John or Paul

kinaldo

It's been done to death but I'm still interested.

Whose songs do you prefer? / Beatles only, not solo

Is there any separating them?

susanna

Equal

Paul just edges it for me

mike65

Atari Jaguar

You can't have one without the other. A draw.

Mike.

abelard

Equal

I'd love to say draw, but I don't want to so I'll force myself to pick one......

I think Macca, by the slimmest of margins imaginable.

Goodshape

Macca

Worked best as a team, obviously. Having said that, I picked John. Some of his solo stuff is also great (unlike macca) and to be honest, I can't help but buy into the hype. John was an icon, and a great song writer.

Paul's probably the more accomplished musician, but a bit of a sentimental eejit at the same time. Penny Lane? Martha My Dear? -- give me Strawberry Fields and I Am The Walrus every time.

Much prefer John's voice and style too.

Rigsby

Equal

Goodshape wrote:

Worked best as a team, obviously. Having said that, I picked John. Some of his solo stuff is also great (unlike macca) and to be honest, I can't help but buy into the hype. John was an icon, and a great song writer.

Paul's probably the more accomplished musician, but a bit of a sentimental eejit at the same time. Penny Lane? Martha My Dear? -- give me Strawberry Fields and I Am The Walrus every time.

Much prefer John's voice and style too.

Can we assume from this that the Kinks were "sentimental eejits" for "Waterloo Sunset" and the Stones for "She's a Rainbow" ?

Paul gets my vote without hesitation !

Black NG-60-90

Ringo! Ringo god damn you!

Nalz

Macca

John, no contest

stovelid

John is the most appealing in a way cos his songs always edge Paul's out for me.

However, like somebody else said, you can't really separate them cos he needed Macca to make those songs what they were. Ditto for John with Macca's songs.

stovelid

Some of the wings stuff is pretty good. I think if he had still been with John, they would have been great.

Goodshape wrote:

Some of his solo stuff is also great (unlike macca)

He wrote a few more songs than that..

Goodshape wrote:

Penny Lane? Martha My Dear?

Goodshape

Macca

stovelid wrote:

He wrote a few more songs than that..

Yea, and they're all crap!

Nah, he's got plenty of good songs obviously. It's just my personal opinion that the stand-out 'McCartney Songs' aren't generally as good as the 'Lennon Songs', or the 'Harrison Songs' for that matter. They tend to be just a little bit too nice, or twee.


Wings may have had a couple of good songs (I can only really thing of one tbh - that James Bond number) but Lennon's Plastic Ono Band and Imagine are fantastic albums. There's raw emotion there that Macca can only dream of.

county

lets be honest if john hadn`t have bit the bullet so to speak would he be such of an icon and his music jugded all out of porportion

Goodshape

Macca

Hmm.. I think he might have been just a wee bit popular before having 'bit the bullet'. I could be mistaken, but I'm sure I remember him being in some sort of band that was popular enough for a while.

stovelid

Agreed, like I said, John edges it for me as a songwriter but the Beatles for me were the mixture of both that was so unique.

Goodshape wrote:

Yea, and they're all crap!

Nah, he's got plenty of good songs obviously. It's just my personal opinion that the stand-out 'McCartney Songs' aren't generally as good as the 'Lennon Songs',

Actually 'Coming Up' is a superb tune but of course John did the main business as a solo artist...and died before he did anything like the Frog song ...

grumpytrousers

Atari Jaguar

Goodshape wrote:

Hmm.. I think he might have been just a wee bit popular before having 'bit the bullet'. I could be mistaken, but I'm sure I remember him being in some sort of band that was popular enough for a while.

He was - and it was his beatle material that people loved him for. I don't doubt that Imagine was well recieved as an album, but no more than any of the other early ex-beatle solo albums it was composed of the kind of tunes that were written to be 'Beatle Tunes' (for instance, Child of Nature from the White album sessions turning up as Jealous Guy in 1971) - in other words that the quality control measures were all present and correct. Thus Lennons prime motivation in the latter Beatle years was always to 'come up with something as good as that other fooker'. Macca presumably thought similarly, but they had such different styles.

It's simply too twee, of itself, to put down McCartneys songs as too 'nice'. There can be no doubt, certainly that while Lennon wrote songs with one eye on them being seen as 'artworks', McCartney seemed to constantly be trying to work out the kind of songs that would keep the nations milkmen whistling to eternity! On the other hand, McCartneys sense of adventure during Abbey Road itself should speak volumes - the symphonic nature of all of side two is still astounding to this day, and the fact that he managed to get the others (with whom he was barely speaking) to buy into the notion of this medley (replete with individually stylised guitar solos) speaks volumes for 'Serious Musical Ability'

I acknowledge freely that maxwells Silver Hammer is also on that album and it's crap; hey it's not an exact science...

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the 35 year old common diktat that Lennon = serious muso tortured artist and McCartney = fluffy hello clouds tripe is just a touch too simplistic.

Lennons solo work (discounting Imagine) shows a level of mawkishness that his erstwhile mucker on the Bass would have even dissed for being a bit too soppy. I mean - the thing is, you'd EXPECT McCartney to come out with a naff tune like 'My Love', but Christ almighty, the overproduced dogs dinner that was 'just like starting over' or 'woman'...they're no bloody better folks...and just 'cos they're written about some ugly japanese bint doesn't make 'em art!!!

I'm gonna call this a tie IMHO...they both had shortcomings as singers, but as foils to cause the other to raise their game, as a team they were unstoppable.

As a matter of interest - post 1973 for ANY of the ex-beatles are there any really indespensible albums that EVERYBODY should own a copy of?

Goodshape

Macca

grumpytrousers wrote:

I don't doubt that Imagine was well recieved as an album

Just a side note, but I much prefere Plastic Ono Band myself.

grumpytrousers wrote:

McCartneys sense of adventure during Abbey Road itself should speak volumes - the symphonic nature of all of side two is still astounding to this day

True. He certainly had his moments, perticularly as a musician (as opposed to a lyricist).

grumpytrousers wrote:

naff tune like 'My Love' ... 'just like starting over' ... 'woman'...they're no bloody better folks...

I like those songs.

grumpytrousers wrote:

and just 'cos they're written about some ugly japanese bint doesn't make 'em art!!!

Lol.

I'm gonna call this a tie IMHO...they both had shortcomings as singers, but as foils to cause the other to raise their game, as a team they were unstoppable.

I'm in almost full agreement with that.. but Lennon still edges it for me

As a matter of interest - post 1973 for ANY of the ex-beatles are there any really indespensible albums that EVERYBODY should own a copy of?

Truly indespensible? Probably not, but Mind Games is quite good, and Lennon's half of Double Fantasy is very good imo. Unfortunitly the ugly Japanese bint makes the album impossible to listen to without a remote control close at hand.

Maccattack

Equal

Ive never been a fan of th Beatles so my opinion may not count but here goes.

McCartney is clearly the better musician but I find some of his tunes nausiating. It may be his voice or nuancing. not sure.

Lennon had a bit more soul or something but to me it was more contrived than real. Thats why I say a 'bit' more soul.

I cant really listen to either of them but I would say McCartney because of all the Beatles covers ive ever heard. The McCartney ones are best.

So its the songs, not the singer ifn ya know what I mean...

davyjose

Macca

McCartney rode on the back of Lennon for sooo long in the formative years, back when Lennon was coming up with chord changes that other artists (McCartney, Dylan, Jagger/Richards) could only dream about. Go home and listen to Hard Day's night and when you get to the end of 'I'll Be Back' (a song so beautifully and skillfully written i still get shivers when i hear it), remind yourself that Lennon wrote pretty much the entire album.

bottlerocket

Macca

John... AND Paul.... AND George...AND Ringo

But if I had to choose just one, then John. Always found his stuff had more of an edge but some of McCartneys stuff was superb also. Obviously the second side of Abbey Road was a high point for him but there was so much more to him than that. Stuff like For No One, Fool on the Hill, Mother Natures Son would be regarded as absolute classics and much 'cooler' if Lennon wrote them. That said, he wrote some muck as well (Getting Better for example). Seems to me like they brought out the best in each other though.

ctrl-alt-delete

George

Mossy Monk

the most even poll i have ever seen

not bothered really. Atari Jaguar for me

Steve_o

Equal

Its a kind of unfair question because Paul is still alive therefore has far more music to listen too, but for me i have to say Paul McCartney!!!

J.R.HARTLEY

Macca

kinaldo wrote:

It's been done to death but I'm still interested.

Whose songs do you prefer? / Beatles only, not solo

Is there any separating them?

it goes without saying that a both or Lennon/McCartney option would walk away with the poll

seeing as people are ignoring the no solo rule working class hero, john lennons recent compilation is a great example of why i voted for him, his songs are fantastic, woman, jealous guy, can't think of any McCartney songs that have the same impact on me.

bottlerocket

Macca

As regards Lennon's solo stuff, the John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band album and Imagine are outstanding. Incredibly lyrics, honest to the point of being almost uncomfortable. Songs like God, Mother, How, Love and Working Class Hero stand up with anything he did with the Beatles and you could just as easily pick out another half dozen or so. Quality control seemed to go awol at times after this unfortunately.

CherieAmour

Equal

It's Paul all the way for me!

Then Harrison

Then Lennon

Ringos stuff always stood out a mile but not always in a good way, I'm afraid he doesn't do it for me

davyjose

Macca

Am I correct in thinking that you think Lennon is the THIRD best Beatle??? I can't get my head around that. If anybody is looking for me I'll be listening to A Hard Day's night.

lodgepole

I prefer Harrison to them both. I prefer Lennon's solo stuff to Paul's, but find it very hard to choose when it comes to their Beatles material. I prefer John as a singer, but Paul wrote some cracking songs.

CherieAmour

Equal

davyjose wrote:

Am I correct in thinking that you think Lennon is the THIRD best Beatle???

Yup, I do!

Kingsize

Equal

Lodgepole wrote:

I prefer Harrison to them both.

Yeah I Think Harrisons songs have just as much edge as Lennon's but people seem to dismisss him.
His contribution to the beatles was huge.The Beatles really were a team effort .
If it's Paul or John i'd have to say Paul.
I dont buy into the Lennon purists who can pinpoint when Mcartney"ruins" a Beatles song.
Some people are totally into Lennon just cos he's dead, they wont admit to that & some of 'em dont know it but it's true, poor old George has passed away too but John gets the Legend status for dying in a tragic & violent incident in new york.

Post Beatles I think they are on a par with each other , some cracking tunes & a lot of old shyte too - I really can't see what makes lennon's solo stuff any better than Macca's & I'm sure if Lennon wrote "My Love" it would be seen in the same light as "woman".(tragic love song by a genius type thing)

I'd listen to "Band on the run" over "Double Fantasy" any day.
I Think Macca has a better/stronger voice too.
Macartney really seems to have blotted his credibility copybook by releasing the Frog song (which afaik got to him number 1 without him having to be shot) But would lennon have been singing backing vocals were he alive??
Would Jimi hendrix be some fat old boring sixties guitar nutter who plays in whelans once a year to a small crowd were he not rock n roll dead???
Is Lennon the Robbie williams to Maccas Gary barlowe or is it the other way round?

Slightly off topic but here goes --> Who would you rather wake up beside Heather mills or yoko Ono?;)

lordgoat

JPII gets my vote..