27-09-2010, 06:42
i think WW4 maybe, i started WW3 over my 'stones most overrated band ever thread' some time ago.
i agree with you Jerome, paul was the more creative of the two, but the combination of John/Paul were a force to be reckoned with, i think they inspired eachother equally.
the so-called best album ever 'sgt.peppers' was Pauls conceptual idea, allbeit a response to 'pet sounds', also at that time the heaviest rock song was 'helter skelter', another paul song, mixing classical with pop was something paul did before lennon, ie: yesterday, eleonor rigby. but it worked the other way also, take 'a day in the life' for example, john didnt have a middle section for the song, paul had a single verse and nothing else so they combined the two bits to create that track.
generally speaking though, its so hard to compare the two of them or say one was better than the other as they were both awesome writers, and prolific too, when you think that george was also a good writer but couldnt get a look in most of the time just shows how good the lennon/mccartney combination was, i dont think we'll ever see anyone again who is so prolific with quality/talent. and mccartney is still writing good songs nowadays, many would argue that he's only still releasing records because he owns his own company(mpl) etc.... and what he does now isnt as good as his past achievements, but by most other artists standards, he is still good enuf to hold his own. but then again, i dont think any other artist could say they had a back catalogue as impressive as 'the beatles'.
i agree with you Jerome, paul was the more creative of the two, but the combination of John/Paul were a force to be reckoned with, i think they inspired eachother equally.
the so-called best album ever 'sgt.peppers' was Pauls conceptual idea, allbeit a response to 'pet sounds', also at that time the heaviest rock song was 'helter skelter', another paul song, mixing classical with pop was something paul did before lennon, ie: yesterday, eleonor rigby. but it worked the other way also, take 'a day in the life' for example, john didnt have a middle section for the song, paul had a single verse and nothing else so they combined the two bits to create that track.
generally speaking though, its so hard to compare the two of them or say one was better than the other as they were both awesome writers, and prolific too, when you think that george was also a good writer but couldnt get a look in most of the time just shows how good the lennon/mccartney combination was, i dont think we'll ever see anyone again who is so prolific with quality/talent. and mccartney is still writing good songs nowadays, many would argue that he's only still releasing records because he owns his own company(mpl) etc.... and what he does now isnt as good as his past achievements, but by most other artists standards, he is still good enuf to hold his own. but then again, i dont think any other artist could say they had a back catalogue as impressive as 'the beatles'.
"BTO....Bachman,Turner,Overweight
They were big in the 70s....for five minutes,on a Saturday,after lunch..." - Me 2014.
They were big in the 70s....for five minutes,on a Saturday,after lunch..." - Me 2014.