Korean Job Discussion Forums

Cornfed · Joined: 14 Mar 2008

There's really no question about this - John, obviously. As well as being easily the most talented writer and emotionally moving singer during the Beatles era, his later solo stuff was brilliant. Consider the now common sayings that come from it like "No problems, only solutions" and "Stand by me". Also, songs like Instant Karma and Mind Games show him to have been a genuine mystic philosopher.

Hank the Iconoclast · Joined: 08 Oct 2007 Location: Busan

The most talented one instrumentally is Paul. George is often overlooked and wrote some great songs but it's hard to compare with John. "All Things Must Pass" is a brilliant album but can you honestly say that "Living In A Material World", "Extra Texture", "Dark Horse", "George Harrison s/t", "Somewhere in England", "Gone Troppo" and "Cloud Nine" can even compare to that album? Not at all. "All Things.." was all of his backlogged material from The Beatles. They all had brilliant work while they were with the Beatles because they were always around creativity. The closest he ever came to being that brilliant again was with "Brainwashed"

John has "Plastic Ono Band", "Imagine", "Mind Games", "Double Fantasy" and "Walls and Bridges" (I didn't list his other two because one was utter tosh and the other one is old rock numbers). Those are much better in my mind. John was the only member of the Beatles that could actually progress further past the material of The Beatles. When I listen to his albums, I see the progression past Abbey Road.

Paul made some great albums, especially "Ram" and "Tug of War" but he only rarely shows a glimpse of his true brilliance. He does on those albums but he either tries too hard "McCartney II" or too little (most of his albums). Paul chose his path and that was to remain a pop star. He was always at his best writing non-serious songs, like he does on "Ram", "McCartney", "Red Rose Speedway". However, he has made a revival starting with "Flaming Pie" and cultimating with his best album since "Tug of War", "Chaos in the Backyard".

In my mind, John wrote the best Beatles songs and has the best solo output. I love all of them, even Ringo, but it's impossible for me to put George and Paul over John. I've been listening to them since I was ten and that's my humble opinion.

stevieg4ever · Joined: 11 Feb 2006 Location: London, England

Have you heard that famous story when John was asked if he thought Ringo was the best drummer in the world and he replied with something like "He isn't even the best drummer in the Beatles" lol.

Agreed with your statement though: Lady Madonna is testament to his ability.

Also Wings were a good band and Band on the Run is alsways worth a spin.

ChopChaeJoe · Joined: 05 Mar 2006 Location: Seoul

Obviously it was a snyergy. George was the glue that kept Lennon/McCartney pumping it out. You could pretty much use the Beatles ass a microcosm of the 60's music scne. between lennon and Mcartney, i waver. The last half of Abbey Road is pure genius, and pure Paul.

Nowhere Man · Joined: 08 Feb 2004

RE: Jimmy Page and the violin bow

I usually find myself defending Zeppelin, but I do believe Jeff Beck did that first.

RE: The Stones being better

I might agree that they rock harder overall, but they haven't put out a solid album since about 1980. For all their rocking, their range is lacking compared to the Beatles.

RE: George

I think he's the most under-rated, but didn't produce on a scale comparable to Lennon or McCartney. I'm talking Harrison.

RE: George Martin

I like that answer. I'm not wholly convinced it was him so much as the drugs that triggered the Rubber Soul/Revolver shift. Still, he's probably the best sound engineer of all time.

RE: Paul

Or, to rephrase, it comes down to John vs. Paul.

To say, hands down, Paul wins because of career longevity is an interesting claim. It's also pretty wrong.

To be nice and fair (and fairly nice), I think the two of them were at their best when each had the other as an editor/collaborator.

But the true comparison starts with the end of that.

We basically have Wings: Band on the Run, Live and Let Die.

To be frank, George outdid Paul post-Beatles. Think "Honey Don't" and the "No No Song", and one might even suggest that Ringo rivaled Paul post-1970.

But but, let's look at John:

Instant Karma

Mind Games

Jealous Guy

Working Class Hero

Give Peace a Chance

Watching the Wheels

Nobody Told Me (This wasn't even ready for release, but it's great)

and I don't think anyone can argue that the most recognized post-Beatles Beatle song isn't "Imagine".

John died in 1980. What has Paul done since 1980?

Answer: Bopped around the world singing Beatles songs.

That's about it. I did like his song on the Vanilla Sky soundtrack (one of many superb soundtracks that surpass movies they're connected to).

If John Lennon hadn't been killed, I argue that he'd still be chucking out quality music to this day.

JOHN.

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

I don't think there is any real doubt that both Lennon and McCartney survived for years (decades) on the strength of Beatles nostalgia. It's better than not surviving at all, I suppose...

Unposter · Joined: 04 Jun 2006

Am I the only one who thinks Paul is shyte? He had about 3 decent singles (Maybe, I am Amazed, Admiral Halsley and Band on the Run) and the rest was unmitigated C r a p. John was easily the best. George was second. I almost like Ringo better than Paul. Ringo's recent album isn't all that bad either. You could not say the same for Paul since - maybe - Ebony and Ivory.

And as for John and Paul working together; they probably stopped working together after Rubber Soul. Sure, all their songs are credited to them both but they were basically solo projects. I heard an interview of John's where he complained about how Paul tried to sabatoge all his songs. He was especially complaining about the song Across the Universe. John wrote it in '67 but Paul hated it. He kept demanding that the song be re-mixed. After being left off album after album, it finally made it onto Let it Be, the Beatles throw-in album.

Personally, I like Harrison too. I listen to a compilation of his tunes a lot. But, he just isn't a John Lennon.

SirFink · Joined: 05 Mar 2006

newton kabiddles · Joined: 31 Mar 2007

It was no contest after Double Fantasy.

JustJohn · Joined: 18 Oct 2007 Location: Your computer screen

They were all good but Paul got a little too much credit.

I'd say songwriting is more important than anything else, since that's what made them revolutionary, and I'd say the best songwriter by a fair margin was Lennon. It's got to go to Lennon.

Czarjorge · Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:47 pm Post subject:

The one who knows about food. He is by far the most reasonable judge on Iron Chef.

Underwaterbob · Joined: 08 Jan 2005 Location: In Cognito

Hands down Dirk McQuickly.

shifty · Joined: 21 Jun 2004

Great post Hank.

Everyone, take a listen through headphones to 'I've just seen a face'

If you know the Beatles like Hank does, you'll know that it's pure Paul, with all its guitar eloquence.

I like The World Tonight. But Paul was at his most prolific when part of a unit, amongst peers and not essentially on his own. Imagine if the Beatles had formed without him, a sobering thought.

I think that george's contribution was underrrated as a Beatle. He was an entity on his own and noone's journeyman But it's vain to imagine that he wasn't in John and Paul's shadow. But who cares? Let's just lap it all up!!

Nowhere Man · Joined: 08 Feb 2004