A treasury and a place to meet people of all ages with various interests from all over the World
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Beatles vs Solo  (Read 260 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ovi

  • Global Moderator
  • A Thousand Pages
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1073
  • Tonight, I'm a rock 'n' roll star.
Beatles vs Solo
« on: March 24, 2014, 07:18:39 PM »

I think it's safe to say that a good majority of us prefer both Lennon and McCartney in their Beatles days more. But what about George? I only own All Things Must Pass, but I gotta say, I think many-a songs off that one can easily compete with his best Beatles offerings. I'm curious to hear the opinions of people who've heard more of his solo stuff.
Logged
http://tangledupinmusic.wordpress.com - yet another music blog

Kangaroo Kev

  • Global Moderator
  • A Thousand Pages
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3252
Re: Beatles vs Solo
« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2014, 10:48:39 PM »

For me he made one good album, the one you already have, he wrote most of that as a Beatle Im told. I have all his albums but (like the other Beatle solo albums) I never play them, imo they are very average with the odd good track and theres many other bands that Id play in preference too them, I don't like any of his preachy stuff, Krishna and all that.
George wrote some great melodies in his life, none better than Something imo.
Maybe he needed a partner. Maybe all the time it should've been Lennon/McCartney/Harrison
Logged
"I have always thought in the back of my mind.... cheese & onion...."

Moogmodule

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 655
Re: Beatles vs Solo
« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2014, 10:57:53 PM »

I think it'd be clear cut that George solo beats George Beatle if George hasn't released Sonething and Hear Comes the Sun with the Beatles. I think most people would rate them if not the top, very near his top songs. Only My Sweet Lord could compete in general public recognition ( and he had some help with that one  ;))

I tend to look at it as George hit his peak from around 68 to 72. Whether with the Beatles or solo. He was still plundering the late 60s tunes til the early 80s. He was extremely prolific in that period. He also did a lot of session work,  producing and co-writing.

As to how his solo songs compare with Beatle tunes. I'd rate several as the equal or better of pretty much all his Beatle songs except Something, which is a deserved classic. Most of those would come from that 68 to 72 period though.

George's solo career benefits from iTunes playlists format. After ATMP his albums were very patchy. But you can pick out some good tunes on them.

I do tend to listen to George's solo stuff more than Paul or Johns. But I've always had a soft spot for George. It's an underdog thing.

 
Logged

oldbrownshoe

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
Re: Beatles vs Solo
« Reply #3 on: March 25, 2014, 05:36:05 PM »

As I've mentioned before, I really don't like the production on 'All Things Must Pass' and still can't bring myself to like it, even though I've no problem with the production on 'Let It Be' (even the much-discussed 'The Long and Winding Road').

Outside of 'Wonderwall', I wouldn't put any of his solo stuff above 'If I Needed Someone', 'Love You To', 'I Want To Tell You', 'The Inner Light', 'Long, Long, Long', 'Only A Northern Song', 'Old Brown Shoe' or the Anthology 3 version of 'All Things Must Pass', but that's as much to do with the era than anything else.
Why would I listen to George in 1979 when I can listen to him in 1969?
Logged

Klang

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1034
  • Go to the window...
    • Klangville
Re: Beatles vs Solo
« Reply #4 on: March 25, 2014, 05:52:40 PM »


I agree with others who feel that the solo works (of all of them) are generally not that entertaining.

I like 'Brainwashed' a lot. Better than ATMP, actually. Guess it's my fave.

 :)

Logged
'...In the name of Preverti, daughter of the mountains, whose embrace with Rani made the whole world tremble...'

Moogmodule

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 655
Re: Beatles vs Solo
« Reply #5 on: March 25, 2014, 09:38:23 PM »


Why would I listen to George in 1979 when I can listen to him in 1969?

Because... you can have more george that way! ;D

Logged

Moogmodule

  • Getting Better
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 655
Re: Beatles vs Solo
« Reply #6 on: March 25, 2014, 09:46:18 PM »

I agree with others who feel that the solo works (of all of them) are generally not that entertaining.

I like 'Brainwashed' a lot. Better than ATMP, actually. Guess it's my fave.

 :)

I like Brainwashed too. I'd go as far as to say it's the only George album I'd play end to end. ATMP being a double album is ripe for playing only bits of at a time. Cloud 9 is a good consistent commercial album and deserved its success but has bit too much 80s sheen for my tastes.

Brainwashed is a solid bunch of tunes, the best of which stand with his best solo material,  with some great guitar and no real clunkers.
Logged
 

Page created in 0.631 seconds with 26 queries.