Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I think it was Paul. John is my favorite, but I think Paul was the most gifted and talented. The best overall musician, and even songwriter. Because while I feel Lennon wrote more involving and literate work for the most part, Paul was the master of melody. If we think of "music" as basically tunes or melodies (with words secondary), I believe McCartney was the best songwriter of the 20th Century. Put him together with Lennon, and it's pure magic.

Yes, I'll agree with Paul as best musician. I have a feeling that it would have been awesome to see him at work with the other Beatles, especially John, in the mid-sixties. But he did become lazy, I feel. Many have said it, but it's true: Paul McCartney needed someone to say "No!" to him.

However, the thread title asks who is the "most naturally gifted/talented". John Lennon, though not the musician that Paul is, had more strings to his bow. He saw the world through different eyes, which produced some of the great and unusual Beatle songs. Add his literary efforts, and his activism, and you have the one!

[pc31]

whats this???bait joe?ok i will bite.i refuse to be led down that road again.i say the most gifted had the most gifted children tho.if you pass on a creativity as wonderous as music without watering it down then you are truely gifted.(it was watered in this case too)which means i picked another beatle.unless little james turns out to be a dynamo in disguise.

[pc31]

consider this lennon had more bouts with awesome grief than paul.john was raised in a broken home,had a shi tty dad ,no siblings in the home,lost his mother,was born during a bombing,had no real person pushing him along with praise,he may have also been termed a misfits and a trouble maker.this guy had poe like luck.but yet this bitter guy put himself out in the public eye to sing about love?
paul was brought up in a loving family with both parents,they took vacations,did singalongs and they supported their kids by being involved in the music making.paul was popular and was liked and was not a trouble maker.
i just had to clarify it was john i picked.

[Indica]

Although you may have grasped I fight for the Mccartney corner, John Lennon is still a huge influence in my musical lifestyle.
 Paul Mccartney, I feel, is the more natural of the partnership, showing a wide range of talent through a mulitude of mediums ( Guitar, Bass, Piano, Drums..and even flute!) which only acts as a back up to his powerful Voice.
 From the Power of Long Tall Sally, to the slow-thinking narration of For No One..right past the Rock style of Peppers and Helter Skelter...Mccartneys Voice is a song-writers dream. The cross-reference of styles and genres absorb the experimental phase of the sixties and creates a podium in which the beatles stand, a definative chapter in Rock History.
 With this said, and the Hofner shining bright, Without Lennon, Mccartney is just the average ageing rock-star who's had a staple diet of commercial solo hits.
 Lennon (although obviously playing the so-called commercial game as much as Paul) later developed a view to Music and Life, which embodied all the skills and eccentricities which makes such an identity, a person who is looked up to throughout generations.......John Lennon.
 Although I feel I may be going off on a tagent. without the small explanation of how the partnership worked so well, John and Paul are a single entity (in some ways), when evaluating the diversity of the Beatles catologue.
Paul may have had the natural Talent, But John shows equal power in the way of writing .......and if that is what Talent* stands for, Lennon and Mccartney are balanced.
Mccartney is the natural winner in sound and musical basis... but a draw on talent.

[Indica]

[pc31]

you guys are in for it when the john bus gets here........lol

[tkitna]

Stu. Have you ever checked out some of his art?

Seriously, i'm going with Paul. John was an equal (or better or worse) song writer, but Pauls musical ability to play almost any instrument gives him the nod. For me, theres more to it than just the song writing and ideas aspect.

[pc31]

aaaaaahhhh you bum........

[quote by=tkitna link=Blah.pl?b=cc,m=1092517016,s=7 date=1092526797]
------
Seriously, i'm going with Paul. John was an equal (or better or worse) song writer, but Pauls musical ability to play almost any instrument gives him the nod. For me, theres more to it than just the song writing and ideas aspect.[/quote]

I agree there's more to it than just the song writing and ideas; that's what gives it to John Lennon, I reckon. He wrote more songs that probed, that asked questions, that revealed himself, the artist. I sometimes wonder why Paul actually writes songs!

BTW, Paul can play a range of musical instruments, it's true - but that's quite a common talent, you know.

[pc31]

maria where are the rest?in the bus?

[tkitna]

[quote by=Maria link=Blah.pl?b=cc,m=1092517016,s=9 date=1092527834]

I agree there's more to it than just the song writing and ideas; that's what gives it to John Lennon, I reckon. He wrote more songs that probed, that asked questions, that revealed himself, the artist. I sometimes wonder why Paul actually writes songs![/quote]

If you agree that its more than song writing and ideas, why did you just give an example that was purely based on song writing and ideas?

BTW, Paul can play a range of musical instruments, it's true - but that's quite a common talent, you know.

Ummmm,,,,,how many different instruments can you play? I dont think thats its common for a musician to be able to play a bunch of different instruments (especially effeciently enough to be recorded to album).

[tkitna]

[quote by=pc31 link=Blah.pl?b=cc,m=1092517016,s=8 date=1092527632]aaaaaahhhh you bum........[/quote]

I'm sorry man, but I quit riding the short bus some time ago. 

[quote by=tkitna link=Blah.pl?b=cc,m=1092517016,s=11 date=1092528394]

If you agree that its more than song writing and ideas, why did you just give an example that was purely based on song writing and ideas?[/quote]

Yes, that was sloppy. I was thinking what I'd written before, when I gave examples of John Lennon's other talents, so to speak. I was also trying to convey that even in song-writing areas, John Lennon has more to offer than Paul McCartney, at least during the Beatle years. (It gets muddy after that!)

[quote by=tkitna link=Blah.pl?b=cc,m=1092517016,s=11 date=1092528394]
Ummmm,,,,,how many different instruments can you play? I dont think thats its common for a musician to be able to play a bunch of different instruments (especially effeciently enough to be recorded to album). [/quote]

ALL the musicians I know (about five, six perhaps) not only do play at least three instruments very well - they can pick up on how to play other instruments quite quickly. Please understand that I'm talking serious musicians here - not the average person who plays the guitar or piano for their own amusement, more or less. I repeat, I'm talking about musicians. Paul had this talent, and it is quite common - in my experience.

[Mairi]

Although I think that the band was all talented in their own ways, I agree Paul was the better overall musician of the group.

[tkitna]

[quote by=Maria link=Blah.pl?b=cc,m=1092517016,s=13 date=1092534167]

Yes, that was sloppy. I was thinking what I'd written before, when I gave examples of John Lennon's other talents, so to speak. I was also trying to convey that even in song-writing areas, John Lennon has more to offer than Paul McCartney, at least during the Beatle years. (It gets muddy after that!)[/quote]

Point taken, but i'm feeling split here in our references toward gifted and talented. Maybe i'm putting to much thought into this (or not enough), but I feel as though Paul is a two sided sword while John is relying heavily on his vision. I'll admit that John laid down the deeper lyrics and some very meaningful music, but I feel that Paul could match him musically while being the better musician (he loses big time when it comes to lyrics). Paul did have some ideas along the way also that have to be accounted for with Sgt. Peppers and Magical Mystery Tour (etc,,). I realize that Sgt. Peppers veered off course, and MMT was considered a failure in the eyes of many beholders (mine included), but they were intrical parts in the Beatles history. I also realize the other three contributed immensily in these projects, but they were primarily Pauls. My point is that he tried and some worked better while others didnt.

(sorry for the rambling as i'm at work and i've been pulled away a thousand times. Had trouble relaying what I was feeling)

ALL the musicians I know (about five, six perhaps) not only do play at least three instruments very well - they can pick up on how to play other instruments quite quickly. Please understand that I'm talking serious musicians here - not the average person who plays the guitar or piano for their own amusement, more or less. I repeat, I'm talking about musicians. Paul had this talent, and it is quite common - in my experience.

You keep some good company then. I know of a few, but thats it. Wish I could do it.

[Wonderwall]

 Paul because he could play good guitar, piano, and drums and of course spectacular bass. I mean he played all the instruments on McCartney! He even played drum parts on Beatles tunes.. Back In The USSR and some other tunes that havent been documented to his name. I read that he would go and redo Ringos drum parts on tracks because of his dislike for them. Thats something ive read about from more than one source.

[pc31]

sitting on corn flake waiting for the van to come

[tkitna]

'Ballad of John & Yoko' and 'Dear Prudence' were also Paul on the drums which have been highly documented as being Paul. Can you state your sources where Paul has redone Ringos drums? I've heard it before, but dont believe it for a second. Ringo is/was a better drummer than Paul ever was.

Personally, I dont like Pauls lead guitar playing. I think his solos lack feel and creativity.

Yes, I'd like to know the sources for Paul redoing Ringo's drums on occasion. I don't believe a word of it - nothing would tear a group apart faster than that sort of caper.

Hmmm...