- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 3/30/26 at 5:35 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
There's a good chance he's the greatest pop/rock guitarist of all time. He is certainly the best bass player.
I haven't hidden my admiration for Maca on this board, but these are both a bit of a stretch. Paul knew well enough to supplement his own talent with Denny Laine even on the first Wings record. By the second one (Red Rose Speedway), he had Laine AND McCollough, as well as Hugh McCracken and David Spinozza (who had already played with Paul and Linda on Ram) taking guest leads, almost predicting how Steely Dan would operate later in the decade. Paul played what he thought he could to fit the music and brought others in (as the Beatles had late, with Preston, Clapton, etc.) to help as needed.
As a multi-instrumentalist who is also the "frontman" Maca has few peers (Prince, Steve Winwood and a few others - I guess the modern version is Grohl), but to argue he was better on lead guitar than effectively anyone else who played lead on a Wings record or the guys Steely Dan used, much less the virtuosos we can all name is a little bit crazy. Likewise, I like his bass parts with The Beatles more than some bass "purists", but to say he was a better bass player than Entwistle, JPJ, Bootsy, Jack Bruce, Larry Graham, Jaco or even some of the great session players like Jamerson or David Hood? I mean, I think he's the greatest pop songwriter of all time and is (was?) a great lead, rhythm and bass guitarist. But greatest on any of those instruments? I don't think so.
Posted on 3/30/26 at 6:38 pm to Mizz-SEC
Least replaceable, Stuart Sutcliffe.
Posted on 3/30/26 at 8:41 pm to Philzilla2k
(6 minute cut)
This post was edited on 3/30/26 at 9:11 pm
Posted on 4/1/26 at 5:58 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:Depends on how you define it. I don't define it as having much to do with virtuosity. If we did that, then certainly it would be some person we've never heard of in a basement somewhere.
As a multi-instrumentalist who is also the "frontman" Maca has few peers (Prince, Steve Winwood and a few others - I guess the modern version is Grohl), but to argue he was better on lead guitar than effectively anyone else who played lead on a Wings record or the guys Steely Dan used, much less the virtuosos we can all name is a little bit crazy. Likewise, I like his bass parts with The Beatles more than some bass "purists", but to say he was a better bass player than Entwistle, JPJ, Bootsy, Jack Bruce, Larry Graham, Jaco or even some of the great session players like Jamerson or David Hood? I mean, I think he's the greatest pop songwriter of all time and is (was?) a great lead, rhythm and bass guitarist. But greatest on any of those instruments? I don't think so.
When you put everything into one bucket, though, it's him.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 8:43 am to Mizz-SEC
Technically within the Beatles universe, George Martin was the least replaceable.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 11:26 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:
When you put everything into one bucket, though, it's him.
Better than Gilmour?
quote:
Depends on how you define it.
I suppose so.
Posted on 4/2/26 at 1:52 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:I'm the wrong person to ask if we're rating Pink Floyd, but sure.
Better than Gilmour?
Popular
Back to top

0






