Is Paul the superior Beatle?

File: George-Harrison-guitar-3-the-beatles-7383766-500-661.jpg (48KB, 500x661px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x661px

Yah, if by Paul you mean Peorge McHarrison

>>74825234
PAUL IS A PIECE OF SHIT

Ringo is the best, you plebs

File: naked.jpg (166KB, 1200x1280px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1200x1280px

I wonder if Paul was disgusted by this degenerate album cover.

i wish paul had been killed and not john tbqhwy

John > George > Paul > Ringo

>>74825234
Neither of them were the superior Beatle. Wings was shit and Plastic Ono Band was shit. They were only a great musical force together.

So you mean in terms of musicianship or personality?

>>74825370
a lot of people would be disgusted by those tits.

File: the best BEATle.jpg (40KB, 615x409px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 615x409px

>>74825234
oi paul you outta get outta 'ere fore i bea' ya like i beat yoko

John was the better beatle despite the paul circlejerk in recent years

>>74825234
When he was alive, yes.

Nah, Ringo is

File: Paul Bathroom.jpg (202KB, 600x855px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 600x855px

>>74825370
No, he included this of himself in the White Album inner sleeve

>>74826090
Why is he ashamed to show it?

>>74825964
By recent years you mean the objective state of reality?

>>74825234
100%

If we ranked Paul's 70s albums along with the Beatles discography, it'd look like this

Ram
Band on the Run
>Magical Mystery Tour
McCartney
>white album
>Revolver
Back to the Egg
McCartney II
>Help!
Wild Life
>Abbey Road
Venus & Mars
>Rubber Soul
>Let It Be...Naked
>Sgt. Peppers
London Town
Wings at the Speed of Sound
>A Hard Day's Night
>Beatles For Sale
Red Rose Speedway
>Please Please Me
>With The Beatles

The fact that so many books still name the Beatles as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success. The Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worthy of being saved.

>>74826867
This.

Wings > Beatles

>>74825234
Yes, but the others are all amazing as well.
Paul>John>>>George>Ringo
that is songwriting abilities only

>>74825234
which one

>>74827429
I can only get behind this if it's more like

Paul >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John > George >>> Ringo

>>74825755
Lol you've never listened to RAM then I take it.

>>74826531
Putting Please Please Me so low lets me know you're a huge pleb.

>>74828209
Not having listened to all of the Wings albums listed let's me know how big of a
pleb YOU are.

File: YOLEGENDOHNO.jpg (293KB, 998x920px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 998x920px

Friendly reminder no Beatles member has been able to release 3 albums in a row as good as these.

Carry on!

>>74825370
He wrote the liner notes

>>74826244
kill yourself paul fag

paul was the most talented out of the 4

>>74826244

john wrote the better songs with out question

just look at the archives for any "what's you're favourite beatles song mu?" thread and 85% of the songs are John songs.

>>74828209
Using "pleb" unironically let's me know not to take you seriously.

>>74828715
Even Ringo, Goodnight Vienna, and Ringo's Rotogravure is a better trilogy.

>>74826867
nah, youll see its maturation in how there are no more classics these days. music is far more egalitarian now. youll get highly rated albums youll never have heard of. but because there are no classics, there arent many that take over from the original classics. this is because music grew up so quickly, maybe within 5 - 10 years from something tiny to something massive and many of the originals that did things first will always be inflated because there hasnt been enough time to forget them, and there wont be because of technology.

classic and jazz dont suffer these because it isnt inherently pop.
you have to admit the beatles did alot of things first.

>>74827467
>>74827429
Give me Paul's top 10 songs then.

File: do it.png (109KB, 310x293px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 310x293px

>I can't comprehend things without trying to relate it to best or worst

>>74829295
I've Just Seen a Face
Things We Said Today
For No One
Yesterday
Here There and Everywhere
Helter Skelter
You Never Give Me Your Money
She's Leaving Home
The Fool on the Hill
Golden Slumbers/Carry That Weight/The End

>>74828869
>>74828918
They were both amazing but I prefer Paul personally.
For No One
I'm Looking Through You
I've Just Seen a Face
Things We Said Today
Here, There, and Everywhere
Eleanor Rigby
Abbey Road Medley
these are some of the greatest songs of all time, and that isn't even close to all of his amazing songs. The Beatles are my favorite band because all of them were so great in their own way, but I just tend to identify with Paul's music more.

>>74825234
The most formulaic Beatle

>>74829342
>>74829363
You and I are so similar, I typed out my comment before I even saw yours.

>>74829364
>Ram is formulaic

If you want formulaic, go listen to All Things Must Pass

>>74829385
I just don't see how anyone could possibly think that Paul isn't far and away the best Beatle/solo Beatle. It's almost as if most "Beatle fans" havent even listened to all of their material, or havent listened to it enough.

I also think being a musician and multi instrumentalist myself has a lot to do with it. Paul's music is way more complex than the others.

>>74829363
>>74829342

thing is, all pauls songs seem to be so shallow compared to say john or lil g's. hes abit vapid.

and half his shit is like pan alley music hall crap.

>>74829441
hes the best musician, but not the best songwriter.

>>74829342
>>74829363
>I've Just Seen A Face

My fucking niggers

File: Paul McCartney Misc..jpg (99KB, 634x634px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 634x634px

>>74829719
I don't know about that. I think that Paul is the best songwriter and musician. Maybe not the best lyricist.

>>74825302

yeah right, Paul ended up recording his and rings parts in many songs, he's by far the superior beatle

>>74829701
>pan alley music hall crap

You mean in comparison to half assed blues crap and Indian weaboo crap and pseudo-political protest crap?

>>74825512
go away, christgau

>>74829832
yeah that was crap but there was alot less of that other stuff. atleast with the other stuff you could kinda see what they were trying to do. paul had no motive other than shit music taste.

File: Dude Guys Stop.jpg (6KB, 250x226px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x226px

>>74830328
>Paul McCartney has shit music taste

I mean, I agree that current Paul's taste is shit, but he's old and senile now. He certainly had a better taste in music back in the day than John and George.

George > Paul > Ringo > John

>>74830369
well how can he not have had a shite music taste if he was making music i can imagine my great-grandma enjoying during her middle age.

>>74829701
>music hall crap
pleb filter works again

>>74830435
You just said it yourself. His music is timeless.

>>74831066
nah i mean by that that is a generation that lived through all the rationing and shit in the war and learned to love bland food as well as bland music

>>74825339
>>74826079
this
>>74825579
pleb

>>74830435
as well as it sounding like how i imagine some of the music in that generation or before might have sounded on the radio

>>74825370
Can we all agree that John was by far the fucking worst

>>74831154
Lol, you're just too stupid for complex music. Go listen to the Rolling Stones.

>>74825942
John never beat Yoko.

>>74831219
you call goodday sunshine, when im 64, honey pie complex music?
do you even like those songs?

File: Paul McCartney.jpg (48KB, 404x480px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 404x480px

>>74831440
Vocaroo yourself playing the piano parts of those songs and we'll find out.

>>74831219
The Beatles were more innovative and revolutionary in the studio, but The Rolling Stones were better musicians.

>>74826531
I would have put McCartney II up higher.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOuczvLMRJ8

File: 20770086_10159112333530591_1348504496897518329_n.jpg (60KB, 647x693px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 647x693px

No, it's GG

>>74831458
im a better piano player than paul mccartney....

>>74826531
with the beatles is literally a masterpiece

paul is the cutest
>>74825370
Yeah he was, you can hear him complaining about it in the Get Back sessions, and he hated yoko back then (wouldn't be surprised if he still does)

File: 1497668980629.png (28KB, 354x286px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 354x286px

>>74828715

john in my eyes was the superior songwriter and pushed boundaries more. Paul was really safe as a songwriter and composer, besides the revolver era.

>>74825234
if you purely like melody then sure
in terms of songwriting and sonic innovation john was the best
george probably had the best personality though

File: all_things_must_pass.jpg (9KB, 220x220px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 220x220px

george has best solo album or no?

>>74833290
Most sonic innovations were Paul or George Martin. For example in Tomorrow Never Knows they used tape loops because Paul liked Stockhausen

>>74833234
>>74833290
no, John was a better lyricist (usually) but Paul is probably the best composer, especially when it comes to melody. even John said Paul was the better melody maker. also in most of Paul's songs, he made the music first, then came up with lyrics to fit it, whereas John in most songs came up with lyrics then wrote music around it (talking about later period where they wrote a lot of songs separately, most of their works up to Sgt. Pepper were collaborations with their inputs mixed in)
>>74833318
this guy is right, Paul was the one into avant-garde art and he introduced tape loops to John

>>74833305
Yeh

File: Ram.jpg (253KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 600x600px

>>74833305

File: hmm.jpg (180KB, 600x549px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 600x549px

>>74834283
>he put a pic of two beetles fucking on the back
what did he mean by this

File: john-lennon-9379045-2-402.jpg (161KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1200x1200px

This is how I see it OP. In The Beatles John is the best. He made most of their best songs and was the main driving force throughout their career. But after that, Paul is best boy followed by George

>>74834644
I think a lot of his talent is wasted as a solo, because it seems much of his talent manifests itself when he's working with McCartney. Just read some of his descrptions from interviews of how he wrote music with Paul. There was this Slate article that cited this guy who had been there when John and Paul wrote With a Little Help from My Friends, and it's crazy how good John is at coming up with great parts to already existing structures that Paul has built. Paul gave another example where he was writing Getting Better and came up wiht the verse + "i have to admit, it's getting better...a little better, all the time" then john spontaneously chimed in with "it can't get much worse", which really amplifies that chorus IMO. I think John was dependent on having a creative partner, that's why he had to replace Paul with Yoko, but she's obviously no match for Paul. His solo albums are good but no match for what he was making with the Beatles. I think George was probably the most creatively independent of all of them.

>>74834710
Can you link it? I'm curious. I've already searched it.

>>74835167
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/creative_pairs/features/2010/two_of_us/inside_the_lennonmccartney_connection_part_1.html

this is it I think

once I read the original source this article is citing but I forget where I found it

>>74825234
>pleb
John
>normal person
Paul
>contrarian
George
>patrician
Ringo

>>74834644
I see it backwards. Paul was far more consistent in writing quality Beatles songs and pretty much called all the shots in the band, while John wrote his best stuff after the band broke up.

>>74829719
That would be George

>>74829270
Welcome newfriend. Enjoy your stay and please include me in your screencap.

>>74836529
>t. contrarian

>pleb
John and Paul
>contrarian
Ringo
>patrician

>GOAT TIER
Paul

>ELITE TIER
George

>HIGH TIER
Ringo

>WIFEBEATER TIER
John

>>74825234
george is the best beatle and you know it

>>74828918
>what's you're favourite beatles song mu?" thread and 85% of the songs are John songs.
I post John's songs in those threads, but I prefer them because they appeal to me personally. Paul is still a better musician.

>>74834420
It means he was getting fucked by the Beatles during the legal issues regarding their dissolution.

>>74833451
this i can agree. explains why pauls lyrics are quite superficial and vapid often. feel like george and john expressed themselves more and paul was more of an intentional "hitmaker".

still doesnt excuse his pan alley music hall crap though... the logical conclusion of a songwriter in the mold of paul.

>>74837067
also, back in the mid to late 60s, there was an intentional effort to make music into an art form and lift it out of pop culture. hence the hype of sergeant pepper and youll also see it in how cream talked about their music back in the day. no one really gives as much of a crap now and in someways its gone the opposite, to the point of embracing pop culture. i think the term "classic" entails art, and looking for classics depends on your perspective - are you looking for art?

>>74837067
we can see that the term classic infact might only apply to rock forms of music. since the 80s, music has become dominated by dance music and youll see even in the last 5 - 10 years, music progression (whether good or bad) has been in dance music through technology use and experimentation. rock music tends to just parody itself these days. maybe because rock musicians are looking to imitate "art" alot more. though recently you do see more crossover influences. e.g. arctic monkeys and other bands intentionally taking on hip-hop and r&b influences while mainstream pop acts now use live bands instead of recordings.

Paul+John was the best Beatle.

>>74837067
dance and pop acts dont intend to make classics nearly as much. maybe because they are in a more money orientated culture, both from the music industry's grasp on them, and the influence of the african american/american immigrant mentality to status being money and girls and survival (as opposed to art) being appropriated by the mainstream.

>>74840268
>not liking paul's granny shit

>>74830435
He was the beatle who liked karlheinz stockhausen and introduced the others to tape loops

Nah George Harrison is, purely on the strength of All Things Must Pass

>>74825234
Paul was probably the best musician. By technical ability it goes

Paul > George (seriously underrated guitarist) > John > Ringo (but Ringo is still top 10 drummers of all time)

>>74829295
Helter Skelter
We Can Work it Out
Yesterday
Lady Madonna
Abbey Road Medley
I'm Looking Through You
Getting Better
Michelle
And I Love Her
Blackbird

>>74840953
11/10 album desu senpai

>>74840268
Paul expressed himself a lot too, but he does have a lot of songs like Yesterday where he just came up with whatever lyrics for his music (it was originally called scrambled eggs, then John came up with the title "yesterday" and Paul wrote lyrics for it)

But he had lots of songs with genuine lyrics too, I think, though less than John. Oh! Darling is one
>Paul wrote ‘Oh! Darling’ after John telling him that he was leaving The Beatles… he actually cried the rest of the day after being driven home by Mal Evans

>>74840576
hahaha exactly.

>>74841198
eh fair.

>>74841898
see, i didnt know that and would have guessed that was an actual thoughtful song. just feel like paul doesn't have anything interesting to say except for love songs, old people and birthdays. lennon is more relatable.

>>74825370
Jesus, what a disgusting degenerate man

RIP but still

>>74842603
That's true. Most of his really expressive songs have to do with heartbreak and love, and the rest of his lyrics are usually just for fun like O-Bla-Di. I still think he could write great lyrics when he really wanted to though. Like Hey Jude, The Long and Winding Road, Two of Us

>>74843122
yeah true, just hate his granny shit.

>>74825579
you literally have it in reverse order

>>74825370
Yoko has a nice rack.

>>74825579
objectively the correct answer

>>74825234
Nah. John was better than him up until MMT, after which George became the best Beatle, although admittedly Paul and him were roughly equal during the later years.