his tragic death.
not to mention his nonsense albums with yoko before the break up:
Two Virgins 1968
The wedding album 1969
Do you like singles compare also in 70’s?
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.
sorry I meant :while Plastic Ono Band was a great album, his only unfortunately
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.
Name Paul’s Beatle songs that compare to:
1) Help!
2) You’ve Got to Hide Your Love Away
3) Girl
4) In My Life
5) She Said She Said
6) Tomorrow Never Knows
7) Strawberry Fields
8) A Day in the Life
9) All You Need is Love
10) Revolution
11) Julia
12) Across the Universe
13) Dig A Pony
14) Because
15) Here Comes the Sun King
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.
For proof that Paul is the worst Beatle on lead guitar listen to The End from Abbey Road.
The three trade licks in this order, Paul, George, then John.
Paul’s licks are the worst of the three.
Taxman has a great Jimi inspired solo, so does Good Morning Good Morning and Sgt. Pepper, Paul should be proud of those, and maybe the slide on Drive My Car, otherwise, Paul did not contribute much lead guitar to the Beatles.
John’s guitar solos on For You Blue and Get Back are among the best Beatles guitar solos.
Oh yeah, John also invented dance music (Tomorrow Never Knows).
So it’s John with, dance music, art rock, prog rock, punk rock, and grunge rock.
I give Paul credit for heavy metal with Helter Skelter, and sappy pops songs like nearly everything else he ever did.
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.
“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”
The lawyer line is about selling your soul, the line about Yoko means he loves her all day, everyday, no matter what he is doing, he always thinks about her, and their love together.
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.
Ammar, first off, I love Paul, big time. I just think the discussion was getting one-sided.
The Taxman solo is not hard, I could play it when I was 15.
The Get Back solo is just as good, and I can play anything from Malmsteen to Chet Atkins.
Paul may hev done the “tomorrow…” loops, but the flanging of the mix was John’s original idea.
As far as Paul showing Ringo what to play, that’s laughable in the least.
Paul may have given some suggestions true, but Ringo DESTROYS Paul on drums so I don’t see how Paul could show Ringo anything on a drum kit, I doubt it seriously.
The only drums Paul can play are straight 4/4 rock beats with no variation lie the ones I teach to 12 year-olds, sorry, it’s true.
I didn’t say Paul was ALWAYS flat, just sometimes, like Love Me Do, Things We Said Today, Two of Us etc…
“The Night Before” is lame, it’s about a one-night stand, gross.
Paul was sometimes demeaning to women in his lyrics, and could be a little pervy as well.
“well she was just 17…”
“she’s sweeter than all the girls and, I’ve met quite a few, nobody in all the world can, do what she can do.”
“Unaccustomed as I am, to the work of a house wife.”
“And when the cupboards bare, I’ll still find something there with My Love. it’s understood.”
When Paul’s mom died when he was 14 he asked his Father, “What are we gonna do without her money.”
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.
Holy cow you did not go there Gabe? If you could bring up what Paul said when his mother died, you clearly know next to nothing about the complex reactions teenage boys might bring to a tragic event in their lives. THAT was a young Paul, who was really still a boy, TRYING to be a grown up, trying to concentrate on something that was important to his mother. Trying not to be overwhelmed by her loss. Heck I saw an interview with him from 1984 and when he was asked about his mother he was still obviously emotionally effected by it. His mother worked her ass off doing everything she could to get her boys into better situations by improving the families financial situation. So that way they could finally live in a house with indoor plumbing(20 Forthlin Rd was it, unfortunately she died very soon afterward) and where they wouldn’t get threatened by bullies for being intelligent. So the first thing he said focused on was something that she was always very keenly aware of, their financial situation.:::eyerolls:::
Also Paul isn’t flat on those songs, not in the slightest. He’s singing that way for emotional effect, that’s quite clear. Not on Love Me Do, but he was very nervous, he said so himself. But on Things We Said Today and Two of Us – I can’t imagine them being as emotionally effective being sung any other way, it was very clearly a choice by Paul to sing them that way. Paul thought nothing of doing NINETY takes of a vocal to get it just how he wanted, believe me if he wanted it to sound different he’d have done it.
How was “she was just 17” demeaning to women, he was 20 when he wrote it, his girlfriend was 17. And the “you know what I mean” line was Lennon’s. As for the rest, don’t know what world you are living in but I’m a woman and I don’t find them in the slightest bit demeaning.
Paul also wrote many songs that were sympathetic to a female viewpoint, even if they ended sadly, like Another Day(which is one of the more honest and sensitive portrayals of that kind of very female loneliness written by a man IMO), even Blackbird was actually written about a woman, a woman fighting for her civil rights.
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.
Nona, you rock, but you need to show some love for John to be a true Beatles fan, IMO.
Also, good call on Paul’s bad choice of words after his mom died, I am sure you are right about that, thanks for showing me another way to look at it.
The flat singing might be as you say it is, interesting thought. I did not mean to say Paul sounded flat often, I originally said John was often sharp, and the combination made for some great harmonies.
Blackbird is amazing, no doubt, glad you pointed that out, I have always disliked Another Day with a passion, my personal opinion.
What do you think of the Lennon songs Mother, Isolation, Working Class Hero, God, Instant Karma, Real Love, Imagine, Jealous Guy, Only People, Give Peace a Chance, Whatever Gets You Through the Night, #9 Dream etc, One Day at a Time, Out The Blue…
John recorded all of those great songs before 1974.
If you don’t know them, you should.
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?
About the drums, sounds like a bossy and overbearing bandmate (Paul), who can barely play drums, telling the greatest drummer in the history of the world (Ringo) specifically what to play.
As a musician I can say, that does not sound like fun to be Ringo, or a healthy creative environment.
As I said before, the other three did not like recording with Paul, this is evidenced by the fact that they ALMOST NEVER did after The Beatles broke-up.
John and George NEVER recorded with Paul again during their ENTIRE solo careers, not once! (George and Ringo did for the Anthology) And Ringo has played with Paul on maybe 6 solo tracks in 40 YEARS!
Paul must be a delight to record music with.
The greatest Beatle must be the one who was fun to record music with IMHO.
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.
Simon – turn the comments off! Just kidding. You guys don’t see that EVERYTHING you are stating is of YOUR opinion. LOL. Read all the comments over again. It’s only an opinion. And besides, I am the only correct person here! LOL, just kidding again. You guys need to relax.
I agree with John.
Yeah Simon, tun them off so I can get the last word, which is this.
John and Paul were quite different, but most certainly equals, where most of this is opinion, some is actual historical fact.
And in the End…
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.
As I said SEVERAL times in this thread, I love Paul, he is great, beyond great, he is one of the greatest ever and THE GREATEST living legend.
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.
jcostelo said: “Together, they were the best songwriters of all time. Separated, they were just two other musicians.”
Plastic Ono Band is one of the SEMINAL albums of the 1970s, and of all time.
I doubt Paul had ANY influence on what John, Ringo and Klaus created.
“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).
Since Paul only made one good album during the 80s, “Flower’s in the Dirt” from 1989, I might go so far as to say John made more great music in 4 years then Paul did in 20.
There you have it, Paul made three good albums in 20 years, John made 4 good albums in 4 years.
Who is better?
you are really funny…
you choose by yourself which is better album upon on your taste and then you ask people:
see ? who is better?
if you are willing to discuss and analyse upon FACTS not just your own taste only then I would answer you.
my opinions up are all based on facts, reading, searching, John and Paul statements.
one by one your arguments were defeated starting from Paul contribution to Beatles songs to recording with other Beatles , through solo career for both.
you can play your game on someone who didnt hear the Beatles or their solo projects.
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”.
jcostello said :
(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.)
you are absolutely right my friend, some fans like George more than anyone else, and Ringo too had fans.
I don’t mind comparing musical abilities and output for the two, it just should be based on facts and figures and consequences.
attacking the role of Paul should come to an end.This man has given all his life to make us happy through his music, why would someone make lies and attack his personality? for the love of John?
or maybe attacking the successful persons will make us feel better?
Plastic Ono Band is one of the greatest albums of all time, name one Paul album that attained legendary status, just one.
Ammar, I never attacked Paul.
I personally said it was my opinion, as a musician, that a creative environment is best when each musician plays what instinctualy comes to him, as opposed to playing what another band member wants them to play.
In a band, there should be creative input.
If Paul “told” and “showed” Ringo what to play, then he was using RIngo like a studio musician, not a band member.
Like I said, if I was Ringo, I would not take drumming advice from Paul, who can barely play.
This is why Paul blocked the re-release of Let it Be, the film, cause it shows him to be bossy and overbearing.
I’ver seen it, I have a copy from back in the day.
Like I said, anyone, name one single Paul album that is an accepted masterpiece.
We shouldn’t have to bash John in order to laud Paul, and vice versa.
I think Paul’s best albums are Ram, Venus and Mars, Flowers in the Dirt, and Flaming Pie.
GabeMc you need to calm down because John would hit you in the face if he knew you were trying to belittle Paul like this.
You say that the Plastic Ono Band is one of the “SEMINAL albums of the 1970s, and of all time.”
Let me ask you, since when is the Plastic Ono Band better than ANY of the Beatles albums? Are you crazy?
You say we shouldn’t have to “bash John in order to laud Paul”, so why are you bashing Paul to laud John?
I don’t really understand what you’re trying to prove. But, All Things Must Pass is much better than Plastic Ono Band and that’s George’s work. Is someone going to join this conversation and start bashing John and Paul in order to laud Paul?
Why do we need to bash any member of the Beatles? In my opinion, there best songs (one not better than another) are: Let it Be, Yesterday, Hey Jude, A Day in the Life, In My Life, Across the Universe, Something, Here Comes the Sun.
3 from John, 3 from Paul, 2 from George. Doesn’t mean I’m trashing Ringo, he just didn’t write a lot. If I had to add a couple more, hows about Blackbird and Dear Prudence
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.
jcostelo said: “GabeMc you need to calm down because John would hit you in the face if he knew you were trying to belittle Paul like this.”
You should check YouTube for John’s thoughts on Paul, you don’t seem to know what they really are.
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.
Yeah and John also renounced ALL of his work with the Beatles. I think if he were alive today, he would agree that his work with the Beatles could not be touched
“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…
Gabe McC, you are worse than a fool–hill or no hill. Much worse– you are nothing more than a shill for John (which is fine, but he doesn’t need your pathetic “Help”), but you pretend to also like Paul, when clearly you only say so because you think it gives you some “even-handed” credibility. There’s no point in discussing anything with you because you are judge and jury; you have ruled (more drooled). What a complete phony!
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.
Like I asked before, is there one groundbreaking, influential, innovative, and seminal McCartney album?
John did more good songs, and great albums in 4 years then Paul did in 40 years.
Look at the catalogs and show me how I’m wrong.
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.
Here is a quick list of 20 essential tracks all done within 4 years after the Beatles.
Give Peace a Chance
Instant Karma
Mother
Working Class Hero
Isolation
God
Imagine
Jealous Guy
Give Me Some Truth
Oh My Love
Mind Games
One Day (At a Time)
Out The Blue
Only People
Going Down on Love
Whatever Gets you Through the Night
Scared
#9 Dream
Steel and Glass
Nobody Loves You (When you’re Doen and Out).
Somebody try to list 20 great Paul tracks pre 1975.
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.
Then list the amazing Paul tracks from 1970-1974.
I do too love Paul, don’t care what you say, I’m still gonna love him.
GabeMc, now you’re in 2 year old territory [probably always were]: “I do too love Paul… don’t care what you say…” Waah waah! Did someone take your blanky away?! Take a deep breath or you’ll go blue. We (well most) are all on to you which is why apparently no one wants to play your ridiculous list crap with you. It’s just pathetic, if not downright psycho. Look, it’s OK for you not to like Paul. Really it is.
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?
GabeMc, go back and read–I never said that John wasn’t superior to Paul in most respects. And there is no “debate” to be had with you. I wouldn’t waste my time. I said you were a phony, a fool and a shill for John (who again doesn’t need someone as infantile as you to defend him)–someone who pretends to be ever so even handed by pretending to appreciate Paul as well when clearly you don’t based on your black and white conclusions and edicts that we all must accept as gospel. You have delusions of grandeur and they are clearly unwarranted. And you are child-like; I can tell by the fact that you need a pacifier badly. But you’ll be glad to know I am done addrssing you; it is fruitless and I will leave to to others.
Hey Raven, what do you think John and Paul would think of your namecalling?
And as far as all this B.S. on here about John being “too lazy” to compare to Paul, what a laugh.
John wrote as many Beatles songs as Paul and he put out just as much music as Paul did from 1970-1975.
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.
loool
Raven . I think this guy is either sick minded or a child as you said.
I was giving some information and analysis before I noticed what this child is doing.
I keep coming here to see if any of the healthy people who were here want to discuss the subject in a mature way like it was before this psycho came..
but it seems they all sick because of him and not interested anymore
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?
You guys are soooooooooo much more mature then I am, and proving my point perfectly.
There isn’t ONE SINGLE difinitive Paul album you guys can mention, must be tough being a pop music junkie.
If you can’t win your arguement lauding Paul then your arguement might be weak.
And by the way, two random strangers on the web can’t hurt my feelings, but keep trying, I care so deeply about what you think.
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. 😀
Ammar, if you go back and look above about 45% of the posts are his (sometimes he posts multiple times in succession)–he HAS to try to prove (more BULLY) something or someone to make up for inadequacies elsewhere (besides the clear mental deficiency). And I never took sides in the John vs. Paul debate because I think it no more fruitful than a Mozart vs. Beethoven silly debate [it may be interesting but to what end?], yet he insists more than once on lumping me in the Paul camp. He doesn’t get it–you can prefer John and still think that “guy” is an obnoxious psycho freak whom not even John would want on his side. 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.
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!
Hey Raven, Beethoven was only 21 when Mozart died, so, another poor comparison, since John and Paul were contemporaries, born only 2 years apart.
If Paul’s music is so great, than what are his songs circa 1970-1974 that compare to these:
Give Peace a Chance
Instant Karma
Mother
Working Class Hero
Isolation
God
Imagine
Jealous Guy
Give Me Some Truth
Oh My Love
Mind Games
One Day (At a Time)
Out The Blue
Only People
Going Down on Love
Whatever Gets you Through the Night
Scared
#9 Dream
Steel and Glass
Nobody Loves You (When you’re Down and Out).
Somebody try to list 20 great Paul tracks pre 1975.
Good luck listing 20 great Paul tracks, let alone 20 great Paul tracks pre-1975.
Ammar and Raven, what great embassadors to Paul, they call you names, make fun of you, say you are a psycho, yeah, you guys are great examples of hypocritical Beatles fans who know nothing about music and even less about the Beatles philosophy.
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?
Let’s start here: is there a Paul album that compares to Plastic Ono Band, Imagine, Mind Games, or Walls and Bridges?
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.
Hey “McMusicGod,” 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. You should be embarrassed by your internet mess.
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”
It’s been fun Ammar–let’s hope GabeMcMusicGod gets the mental help he so desperately needs. But he may not have time when he’s so busy being the musical virtuoso that he so obviously is. Wait, I think I hear him playing on the radio now–no, sorry, it was just a car backfiring….
I wish everyone would just shut up..I love both and they are both unique and special. Cant compare the two.
good post Lilli
but speak with better attitude if you really love both.
we compare with respect to both Paul and John, it doesn’t mean that one of them is bad and the other is good.
discussion is good unless some “idiot” comes in and attacks one of them in a childish way.
if you don’t like someone’s post then don’t direct harsh words to “Everyone”!
“You’d think that people would have had enough of silly love songs…”
Plastic Ono Band and Walls and Bridges slaughters anything Paul has EVER put out, IMHO.
John did 2 albums in the first 4 years after the Beatles that Paul would never top.
Go listen to them, it will do you good.
Paul never lived up to his potential.
John Lennon 1970-1974
Plastic Ono Band, Imagine, Mind Games, Walls and Bridges.
4 great albums by a seminal artist.
Mind Games is the weakest, but still has several very strong songs.
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.
Raven….
the medicine please
😀
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.
Paul often insisted on playing drums on his albums and they suffer for it.
Paul should stick to acoustic and bass, and some piano, though he is quite boring on one.
Paul is one of the best singers to ever live, and a great bass player.
John used Ringo and Keltner, wise choice cause they rock on a kit.
John also used Clapton and George, again wise, since they can actually play lead guitar.
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.
So, your opinoins may lie elsewhere, but the arguement that the better musician was “better” overall does not hold true.
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.”
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 thought I posted this link:
http://rockguitardaily.blogspot.com/
interesting article about Paul.
“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.
Band on the Run, Flaming Pie and Ram are good, but only two are contemporary with John, and neither of those are bettter than POB or Walls and Bridges.
40 years of solo music and all you can come up with is three good albums.
John did 4 good albums in 4 years.
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.
Name one early Paul song that compares to Give Peace a Chance, Instant Karma or Imagine, all songs John released by 1971.
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 :
Paul’s High rated albums in 70’s :
Band On The Run 1974
At Speed Of Sound 1976
Venus And Mars 1975
Ram (is now highly considered by critics) 1971
McCartney 1 1970
Back TO The Eag 1979
Wings Over America (Live) 1977
McCartney 2 1980
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.
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!
Walls and Bridges was also a #1 album Ammar.
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.
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.
McCartney 1 is not a full fledged album, it’s a collection of rough demoes and dittys, and contains one good single. It sounds like it was made in someones basement, which it was, Paul’s.
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.
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.
Like I said, is being a better musician really preferrable to being a better songwriter?
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.
“In 2002, respondents to a BBC poll on the 100 Greatest Britons voted John Lennon eighth. In 2004, Rolling Stone magazine ranked Lennon number 38 on its list of “The Immortals: The Fifty Greatest Artists of All Time” (The Beatles being number one). He was also ranked fifth greatest singer of all time by Rolling Stone in 2008.”
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.
I like Paul’s music quite a bit, but he is not “Better than Lennon”.
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.
Maybe Paul’s disgusting hypocrisy is linked to the quality of his fans, who cannot laud him without slamming John and calling his detractors childish and dangerous names.
Paul SUCKS on drums.
Paul SUCKS HARD on electric guitar.
Paul is LAME on piano.
OK. Now i have to say it–despite the fact that i might think John is better than Paul (which would be for lyrics and not music)–which some asshole on this sight has continued to ignore–i will ackowledge that some “critics” say that Plastic Ono Band is incredibly self-indulgent and the lyrics are occasionally ridiculous and the music simply simplistic. I dont happen to agree with them but they have a point that i acknowledge. Double Fantasy is, in my view (which i wont force down anyone’s throat) garbage worse than Silly Love Songs. I could easily argue that Band On the Run is better than anything John did post-Beatles, but i won’t. The one thing beyond argument is that the crazed-out momma’s boy basement confined lunatic [greatest musician in the world] 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… Jcostello and Ammar i salute both of you
“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.”
Paul had 6 #1 albums in the US, and 7 in the UK, not 8 as stated above.
John had 3 #1 abums in the US and 2 #1s in the UK.
Not bad for 5 years work.
Paul had over 40 years to rack up his #1s, John recorded all of his solo music within 5 years.
BTW, this is supposed to be a “lively discussion” but namecalling, are we on the playground?
“Nat Weiss, a New York attorney and a friend of Beatles manager Brian Epstein, helped the Beatles promote their company, Apple, in the late ’60s. His take is astute:
“ ‘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.’’
“…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.”
Paul paid his Wings guys so poorly that between gigs with Paul they would have to fly back to the states and play with other people so they could pay their bills.
Raven, don’t you think John deserves to have someone passionately defend him?
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!
Unfortunately John stopped music in 1975 simply cause he was not making good music, after 8 years of solo projects starting 1968.
it took him 5 years to come up with new songs in a shared album with yoko, similar to BeeGees songs in 1980.
“”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 😀
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.
you are the expert GabeChapman..
everything you say should be written in the Bible.
you are the first man on earth to discover that Paul stole the song that hold the world record, which went unnoticed from all musicians, critics and all the world…
you must be God as Raven stated
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.
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.
Paul did in fact write Mull with Denny Laine, Denny is co-credited as the co-writer, an honor Paul would only bestow had Denny contributed greatly to the melody and/or lyrics, that is obvious.
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?
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.
Penny Lane and Strawberry Fields were topped by Engelburt Humperdink’s Release Me.
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?
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.
In fact, in America only 3 Beatles albums have sold more copies than the Soundtrack to Grease, Sgt. Pepper, The White Album, and Abbey Road.
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”?
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.
Happy Xmass (War is Over) reached #4 on the UK Billboard Charts in 1972.
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.
Everyone knows the only hit worth it’s weight in gold is an American hit, that’s not a slam on any other countries, it’s the truth.
Havn’t you watched any Beatles documentaries, they agreed with me.
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.
Flaming Pie was outsold in the US and in the UK by THE SPICE GIRLS.
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.
You’re wrong again Ammar, Happy Xmass (War is Over) reached #4 on the UK Billboard Charts in 1972.
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.
To further prove that the British are not the best source for album charts look at Pink Floyd’s The Dark Side of the Moon, not a #1 album in Britian in 1973 though it would go on to become the 6th best selling album of all-time in the UK selling 9 million copies in Britian, 45 million copies worldwide, and it would remain on the Billboard 200 for more than 14 years.
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.
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.
GabeChapman read what I said about Happy xmas:
it was a hit in UK, but it didnt chart in US.dont lie about that.a new fact for you:
The song’s melody and chord structure has been borrowed from the folk standard known as “Stewball”!
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.
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…
According to Billboard, the last time Paul made a Hot 100 #1 single in the US was in 1983 for his duet with Michael Jackson, Say Say Say, 27 years ago.
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.
So Paul has only had two #1s since John died and both were duets with extremely popular contemporary musicians.
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.
As far as The Stones or Floyd being greater then the Beatles, listen to Piper and Pepper back to back, recorded at about the same time.
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.
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?
Simon Barret said: “I know I am in the minority, but I don’t feel that the beatles did squat!”
and
“…the numbers tell the story.”
If the numbers tell the story then certainly the Beatles did a little more than squat.
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?
Ammar said: 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.
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?
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.
The RIAA certifies that The Beatles have sold 170 million albums in the US.
Pink Floyd 74.5 million.
The Rolling Stones 66 million.
“…the numbers tell the story.”
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?”
According to RIAA (American sales only):
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.”
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.”
On hits in America, John has had more #1 songs in America since his death than Paul has!
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’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.
It should also be noted that the popular artists Paul did those two duets with were American artists, which I am sure helped secure them as #1 hits in America.
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.
Jimi Hendrix sold more albums in the US (22.5 million) with just 4 years of recording than Paul would in 40 years of solo work.
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”?
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?
From RIAA: 10 acts who have sold more albums in America than Paul McCartney:
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.
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%.
Hey, Ammar, GodMc has spoken and spoken and spoken. But he still says nothing over and over. But of course he’s right on all points–he himself has told us so. 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 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.
Since Say Say Say was co-written with Michael Jackson, the last #1 hit Paul had that he wrote himself was the 1982 duet with Stevie Wonder, Ebony and Ivory, 28 LONG YEARS AGO.
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.
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.
Ron Richards, who worked for George Martin at both Parlophone at AIR Studios, was present for many Beatle recording sessions.
He said McCartney was “oblivious to anyone else’s feelings in the studio…”
Raven, go on insulting and namecalling, they don’t effect me, they only make you seem mean and child-like.
I do like Paul, and I don’t need to prove that to anyone, but Paul is not better than John IMO, and John deserves his side to be argued.
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.
Yeah, sometimes the numbers do lie.
Raven said: “There were no insults…”
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.”
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.
those weren’t insults–they were accurate observations. and have you noticed that no one thinks you have anything to say of any value about John and Paul (or how you are such a wonderful musician)? you have no credibility on the subject and likely have driven most people away. jcostello was a much better advocate for John and your outrageous BS caused him to have to defend Paul, so you are converting people to the wrong side. Keep it up and all John fans (like me) will be joining Paul’s fan club!
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?
No, but Mind Games is John’s worst album, Band is one of Paul’s best.
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.
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.
The proof is in the pudding, and when asked, contemporary songwriters almost unanimously cite the Beatles as a primary influence.
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.
When they were young, Paul wanted to be Little Richard, John wanted to be Elvis.
Enough said…
some delusional asshole who posts over and over and over and over on this site may say he may be better at guitar, piano or drums than Paul but Paul was much better at all those than John (despite the poster’s psychosis)and Paul was one of the best bassists if not the best) so what the fuck does that prove? And i am a john fan. Any sane John fan knows that Paul was a better musician and better at playing and writing “music” than John. If John excelled at all (and I think he did)it was in his lyrics. GabeMcAssole is just a waste of human ectoplasm.
Raven, you would make Paul very proud!
Glad you listened carefully to the Beatles, and got what they were saying.
I only said I was better at said instruments to show that being a better guitar player, drummer, or piano player does not make you “better then Lennon”, as some here have claimed, even if you are Paul McCartney.
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?”
Paul is so stingy, he won’t even fork out the 30 million pounds to save Abbey Road.
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2010-03-25/music/paul-mccartney-s-worst-songs/
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/kschlichter/2009/10/27/the-worst-song-of-all-time-imagine/
I feel it is difficult to compare John and Paul while they were a part of the Beatles…they were almost like one person if you take into account the way they balanced each other out, personally and musically, and inspired one another, even if the inspiration was born out of competition at times. Paul and John are musically gifted, no doubt about it, but I feel Paul’s career after the Beatles was less impactful than John’s. I wouldn’t go by number 1’s; Paul had a good run with Wings and collaborated with a few great artists (notably Michael Jackson), but John’s solo work was innovative, expressive, and profound. So innovative that…has anyone else recorded a song/video while in bed with their spouse? His solo work touches your soul (Instant Karma, Imagine, Power to the People, Give Peace a Chance, and War is Over), making you stop in your tracks, FEEL something, and think. Do we all shine on, like the moon and the stars and the sun?
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.
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!
GabeMc has become a problem everywhere online that discuss The Beatles history. He is a self-made expert in everything, in hs own mind. Users, have a look a Wikipedia and you will soon see he is having amental breakdown, about July 2012. The plan is working very well. This boy has had his day and will soon be put to bed. Buh bye golden one! ROFLMFAO!
Leave A Reply