Music: Who's post-Beatles career do you like more - John Lennon or Paul McCartney?

[MVP of West Hollywd]

I've always been in the Lennon camp, I think he had a superb decade despite the little time he had left, and I find McCartney's a little disappointing as I would have expected him to rip off a bunch of accessible pop hits to make up for not going as personal, but outside of a few like Maybe I'm Amazed and Live and Let Die I don't think he was quite as much of a machine there as I thought. Actually some of his more prog structured ones like Band on the Run and Uncle Albert ended up sticking the most.

Click to read more...

 

[#37]

For me, they both suffered from the same problem as solo artists: No one was brave enough to tell them when something wasn't as good as it could have been (a role that they once could rely on the other to fulfill... and George Martin). So, for me, its a wash. As an aside, I think George had the best post-Beatles career... but that's not the question.

This is one of my favorite solo things from either of them though... Love the bass and guitar.

 

[Mike C]

I've always been in the Lennon camp, I think he had a superb decade despite the little time he had left, and I find McCartney's a little disappointing as I would have expected him to rip off a bunch of accessible pop hits to make up for not going as personal, but outside of a few like Maybe I'm Amazed and Live and Let Die I don't think he was quite as much of a machine there as I thought. Actually some of his more prog structured ones like Band on the Run and Uncle Albert ended up sticking the most.

Paul was awesome live. Plays many instruments and nailed the Beatles stuff. He wailed on lead guitar a few songs

The Band on the Run era was pretty good. I loved George's albums. John was great those last 2 releases once he found peace. Ringo was OK. Fun live

Fun fact. Ringo' wife's sister is married to Joe Walsh

 

[Xelebes]

I didn't care for them much as part of the Beatles and I don't really care for them post-Beatles. Oh well.

 

[PANARIN BREAD FAN]

I've always been in the Lennon camp, I think he had a superb decade despite the little time he had left, and I find McCartney's a little disappointing as I would have expected him to rip off a bunch of accessible pop hits to make up for not going as personal, but outside of a few like Maybe I'm Amazed and Live and Let Die I don't think he was quite as much of a machine there as I thought. Actually some of his more prog structured ones like Band on the Run and Uncle Albert ended up sticking the most.

jet?
junior's farm?
beware my love?
let 'em in?
silly love songs?
rockshow?
my love?
with a little luck?

he didn't do that bad at all as you made it seem.

 

[MVP of West Hollywd]

jet?
junior's farm?
beware my love?
let 'em in?
silly love songs?
rockshow?
my love?
with a little luck?

he didn't do that bad at all as you made it seem.

I definitely give him credit for Silly Love Songs, for some reason I thought it was originally sung by an older artist.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Interesting question, don't remember us discussing this before. I think that the stretch from George's Wonderwall Music (1968 - probably my favorite of every Beatles related albums) to Lennon's Imagine (1971) - including Electronic Sound, McCartney, All Things Must Pass, Plastic Ono Band, and Ram - might just be the best Beatles period overall (and if you include the actual Beatles albums that got out during these years, there's certainly no question - and that stretch is unreachable by any other group too). Even Ringo had his best period, and by far his best song (Love Don't Last Long) during that stretch.

As for best individual career, I'd be tempted like #37 to give it to George, but I think that like Paul, his great early stuff got sparse and diluted in the quantity. I'd go with John.

Regarding Paul's better songs, I'd like to add Mull of Kintyre and Junk to the ones already listed - probably my favorite ones, with Monkberry Moon Delight (but I might be alone on this one). He eventually made a lot of crap (I still can't get passed his shameful "I just want to fuh you"), so he falls way back behind the other two for me.

 

[kihei]

Plastic Ono Band is a superb album, the best achievement any of them accomplished solo, but if you let me put a "best of" Paul McCartney album together, I could come up with a monster of a double album. Could do that for a single album of George's stuff, too. So let's put it this way--it's not Ringo.

 

[Catanddogguitarrr]

jet?
junior's farm?
beware my love?
let 'em in?
silly love songs?
rockshow?
my love?
with a little luck?

he didn't do that bad at all as you made it seem.

He took time before releasing one album we could say is good from first song to the last. It's Band on the Run. Before that his albums were a big deception, while George did his masterpeice on his first album. All Things must Pass sold more than Band on Run and Imagine combined and was better critic awarded.

Ram was a good album after all. His first one was a deception, Wild Life was bad, Red Rose Speedway was bad too. It was in 1973 I think Band on the Run was released. There's nice story about how the album was composed andm produced. After meeting a bandit in the african forest Mac had to give his tape recorder with the demos of the album. He recreated it by memory after. He was on the set of the movie Papillon starring McQueen and Hoffman. Hoffman and his wife invited Paul, they discussed, had wine and Paul said he could create a song just by reading a title on a newspaper. Picasso was dead and he did the song Picasso's Last Words.

After Band on the run his albums were better but some boring albums were made like London Town. McCartney end up making good songs from a ton of songs, a ton and a ton and a ton.

Lennon makes less but better. Lennon is able to make a song that really moves you. It's intimate, deep and brillant. But he did run of the mill albums like Mind Games.

 

[Killer Orcas]

Lennon for me just feel was more depth to his work than Paul's. Paul made some catchy tunes but John's stuff just felt much better to myself.

 

[Jumptheshark]

This is one of the great debates where Harrison gets forgotten about again.

Lennon did Imagine--that is next level shit.

Lennon's solo out put was only 4 or 5 albums. I do not count Rock and Roll (done due to a lawsuit), Milk and Honey (Ono put the album together after Lennon's death) and Some time in New York(Hodge podge of stuff that Lennon he may not have been in the right state of mind).

McCartney, while more prolific did not challenge himself as much as Lennon did.

Getting back to Harrison--I prefer his 70's stuff to both

 

[Shareefruck]

Easily Lennon and Harrison for me. Personally, I didn't get much out of anything McCartney did post-Beatles.

 

[VMBM]

So let's put it this way--it's not Ringo.

As the old joke goes; he was the fourth most talented Beatle! I remember that seeing Ringo on VH1's Storytellers was somehow one of the saddest sights I've ever witnessed on TV (he was The Beatles' drummer and brilliant at that but let's not pretend he was a good songwriter or a singer and deserved to be on that show).

I'm more of a Lennon than McCartney guy. That might be slightly contradictory, since I hugely prefer the later Beatles albums to the earlier ones, and on those McCartney usually dominates a bit. However, the thing is that even the worst Lennon songs have at least some interesting or depth in them, whereas McCartney's 'rubbish' is mostly just that. This sort of continued in their post-Beatles careers imo. Imagine would be my favourite record, with Plastic Ono Band a fairly close second. Band on the Run was probably the strongest McCartney/Wings effort, but I think it's somewhat behind those two Lennon ones.

Some fave Lennon solo/post-Beatles songs:
#9 Dream (a Beatles-level masterpiece!)
Crippled Inside (oh, the contrast between the jolly music and downright nasty lyric)
Jealous Guy (could and maybe should have been on the White Album as Child of Nature)
How? (a bit too self-pitying but those 'Hollywood strings'!)
Instant Karma! (the creep called Phil Spector and Lennon were a good team for a while)
God ("I don't believe in Beatles!" Ouch!)
Oh My Love (a pretty for you)
Woman (aaand another one)
Of course "Imagine" is a super-classic too, but I can't help but sneer at the lyric nowadays!

McCartney:
Band on the Run (too bad the least interesting part lasts by far the longest, though)
Listen to What the Man Said (pure joy, effortless Macca melodicity)
Jet (ditto)
Waterfalls (a seemingly forgotten gem)
No More Lonely Nights (1980s highlight for me)
Let 'Em In (um, yeah)
With a Little Luck (kind of 'just a ditty', but somehow a very charming and disarming one at that)
And since even a bunch of bagpipes on it couldn't prevent "Mull of Kintyre" becoming the best-selling single ever at the time (was it the UK?), it has to be a great song, right?

I have to get better aqcuainted with George's solo stuff, but the general consensus seems to be that after a brilliant start, he deteriorated fairly quickly, dare I say, to mediocrity.

 

[Jumptheshark]

Due to Lennon's death--I think it is only fair to compare solo output from all 4 up to his death.

For me Harrison wins

 

[Primary Assist]

Expanding this a little bit:

Ringo had arguably the best post-Beatles song with "It Don't Come Easy." Rumor is that George Harrison wrote the song and gave it to Ringo as a birthday present.

"My Sweet Lord" is up there as well - similar energy to "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" and both songs show that George Harrison was a powerhouse musician/songwriter and that the legendary McCartney/Lennon duo wasn't the only driving force behind the band's craftsmanship and success.

"Uncle Albert" is my favorite of McCartney's solo work. The pure joy of "Hands Across the Water" mixed with the unabashed Britishness of "Uncle Albert" is just such a cool concept for the medley.

"Imagine" is in the running for worst song of all time. I will never understand how anyone can find meaning in the vapid, shallow lyrics that Lennon himself clearly didn't believe. "Imagine no possessions" - that's rich coming from a man who had a walk in humidor for his fur coat collection. The melody isn't even catchy and the pseudo-pop-philosophical lyrics are unexamined and don't hold up to any level of scrutiny.

So to answer the OP, McCartney, AINEC

Edit - RIP John. Sure I can't stand that one song but the world lost a beautiful human for such a senseless and horrible reason.

 

[Lshap]

Due to Lennon's death--I think it is only fair to compare solo output from all 4 up to his death.

For me Harrison wins

This is an important point. John Lennon's reputation has been enhanced because it was cut short. Paul McCartney's reputation has been diminished because it's lasted so long. Unlike John, we've had the dubious honour of watching one of the greatest musical influences in history run out of ideas and get old.

But if you narrow the focus to the decade following The Beatles' breakup, Paul has the best material song for song. From Maybe I'm Amazed through No More Lonely Nights, with Band on the Run in between, he delivered more quality songs than John or George. Yes, John's songs had better lyrics, but the production was pretty meh. Paul was always the studio guy and the difference shows on each Beatle's solo work. I can't blame anyone for preferring John – his voice and songwriting had a rawer edge – but for the decade until John's tragic death Paul put out a wider and more interesting body of work.

 

[frisco]

I like Wings overall output more than the Beatles but McCartney truly solo (exception of "Take It Away") doesn't move me at all. Lennon was trending OK, but nothing I really could get into, either. So I guess Paul (with Wings) gets the unenthusiastic nod.

My Best-Carey

 

[Catanddogguitarrr]

Ringo had arguably the best post-Beatles song with "It Don't Come Easy." Rumor is that George Harrison wrote the song and gave it to Ringo as a birthday present.

Not just a rumour. There is a bootleg easy to find, George sings on the demo with all the musicians like the real song and the women backing vocals sings Hare Krishna. George gave to Ringo another beautiful song : Photograph. This is a kind of song that doesn't sound like an ex-Beatles. It's a mellow ballad that seems to come from Neil Diamond or Sinatra. But we can recognise the signature of Harrison in the guitar intro. Lennon gave a good song to Ringo too : I'm the Greatest. There is a John's demo of that song.

 

[VMBM]

I like Wings overall output more than the Beatles but McCartney truly solo (exception of "Take It Away") doesn't move me at all. Lennon was trending OK, but nothing I really could get into, either. So I guess Paul (with Wings) gets the unenthusiastic nod.

My Best-Carey

Alan, is that you?

 

[Jumptheshark]

This is an important point. John Lennon's reputation has been enhanced because it was cut short. Paul McCartney's reputation has been diminished because it's lasted so long. Unlike John, we've had the dubious honour of watching one of the greatest musical influences in history run out of ideas and get old.

But if you narrow the focus to the decade following The Beatles' breakup, Paul has the best material song for song. From Maybe I'm Amazed through No More Lonely Nights, with Band on the Run in between, he delivered more quality songs than John or George. Yes, John's songs had better lyrics, but the production was pretty meh. Paul was always the studio guy and the difference shows on each Beatle's solo work. I can't blame anyone for preferring John – his voice and songwriting had a rawer edge – but for the decade until John's tragic death Paul put out a wider and more interesting body of work.

It is well known that Lennon was still abusing substances for most of the early 70's up to Double fantasy and he did not really care how things sounded. One reason why they were remastered a few times.

 

[Gordon Lightfoot]

Interesting question, don't remember us discussing this before. I think that the stretch from George's Wonderwall Music (1968 - probably my favorite of every Beatles related albums) to Lennon's Imagine (1971) - including Electronic Sound, McCartney, All Things Must Pass, Plastic Ono Band, and Ram - might just be the best Beatles period overall (and if you include the actual Beatles albums that got out during these years, there's certainly no question - and that stretch is unreachable by any other group too). Even Ringo had his best period, and by far his best song (Love Don't Last Long) during that stretch.

As for best individual career, I'd be tempted like #37 to give it to George, but I think that like Paul, his great early stuff got sparse and diluted in the quantity. I'd go with John.

Regarding Paul's better songs, I'd like to add Mull of Kintyre and Junk to the ones already listed - probably my favorite ones, with Monkberry Moon Delight (but I might be alone on this one). He eventually made a lot of crap (I still can't get passed his shameful "I just want to fuh you"), so he falls way back behind the other two for me.

I don't know much of Lennon's solo work. I do know a decent amount of Paul's work. I just have to say how much I adore Junk. He probably tossed it off in ten minutes. What a gorgeous song.

 

[Satans Hockey]

For me, they both suffered from the same problem as solo artists: No one was brave enough to tell them when something wasn't as good as it could have been (a role that they once could rely on the other to fulfill... and George Martin). So, for me, its a wash. As an aside, I think George had the best post-Beatles career... but that's not the question.

This is one of my favorite solo things from either of them though... Love the bass and guitar.

I've never heard this song before but this video is incredible, drummer Paul with the fake beard is amazing lmfao...

 

[TheAngryHank]

Maybe I'm amazed is one of my favorite songs all time , for me it's Paul.

 

[#37]

Music is better than sports, because its all what you feel and no one is whipping out 'stats' to make their point. (OH, NO.. WHAT HAVE I DONE!... hehe)

Seriously, this is similar to picking a favorite Beatle. which can vary for me depending on the mood and where I am in my life. At some point I have had each of them as my favorite. At one point I had George as my fav, but then I learned that he was nailing Ringo's wife, Maureen, during the Let It Be period... Not cool! He slipped from the top spot. I mean, no amount of Concerts for Bangladesh is going to make up for that. However, karma being karma, Clapton later stole George's wife Patty... Ringo has been with Barbara Bach for the last 40 years, so, yay Ringo!

Back to the topic at hand. Post-Beatles each did some interesting things. Paul being the inspiration for 'The Ramones' name and John co-writing and singing the harmony on Bowie's 'Fame' being just two iconic non-Beatles things.

 

[#37]

For me, John Lennon's 'Fame' vocal is the hook of this song.