The thing about Paul specifically is he seems to have no idea if what's he's doing is any good or not. I mean, you're in the studio, you're playing with Paul McCartney. Are you going to be the one to tell him Mary Had a Little Lamb might not be his best work? John would've. From various Beatle documentaries and such, it seems that internal competition drove the band, until it broke the band up.

I do think by the way that McCartney's New is pretty good.

I'll have to re-listen to all things must pass. It's been years.

George was a bit suppressed by John and Paul, so he had a backlog of songs when the Beatles Broke up. He was musically constipated.

Once freed of the confines of the band, all that music flowed from him. All things must pass, indeed.

momadance wrote:

phatj wrote:HATE

EDIT: this was directed at "Wonderful Christmastime"

So do I. I posted it to prove your point. Post-Beatles shit is terrible for all of them.

Not true - George Harrison has some excellent solo work, and Lennon had a few nice things he did solo, and, believe it or not, even McCartney. There are some solo works I would take over "Beatles" recordings (although what I am mostly thinking of - things like "The Long and Winding Road" are Beatles in name only).

mozartpc27 wrote:

momadance wrote:

phatj wrote:HATE

EDIT: this was directed at "Wonderful Christmastime"

So do I. I posted it to prove your point. Post-Beatles shit is terrible for all of them.

Not true - George Harrison has some excellent solo work, and Lennon had a few nice things he did solo, and, believe it or not, even McCartney. There are some solo works I would take over "Beatles" recordings (although what I am mostly thinking of - things like "The Long and Winding Road" are Beatles in name only).

I agree with you Moz. They all did good post Beatles stuff.

Swiggers wrote:Seriously, All Things Must Pass is truly spectacular, and you can make the same case for Band on the Run and Plastic Ono Band as well.

and Ringo was in Caveman

Scharpling had a pretty great bit last month about how absurd it is that Ringo is in the Rock n Roll HOF as a solo artist

Swiggers wrote:... you can make the same case for Band on the Run ...

can you? because that shit is...not Beatles caliber

yeah it's no Lovely Rita or Rocky Raccoon

or the piggies song or yellow submarine or ob la di ob la da

I was about 7 years old. My aunt and uncle were visiting and telling me excitedly that the beetles were going to sing on Ed Sullivan. At that point in my tiny world, I paid no attention to any kind of music, but I was pretty buzzed to see these singing insects.

Needless to say, quite a buzzkill to see that the oldsters had deceived me as I watched four men with ladies' hair styles singing.

However, right after that, a few things came together that made me a fan:
1) I got a 9-volt transistor radio for my birthday.
2) My older sister was a big fan of rock and teen idols - so I got to follow here musical taste
3) The Beatles re-appeared on Sullivan

My ears were glued to that little radio, and I liked almost everything that was broadcast in the 60s, but then and now - the Beatles were something special.

Others here have alluded to the McCartney/Lennon partnership, and it seems certain that Lennon's sour acid helped to dampen McCartney's treacle, and vice versa.

I heard a cut from the wonderful Band on the Run LP this AM, and my thought was how much better that album would have been with Lennon as a censor.

I put a lot of value on the post-Beatles work of Lennon, McCartney, and George, but none of it rises to the level of the Beatles best stuff. Sure, it's better than the curiously tossed-off Magical Mystery Tour, but that's it. I'm glad George got to shoot his wad with ATMP, and I enjoyed a few Ringo tunes. McCartney's solo and Wings work can be condensed into a 2-disc greatest hits, and Lennon didn't have one great album or song. Plenty of good, nothing great.

i thought that the major

was a lady

TomatoPie wrote:I was about 7 years old. My aunt and uncle were visiting and telling me excitedly that the beetles were going to sing on Ed Sullivan. At that point in my tiny world, I paid no attention to any kind of music, but I was pretty buzzed to see these singing insects.

Needless to say, quite a buzzkill to see that the oldsters had deceived me as I watched four men with ladies' hair styles singing.

However, right after that, a few things came together that made me a fan:
1) I got a 9-volt transistor radio for my birthday.
2) My older sister was a big fan of rock and teen idols - so I got to follow here musical taste
3) The Beatles re-appeared on Sullivan

My ears were glued to that little radio, and I liked almost everything that was broadcast in the 60s, but then and now - the Beatles were something special.

Others here have alluded to the McCartney/Lennon partnership, and it seems certain that Lennon's sour acid helped to dampen McCartney's treacle, and vice versa.

I heard a cut from the wonderful Band on the Run LP this AM, and my thought was how much better that album would have been with Lennon as a censor.

I put a lot of value on the post-Beatles work of Lennon, McCartney, and George, but none of it rises to the level of the Beatles best stuff. Sure, it's better than the curiously tossed-off Magical Mystery Tour, but that's it. I'm glad George got to shoot his wad with ATMP, and I enjoyed a few Ringo tunes. McCartney's solo and Wings work can be condensed into a 2-disc greatest hits, and Lennon didn't have one great album or song. Plenty of good, nothing great.

we wrangle like punch-drunk irish but we agree to the T on teh Beatles go figure

As a former librul Democrat I am still attuned to culture beyond Ted Nugent and Shania

I feel that if Paul McCartney was not a member of the Beatles they would have been a ok band. Good but not great.

Warszawa wrote:I feel that if Paul McCartney was not a member of the Beatles they would have been a ok band. Good but not great.

I was going to make up some joke about , yeah, what if they'd added so and so as a bassist, but realized I couldn't really come up with a bassist of that era (or many eras, really) who was a great songwriter. A pubescent Roger Waters? A kidnapped Brian Wilson?

Lennon wrote more than half of the songs before Sgt. Pepper's. They would have been on par with the Kinks, or close to it

Wanted to resurrect this thread as the Beatles channel on Sirius is so good.

Top 10 songs (no particular order):

1) Tomorrow Never Knows
2) Across the Universe
3) A Day in the Life
4) Come Together
5) Golden Slumbers
6) Dear Prudence
7) I Am the Walrus
8) The Balld of John & Yoko
9) Blackbird
10) Taxman

Nothing pre revolver?

I always was fond of Lennon's Working Class Hero.