Walls & Bridges

[Brains]

Agree with Steve. Imho solo-John is overestimated, compared to solo-Paul. 70-75 Paul is much better.

[Steve-o]

quote:Originally posted by Brains
Agree with Steve. Imho solo-John is overestimated, compared to solo-Paul. 70-75 Paul is much better.
Thank-You brainsy....I retract all q-tip references, LOL [:D]

[Gastro (gone)]

There's no doubt Paul became bigger than John after the breakup because more people bought his records and more people bought tickets to see his concerts. Admittedly John never toured but I don't think concerts with Yoko would have attracted as many people as Paul's concerts. I think John proved he was the more formidable Beatle with POB and Imagine. Those albums are considered classics by the critics who generally regard the McCartney album as just abit of fooling around and RAM as a disappointment.

I disagree about Paul getting the better of John in '66. The songs on Revolver + Rain are equal to Paul's. It's John's songs which made the Beatles sound go in a new direction in '66. I would say '66 was an equal year for John and Paul but yes 67-69 was not as productive for John and Paul really began to assert himself.

The ultimate indication is really the people. Whenever there's a poll of the greatest songs, John's solo songs invariably appear more often than Paul's solo songs. The masses normally decide what they like whether you or I agree or disagree.

[Steve-o]

Ram was NOT a disappointment and Macca 1 was far than just fooling around. Sorry---POB was good and Imagine was JL at his best--but both pale in comparison with BOTR. I don't know what polls u r looking at, but I've never seen them. Macca blew his doors off--plain and simple. Revolver was the beginning of Paul's dominance. His songs on that album are pop classics--John's were good, but not up to Paul's awesome output on this album. Revisionist history always makes me laugh. Oh well. [:D][:D][:D]

[dsnito]

Hmm...it´s so hard to me choosing what album or what song is better between both geniuses as Paul and John... I´d say both are AMAZING each one in his own way...but Paul ever has been my favorite one for a very little difference to John, that´s it.

Peace.

[Gastro (gone)]

Steve, relax we're just having a discussion. I don't know what you mean by Paul blowing John's doors off. It's simply not true. Paul made more records but the quantity of his output didn't translate to quality all of the time. The polls I look at are on the Internet or your radio stations where they conduct polls for the best songs and Stairway to heaven always ends up winning. Paul if he's lucky will get BOTR and Jet on that list whereas John always gets Imagine, Instant Karma, Jealous Guy, Mind Games and Woman. The lists are created by people voting in. Sometimes Paul gets a few more like Mull of Kintyre and Silly Love Songs but John always has more. That's why it is false for you to say that Paul blew John away. Clearly he didn't. Also John will always get POB and Imagine on a classic albums list whereas Paul only gets BOTR.

Revolver is a classic example of how different John and Paul are as songwriters. Listen to Ringo's drumming on John's tracks on that album and compare it to Paul's tracks. Ringo did his best drumming on John's songs. Period. John was constantly pushing the boundaries whereas Paul was refining his songwriting. Paul did mainly ballads which were fantastic and more commercial sounding than John's songs but he didn't dominate him on Revolver.

[Steve-o]

Gastro--I am relaxed as can be. I stand by each of my statements. Some of your comments are just, well, misguided, but afterall, it IS only music and I enjoy a good discussion as much as the next person. I remember the period distinctly and I am telling you, Macca was way ahead of him in any measure you'd like: Popularity--Song Quality..both in number and individually--Overall Album Quality, etc. I love JL--dont get me wrong. No doubt that he and Paul got off to strong solo career starts, but JL just gassed on SINYC, Mind Games and some of W & B. Paul had dips with Wild Life and RRS, but the awesome quality of BOTR and under-rated and quite excellent V&M, along with the prior great efforts with Mccartney & Ram, solidify my comments.

Comments about JL having more songs mentioned as "the best" in polls (and those are laughable usually---small samples and 25 years after the fact) are usually fueled by revisionism caused by Lennon's untimely death, and those who can't stand the fact that Macca was the better songwriter after 1965. We will never know what would have happened post 1980, but my guess would be that macca would have continued his dominance.

Aside from my whimsical look at post 1980, those are the facts. Sure JL had some GREAT songs. Macca had more during the period mentioned. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Just don't portray it as the opinion of the "masses". The masses do not include flimsy internet polls and the pro-lennon, Anti-macca rag, Rolling Stone, and others like it. (PS..I'll give you 1980, but only due to the fact that macca put out an experimental album and JL had 1/2 a good album with 3 or 4 really nice songs). [:D] And your defintion of a "classic album" sounds a bit contrived if it includes POB and only includes BOTR. Must be those masses again, lol. If one chooses to look at "masses" the only "masses" that matter are the ones buying the albums.....not the critics or the 263 respondents to an internet poll.

[theDingle]

One of my favorites off W&B is Beef Jerky...some Lennon humor in a good little fun tune.

I agree with Gastro only re: Revolver. I do think that one was a 50/50 split. Paul's excellent contributions gave the album some amazing range, but John's are one excellent solid guitar-driven rocker after another, they are John as I prefer to remember him.

Afterwards, I agree, stevenw628, Paul dominated. Solo, it's no-contest. John had only occasional brilliant moments, but it's Paul all the way.

[Steve-o]

Appreciate your input, Dingle. I still think it's 60-40 or 70-30 on Revolver. U R correct..one rocker after another, but I don't think that those songs, while they rock, are nearly as good as Paul's on the album. They sound great, but they are not all Lennon "classics". Most of Macca's are. Just a difference of opinion.

[Gastro (gone)]

No problem Steve, I guess we like different things about John and Paul.. but there's no way John would have made albums as bad as McCartney, POP, Give my Regards to Broadstreet and Press to Play in the 80's.. if he did then he would have had to give it up. The 80's were Paul's worst decade of music in my opinion. I think he started to become uncool in the 80's. George got the better of Paul with Cloud Nine and the travelling wilburies projects in my opinion... and he made better videos for his songs... that's one thing that pissed me off about Paul. He didn't make great videos.

One final thing to ruffle your feathers [:D] although in '67 Paul was more prolific than John, John did write the best psychedelic songs... Strawberry Field, LSD, I am the Walrus and A Day in the Life were much better than Hello Goodbye, Fixing a Hole, Magical Mystery Tour and {insert any other Paul song}... also Happy Xmas (War is Over) vs Wonderful Xmas Time... John again... also people like the Rolling Stones, Bono, Noel Gallagher although they respect Paul for being a great song writer... they've all stated that Paul was a weaker tunesmith than John ... and that has nothing to do with revisionism...