Singing Talent

[Steve-o]

"Obsessions with Steve's Posts" by Gastro. Now there's a book worth reading. [}:)] If I said the sky was blue, he would say, "no, dude, green", and want to debate it. It's kind of sad. [:0] But not without some humour.[:D]

[Gastro (gone)]

Do you remember the part in Revolution 9 where John goes:

Yooooohhhhhooooooohoooooo

yooooohoooooyoooohooooo

Well this is my Starship Troopers

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

to you !!

[dsnito]

One thing that can´t be denied is that Paul is a MODEST guy even being who he is(one of the most famous singer/songwriter of the 20th century-it's not just me saying but the general critics)...
I NEVER heard him saying "I´m the BEST, I´m the GREATEST" or such things. As Gastro himself said , Paul knows his own limitations about his voice, although I think that he STILL sings live well even at...61!!!
So I meant that a guy that admit his own limitations IS a GREAT person, a few famous people do it...decent people.

Peace.

[bianca_macca]

Even if Paul says he cannot sing at all - who cares??? I don't, I LOVE his voice. I even like his voice better than Johns, but thats just my opinion. The thing I love most ofcourse is John and Paul singing together. It's magic! The Beatles were magic!

[maccastheman]

quote:Originally posted by Brains


sigh... Long Tall Sally? Let's see John, or ANYONE do better than that.


I'm glad you brought that up. Macca cleans the floor with that one.

[Grillo]

quote:Originally posted by Gastro Boy
quote:Originally posted by stevew628
quote:Originally posted by Gastro Boy
John's is better by a long shot. Paul's voice cannot cut it live, never has. That's pretty funny. Both statements. And you say you don't bash? CHOKE!!!!![:D]

Both are just different, IMHO. And we don't have, sadly, much to hear from Lennon live. I say listen to Back in the USSR, She's Leaving Home etc etc etc. Macca also has one of the most varied voices in Rock history. He can sound so different from one track to the next. Awesome. Lennon's WAS haunting, but range-wise, he can't match McCartney. But they DO sound stunning together. I would also say that Paul was a much better harmony vocalist than Lennon.


Dude I'm right and you know it. As much as I like Paul's studio voice he can't sing live. A real singer does not scream or screech. Paul does not have a deep voice hence he has no power. The AHDN part you guys bring up makes me chuckle. He's singing in a higher register, same as Long Tall Sally. He can scream very well I'll give him that but he can't project power in his voice. The proof is in his live albums. There is no song where his voice sounds like the way it was recorded. That's why folks there are singers in this world. Most of them can't write music or lyrics but they can sure as hell as sing. Paul can do abit of everything but he's not the master of anything except his bass playing.


Thanx a lot, Gastro. You made me laugh this morning with some things you wrote. It´s pretty obvious you didnt hear the 65 Shea Stadium gig; otherwise you wouldnt go telling that crap. U want control of voice, so hear when they play Babys in black. Another excelent example is Yesteterday in Japan, or his backing vocals On Help (every time they do it). In Yesterday you can notice control in low and high registers.
Anyway, im totally sure that if Macca wasnt also a songwriter and a bass player(like Jagger in the Stones)you would say he is an OUTSTANDING, AMAZING singer. It´s a case of envy, you cannot stand that he can be the wonderful songwriter, bassman and besides an excelent studio/live singer he is.
And i wonder another thing: if you think that of Macca´s live performance, what will u think of Jagger´s, a man who sings an entire show in the same note. [:D]

[Ghavi]

Well Marchu...
When i hear Beatles songs with the two best voices in the world at the same time... I dont hear Paul´s Voice and Joh´n voice, i hear one only voice, angelical, And when they decided to sing solo, They are great too... Lennon its a singer with a voice and a (Timbre) of another planet, he can make you smile, sad, swet, and chiken skin. He have the hability of sending you trought his voice, what he have to say...
Macca... Well... It cant be Macca Cause God don´´t use smoking.
Cheers.[;)]

[Gastro (gone)]

Grillo, I'm glad I made you laugh because hey I wouldn't want to make you cry [V]. Paul's studio voice is great on love songs because he has a sweet and pleasant voice but when he tries to rock out in concert keep away from the glass. There are only two songs where I think that Paul might be as good as John and they are Oh Darling and Shake a Hand quite possibly because they're done in the same style.

This boogie woogie singing that you guys like in Long Tall Sally and Back in the USSR just doesn't do it for me. That's not his natural voice, that's Paul trying to imitate someone else... and what about Shea Stadium...I've never laughed so hard in my life.. as if you can tell if the singing is good or not... the whole concert was chaos.. ahhhhhhhhhhhh.. you crack me up dude..[8]

[mjb27]

Technically speaking Pauls voice is better.He has more ranged and definitely sings ballads better. However Johns voice is more distinctive,and most people believe John sings with more feeling. Paul still sings good today probably because he quit smoking many years ago.

[Gastro (gone)]

I disagree, John sings ballads much better than Paul... John sings rock songs better than Paul...

Conclusion: John is a better singer than Paul. Period!