re: Spinoff: McCartney or Lennon?

Both had a melodic sense that was second to none when they were in the Beatles, not like the self-indulgent hard rockers of the 70s. Lennon may not have been as proficient on his instruments as McCartney but neither was Dylan when he played with the Band and he was the greatest singer-songwriter of all-time.

quote:

---

Lennon was more misunderstood than being an a-hole.

---

I like Lennon but beating your wife and being a deadbeat dad is being misunderstood?

If we start by accepting the premise these are 2 of, say, 10, most influential pop/rock songwriters of the entire history of the genre, it is kind of counterintuitive to suggest that we probably wouldn't have heard of John Lennon without the Beatles (there I said it) and there is only marginally greater chance we would have heard of McCartney. But I think this is nonetheless true.

The Beatles constitute a perfect storm. They were the right group of kids at the right place at the right time. Because one had to have a certain minimum degree of actual, legitimate musical talent to even survive, much less thrive, all of their talents (even Ringo) were made available to the world. They also followed a pretty rapid evolution (they led changes in rock music throughout the 1960s0) and burnout - particularly when one considers that - from a musical production standpoint, everything the Beatles did, of any significance at all, was done from 1963 to 1969.

That being said, my personal preference is for McCartney. I like the edge that John brought to the collaborations and the darker side of the band's music, overall. I even enjoyed some of his solo work. But, Paul's music starts off more accessible. That does make a difference.

quote:

---

if still alive, John Lennon's solo career would have dwarfed Paul McCartney

---

the ole if he was still alive bit. In the decade post Beatles it is McCartney by a wide margin, on both volume and quality. When Lennon was shot he was 40. How many people post 40 after a decade of relatively little output would really start cranking out great stuff? His last album is largely overrated due to his untimely death. (Watching the Wheels is a great song though).

If you look back on it, McCartney, who cranking out material through the 70's had mostly slowed down by then. He released Tug of War in 82 and Broadstreet in 84 and very little that did anything after that. I see no reason to think Lennon would have had a renaissance in the 80's. His best work was well behind him at that point, as it is for pretty much all pop musicians at 40.

And I misspelled it twice in the same post. I think I have the dementia really, really bad.

Can't fault Macca for writing and performing the greatest rock love song of all-time Maybe I'm Amazed.

Lennon was an enormous douche and destroyed the greatest band of all time

McCartney all day

quote:

---

I hate everything Lennon.

---

With you there.

"Watching the wheels go round and round" turns my stomach.

George Harrison

It's safe to say both McCartney and Lennon are extraordinary talents who changed the direction and scope of popular music positively during the 1960s.

Although either one of them can stand as a great musician alone, the combination of the two is much greater than the sum of each individually.