The most talented Beatle

[salman85]

I'm not sure if there's been a topic along these lines on the forum before,but keeping my latest fascination with comparing musicians in mind,i thought this would be rather interesting.

Effectively,it would probably come to down to one of John or Paul,but i've also come across a significant number of people who think George was the most talented one of the lot.

Again,happy debating!

[GIMH]

I guess it depends on how you define 'talented'.

Lennon the better lyricist and vocalist. Macca the more accomplished musician. Both hugely innovative in different ways. Macca more diverse musically, IMO.

Will elaborate on all next time am at a computer.

[keeper]

I guess it depends on how you define 'talented'.

Lennon the better lyricist and vocalist. Macca the more accomplished musician. Both hugely innovative in different ways. Macca more diverse musically, IMO.

Will elaborate on all next time am at a computer.

[morgieb]

I'd say Lennon. McCartney was also good too, though.

[weed wizard]

JOHN LENNON
debate over.

[grecian]

Lennon for me, but it can't be doubted that Macca not dying young has made the gap bigger theh it should be. Imagine, still, along with Bohemian Rhapsody, the most over-rated song of all time.

[James]

I've deleted all the rubbish in this thread, and hopefully it will allow the thread to get back on track for those that are interested in the subject being discussed.

[GIMH]

Originally Posted by grecian

Lennon for me, but it can't be doubted that Macca not dying young has made the gap bigger theh it should be. Imagine, still, along with Bohemian Rhapsody, the most over-rated song of all time.

As they said in The Dark Knight, "You either die the hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain."

I have zero problem with people like yourself rating Lennon higher. I do have a problem with what you've alluded to, and that's the people who seem to think McCartney was streets below Lennon.


They were close enough for it to be a discussion. Not bothered which way people go but I hate the way some people act like Paul owes absolutely everything to John.

[Smudge]

I didn't really pay much interest to their post-Beatle careers until a few years ago, until i watched a few of those classic album programmes. After which, I have to give the nod to Lennon - although McCartney's case wasn't helped by the documentary on Band On The Run being fronted by some complete **** called Dermot O'Leary who made the documentary more about him. There were far too many shots of him asking questions and giggling like a school kid and interrupting McCartney as he answered a question.

[keeper]

Wings - the band the Beatles could have been.

Agree McCartney is under-rated. He came over as the nice one compared to the more rebellious image of Lennon. If you listen to early interviews, though, McCartney was every bit as acerbic and quick in his wit as Lennon.

I believe - without knowing about such stuff - that many think that the musical development from pop band to something a bit more interesting was in large part down to George Harrison.

[Daemon]

Originally Posted by James

I've deleted all the rubbish in this thread, and hopefully it will allow the thread to get back on track for those that are interested in the subject being discussed.

You forgot post #3 (delete this post as well after that so it doesn't make me look like an idiot )

[GIMH]

Originally Posted by Voltman

I didn't really pay much interest to their post-Beatle careers until a few years ago, until i watched a few of those classic album programmes. After which, I have to give the nod to Lennon - although McCartney's case wasn't helped by the documentary on Band On The Run being fronted by some complete **** called Dermot O'Leary who made the documentary more about him. There were far too many shots of him asking questions and giggling like a school kid and interrupting McCartney as he answered a question.

Did you watch the John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band one? I only watched that myself a couple of weeks back. Good watch.

[Smudge]

Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero

Did you watch the John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band one? I only watched that myself a couple of weeks back. Good watch.

Yep, I enjoyed it - I love how the engineers and producers pull back all the various layers of music to reveal the rawness behind it. That's probably the best of the series I've seen - even if Yoko was as rambling as ever.

[GIMH]

Yeah - the bit where you just heard the scream from Mother was amazing

[salman85]

I think the problem people have with McCartney is that he has carried on for longer than he should have.Yes,some might give him top marks for longevity,but others would slam his refusal to retire gracefully.Kind of like U2 and Rolling Stones.By carrying on for so long,they've become Cash Cows.McCartney still has that phenomenal knack of pulling out addictive tunes now and then (English Tea being a prime example),but the longevity factor is always going to have a downside to it and like so many other musicians,it has effected McCartney too,although it wasn't as brutal on him as it has been on that douchebag Bono.It can be argued that Harrison has a substantially long career too,but he didn't suffer from the same longevity downside that McCartney did.Ofcourse it does have a lot to do with the fact that McCartney was much more visible on the media compared to Harrison,and therefore it was easy to ignore the latter's shortcomings because he wasn't visible that often.

As for the talent comparison,i think Lennon just about edges it,but that's personal bias for me since the majority of my favorite Beatles songs were written by him.But if you're going by those addictive,smooth rhythmic tunes,then it's very difficult to argue against anyone in history being better than McCartney.