Beatle Paul vs Solo Paul

Discussions related to Paul as a Beatle.

Moderator: Mike

Postby EddieV » Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:24 pm

In Beatles there was a healthy competition to come up with the next a-side on a single between John and Paul. Maybe Paul has been missing a partner and a competitor in the songwriting proces??
Now junior behave yourself
User avatar
Posts: 7087
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 3:13 am
Location: Svendborg, Denmark

right !

Postby Paperback Writer » Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:17 pm

yes Eddie has plucked the exact chord here, he is phenominal as a solo,

but there is no replacing the dynamic he had with John.

The competition spurred him- and the collaberation gave - a perfect

finish to the 90% perfection of a song he consulted with John about.

That's why writing now with capable others - or being produced by such -

is not the same. A.They don't have John's talent/chemistry with Paul and

B. they don't play in a band with him, where they're competing against

him, rather they are "helping."

Can you imagine the present good/excellent songs he's written as a

solo/Wings - being given the Lennon touch? BONANZA!!!!!!!!
User avatar
Paperback Writer
Silver member
Silver member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:32 am
Location: San Francisco, CA.

Postby ANGRY » Sat Dec 03, 2005 3:33 am

so, if i get what you're saying, it's : not only is every single album/song done by macca a lesser effort...but, in fact, the only way it can be really, really good is if john were around to help paul out .( 'cause we all know paul just can't be THAT good if he doesn't have johns' help ?) moreover, no matter how hard he tries, he'll never, ever have it as good as it was then?...'cause it sounds an awful lot like that to me..but, what do i know...i think each beatle has done just fine, musically, since the big bang..four beautiful, intriguing universes to play in, not just one. each unique, each very much it's own individual cosmos of sound. i wouldn't change a thing (except the direction of that fateful bullet...and NO...i don't mean have it hit ANYONE else....)
User avatar
Silver member
Silver member
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:50 am
Location: NEWTON, KS, USA

Postby Paperback Writer » Sat Dec 03, 2005 4:12 am

I said in the post his solo work was "phenominal." (hardly a put-down).If

he was writing those songs and able to get input from John, they would

only be better! Right? Your not saying they would remain the same or

less from his input?

Are not most people - (not I)- saying nigel helped his music? I'd say

John could have helped - to say the LEAST! - as much as nigel !

Bottom line, greatness is unlimited and runs to the infinitive. Say, a solo

Paul song you feel is perfect is then exceeded by a live version.

Also, I feel John would have benefitted even more from Paul's input into

his post-Beatles work.
User avatar
Paperback Writer
Silver member
Silver member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:32 am
Location: San Francisco, CA.

Postby james1985 » Sat Dec 03, 2005 5:31 am

BUT, Freddie, to add John and Paul to the other's respective solo works would take away all the character that makes the Beatles' solo careers so enjoyable. Post-1970, their records let their personalities run wild.

And how many Beatle songs did JP or PM really "improve" the other's songs or stop them from being bad? IMO, they were both at the peak of their songwriting powers between 1963-70, and that is why the Beatles output is beter than the solo stuff. Jagger and Richards have been together for over 40 years, and their stuff has been in permanent decline since 1975. Rock stars just get old, that's all
May sweet memories of friends from the past
Always comes to you, when you look for them
User avatar
Posts: 4259
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 2:06 pm
Location: The old UK


Postby Paperback Writer » Sat Dec 03, 2005 10:55 am

I appreciate everyone's response and view-points, I find it enriches my

appreciation of the Beatle/solo Beatles listening experience. Now

to illustrate my point.... er "audiolize" it......dig this:

Paul's "Getting Better", "She's leaving Home" benefitted from a couple

dashes of John's lyrics and counter-harmonies/harmony making them

better than had the

song been left as originally written - Paul has said that!

John's "Come Together" benefitted from major bass innovations from

Macca. His 5* star masterpiece - "In My Life" did have a splash of

input from Paul on some of the melody/lyric. I'm sure they were great

songs before they got tweaked, but I'm even more sure they became

better with a little help from their friend.

As far as having free-form, independent, spirited opportunity to record

their unrestricted musical art, I believe The White Album is a shining

example of that and no restrictions are evident! We were able to have it

both ways!
User avatar
Paperback Writer
Silver member
Silver member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:32 am
Location: San Francisco, CA.

Postby 2 of 3 » Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:45 am

I think you folks are missing a few people in this discussion when it comes to the song writing process. Mr Harrison, Mr Starr and Mr Martin had a whole lot to do with all those songs too. It wasn't just between Paul and John. Sure the basic ideas are probably one persons...but when laying down other details to a song, everybody in a band adds something to the mix.
User avatar
2 of 3
Posts: 2804
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:12 pm
Location: Canada

Postby talmat1958 » Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:44 pm

The childish "Paul is better than John" stuff should have no place in a Paul site. How silly.

Both were geniuses, both in similar ways, and in opposite ways.

BOTH needed each other musically, as far as I'm concerned. John had some great solo moments, but he also had some not so great solo moments, as well. Yoko might have stimulated other artistic and emotional responses in him, but, musically, she was no Paul McCartney.

Same would apply to Paul. Linda was someone he could rely on emotionally, but, she was hardly someone who could inspire him, or create on an equal plain with, when compared to John.

Paul's solo career is voluminous. A lot of good. Unfortunately, a lot of not so good. A lot of lazy and medicore efforts. But, a lot of brilliant stuff, too.

Does his solo work compare with his Beatles work? I think, at times, it certainly does. But, it's an unfair comparison. The Beatles were the Beatles. Paul's solo career is Paul's solo career.

Different influences, different times, different needs and goals. The only common ground is that Paul has a pressing need-- THANK GOD!!-- to produce music. And, for that we are all very thankful...and it's why we look forward to each new release, each new tour.

You know, the day is not far off when Paul will NOT be doing these things. So we should appreciate what we have now. Take the bad with the good.

And, lately, the good has far outweighed the bad.
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 159
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 7:39 pm
Location: Eastern Massachusetts

Postby Cologne girl » Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:19 pm

Great post, talmat1958 - totally agreeable!!
It's the start of a journey
To a much better place
And this wasn't bad
So a much better place
Would have to be special...
User avatar
Cologne girl
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 8:16 pm
Location: Far Far Away

Postby Genuine_Indian_Guru » Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:25 pm

Couldn't have said it any better!
Cheers to that!
User avatar
Posts: 3080
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:15 am
Location: Cape Breton Island - Canada


Return to Paul as a Beatle

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest