n Most fans go for Lennon. Personally, I’ve always gone for McCartney. In my opinion he was more versatile (guitar, bass, drums, keyboards), had a much stronger melodic gift (which I happen to prize highly), and was a better singer. I think that with some exceptions Lennon wrote rather ‘plain’ tunes where the vocal line was basically just the root note of the chord. Also, whereas most people praise and admire John for his political stance and supposed activities on behalf of peace, I prefer McCartney precisely because he didn’t start pontificating in the same way (apart from the Northern Ireland thing). Of course, more recently he’s started banging on about vegetarianism and animal rights, but I’m talking about the earlier Paul who just sat around making up pop music.
McCartney was better with music, but Lennon was better with lyrics. But I tend to agree they were best together, and their abilities as songwriters were very close.
Of the four, Paul was definitely the most versatile instrumentalist, and he could write good songs in so many different styles with minimal effort. I’ve dug out a few Beatles albums in recent months and really gained a lot of respect for him. But when you get down to it, John wrote most of my favorite Beatles songs, and I think he didn’t do as much fluff. So I always end up picking John in these things.
I disagree with the OP on Revolver and Rubber Soul…especially Revolver. John’s contributions on that album…She Said She Said, And Your Bird Can Sing, Dr. Robert, I’m Only Sleeping…are the pinnacle of The Beatles’ catalogue, IMHO. Revolver is also a perfect example of why I prefer John to Paul. John is a rock songwriter, and Paul is a pop songwriter.
When you look at what Lennon and McCartney did individually after the Beatles, you have to lump them together as LennonMcCartney during the good years. Even better, LennonMcCartneyHarrisonStarrMartin. They’re history’s outstanding example of being better than the sum of their (very good) parts.
As the Beatles it was the paring of Lennon & McCartney.
Based on their careers post Beatles, it is John Lennon by a landslide.
John Lennon: Standouts (IMO)
1969 “Give Peace a Chance” (with The Plastic Ono Band) #2 UK; #14 US
1970 “Instant Karma!” (with The Plastic Ono Band) #3 US; #4 UK
1971 “Mother” (US only) #43 US
1971 “Power to the People” (with The Plastic Ono Band) #6 UK; #11 US
1971 “Imagine” (US only) #3 US
1971 “Happy Xmas (War Is Over)” (US only) (with Yoko Ono, The Plastic Ono Band and The Harlem Community Choir)
1973 “Mind Games” #26 UK; #18 US
1974 “Whatever Gets You Thru the Night” #36 UK; #1 US
1975 “Stand by Me” #30 UK; #20 US,
And just before Chapman took him from us: Double Fantasy the entire Album!!
vs. Paul’s
1971 “Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey” #1 US
1973 1st June “Live and Let Die” #7 UK, #2 US
1974 28th June “Band on the Run” #3 UK, #1 US
1976 23rd July “Let 'Em In” #2 UK, #3 US
1977 4th February “Maybe I’m Amazed” #28 UK, #3 US
1982 29th March “Ebony and Ivory” (with Stevie Wonder) #1 UK, #1 US
I always prefered McCartney’s music. I recently bought the best of albums from John and Paul and found far more of Paul’s music that I liked than John’s.
Yeah, yeah I agree that they were by far best together. But I still think it makes sense to weigh their Beatles songs up against each other.
Ass for a Hat:
I don’t think Dr. Robert and she said, she said is on level with good day sunshine or got to get you into my life. If you do you must think that Lennon was easily the best one.
In all seriousness, I have to disagree profoundly. Revolver is the Beatles’ masterpiece of masterpieces and Tomorrow Never Knows is its crowing achievement - and it is Lennon’s baby. All the other songs cited on the album by Ass for a Hat matter as well, but TNK ushered psychedelic rock into the mainstream and was the shot over the bow that made it clear that the Beatles had evolved. Sgt. Peppers was just a further exploration but TNK blew the doors open.
As for the question in the OP, trying to decide who the best Beatle is is like trying to decide who the best player on a great sports team is. The point is that the TEAM is what mattered.
Clearly we have different tastes. She Said She Said may be my favorite Beatles song. With the exception of Good Day Sunshine, I find McCartney’s songs on Revolver fairly dull.
What I think would be an interesting debate between John and Paul fans, would be regarding the non-album singles compiled on Past Masters Vol. II. I’m definitely a John guy, but some of my favorite Paul songs are on that album…We Can Work It Out, Paperback Writer and Hey Jude. On second thought though, my favorite Beatles song is Rain, thus John wins on this album too.
I mostly agree. I left TNK out of my previous post, mainly because I thought it would fracture the debate. I know know many Beatles fans (Paul fans, mostly) that think TNK is crap. I agree that it’s a major achievment, but even as a John guy, when I listen to Revolver, I almost always go for And Your Bird Can Sing and She Said She Said first. They’re just beautiful examples of pure rock songwriting, and I love them to pieces.
It wasthe first thing I thought of when I read the thread title.
I started trying to do this thing, but then I gave up; it’s just too difficult, and there are too many places where I want to declare a tie. (Plus I couldn’t decide whether to use the American/Capitol or British/CD versions of their albums.)
I also agree they were best together. The post-Beatle solo work of all four varied widely in quality; I’d take the best of any one Beatle over the worst of any other Beatle, easily.
John Lennon, hands down. Sorry, but after the Beatles broke up, Lennon went on to write some beautiful pieces and in my humble opinion, Paul went off to bubblegum land.
Together, they were brilliant, but apart - Lennon still had the class, and Paul just went for the cash.
Of course, I also liked Lennon for his political stance and, horror of horrors, I actually think it was good that he married Yoko…she helped him avoid writing silly love songs.
John was on a pretty good roll until he got addicted to heroin. It sapped his ability to write great songs. The cold turkey purged the monkey, and primal therapy got out all his anger, and he no longer had the kind of angst that made him the kind of person who wrote a list of 20th century standards. A few years later, Yoko kicked him out, and he went on a drug and alcohol binge for a couple of years, during which the quality of his output nearly vanished. Then he retired.
Without the input of anyone brave enough to tell them that some of what they were doing sucked, they all put out wildly inconsistent records. A lot of people love to slag Paul, but he was clearly gifted and could prove it, seemingly effortlessly when he wanted to. He is often accused, and rightly, of writing music that was all filigree and no substance, but that’s not true of his entire canon. There are a lot of gems on the B-sides of 45s and buried on albums. George became wrapped up in sanctimony set to music, then became a gardener. Without input from the other three, Ringo never made a decent record post-1975. Thankfully, some of them have never been reissued.
