Log In
Register
3.29am
20 December 2010
Offline
I started this thread so I thought I might make a few more comments. First of all, all four Beatles were very talented in their own right. George is my favorite for a number of reasons. Of the four members, I have always felt he was the most humble and never on an ego trip. He was a very spiritual person who in my opinion was a major force in rock music (merging east and west music together/introducing the Sitar in 1965 in the first pop song/staging the first rock benefit to help starving children)
everytime I watch his interviews, he just seems so philosophic and has deep meaning in every thing he say's especially in his music. He was the one that had to stand for all those years in the biggest band between two egos. As a solo artist, I feel he grew the most putting out albums only when he had something to say and not for the money or fame. He said, he did not want to be famous but wanted to play music. He always played to the song and was not a flashy player which is why so many don't feel he is a great guitarist.
He played 26 instruments: guitar, sitar, 4-string guitar, bass guitar, arp bass, violin, tamboura, dobro, swordmandel, tabla, organ, piano, moog synthesizer, harmonica, autoharp, glockenspiel, vibraphone, xylophone, claves, African drum, conga drum, tympani, ukulele, mandolin, marimba, and Jal-Tarang.
I love John and I love Paul and we all have our favorites which is what makes this site so special. I have appreciated everyone's input. the bottom line is the Beatles will live forever in our hearts.
May you all have a very Merry Christmas and New Year.
The further one travels, the less one knows
7.14am
1 May 2010
Offline 
I think several great points have been brought up. First, mith raises the best question: how do you measure talent? When you say most talented Beatle I feel like you’re implying that either a) George was the most talented musician or b) George was the best songwriter and I happen to disagree with both of those claims. Was he an incredible musician and great songwriter? Absolutely and no one is denying that, but I wouldn’t say that he was a more talented musician than Paul or a better writer than John or Paul. That’s nothing against George, it’s just the other two wrote some of the most incredible songs ever.
I love who George was as a person, but certainly the others were as cool of people because they all were able to grow into their own type of person and they all cared passionately about different things. No one was “more talented at life” than the others because that doesn’t exist, we all turn into the person we hope to see ourselves as and no one can tell us if that’s right or wrong because it’s OUR life. I have taken a lot of George’s ideas about life and have applied them to my own life, but I also love John’s idea of having a completely centered reality that isn’t filled with bullshit illusions. But, at the end of the day, I suppose I’ve been most influenced by Paul because what I truly love to do is play and listen to music, but also I think that Ringo’s lifelong motto of peace and love is something that I will try and carry with me. That’s the greatest thing about the Beatles, they are so much more than just a band, and I suppose that’s why we are all able to have intelligent conversations on the Internet because we’ve all been influenced by these guys who just had unique perspectives on life.
I sat on a rug, biding my time, drinking her wine
4.00pm
1 May 2010
Offline
mr. Sun king coming together said:
But, Why? What do we Gain by all this?
Talk about things. That's why we participate in forums.
And to enter 9 in captchas… 9!! 
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
5.07am
9 June 2010
Offline 
Wait … entering 9 isn't the only reason?
If I seem to act unkind, it's only me, it's not my mind that is confusing things.
9.35pm
4 December 2010
Offline George is the best at playing an instrument. However, in terms of song writing, I don't think he's really comparable to John or Paul. As a direct comparison, my Spotify “George” playlist is 12 songs long (it will hopefully soon be 16, with one duplicate). My “John” playlist is 19 songs long, and doesn't include Beatles songs or several solo songs I like.
George's songwriting in 1968 and 69 was fantastic, as were the three songs for Revolver . But Paul McCartney is the second most successful songwriter of all time in terms of no. 1s (the best, I forget, but he's a specialist songwriter, not a musician), and John Lennon is the best songwriter of all time. Strawberry Fields Forever , A Day In The Life , Tomorrow Never Knows , I Am The Walrus , All You Need Is Love , Imagine , Instant Karma !, Working Class Hero , Rain , God , Mind Games , Watching The Wheels , his Revolver contributions… there are so many utterly fantastic songs by John Lennon , that the possiblity that George Harrison or even Paul McCartney could be “more talented” than him is a little far-fetched. The only man who compares is Dylan, and I don't reckon he even comes that close.
I told her I didn’t
10.33pm
20 December 2010
Offline I agree. George is my favorite Beatle both as a Beatle and Solo Artist but if I just based my favorite by the Beatle songs I like regarding who wrote them and who was the lead singer, John would be my favorite one.
Paul is the most successful song writer in Pop music history because of all the Lennon/McCartney songs which includes the Lennon songs that he had nothing to do with. Take out the Beatle songs and he would not be the leader. I know he had some Wings hits as well but lets face it. When the majority of the fans go to see him live, they want the Beatle songs. Just listen to how loud the crowd gets when he performs them.
I love Paul but I think he is over rated especially in the last few years. He just tries to keep the Beatle thing going. I read somewhere that after ‘Press To Play ‘ failed and was panned by the critics, He started to perform again lots of Beatle tunes knowing that it would make him more popular.
The further one travels, the less one knows
2.15am
1 May 2010
Offline I think you guys are right about John, it's nothing against the others, but just look at some of those songs that he wrote and recorded! The list goes on and on and he was at the forefront of pushing music to new levels. Was he the most talented? It just depends on how you define the word, I think he was the most driven to push the boundaries of music, but does that make him talented or just passionate? Paul's talent as a musician truly blows my mind, I don't understand how someone could get so good at all those different instruments in not that long of a span, but is that talent or just practice and determination? I don't think there is any big secret about music, obviously some are blessed with more musical talent than others, but the only thing required of a musician is practice because it's basically up to you how good you get.
I think it's probably just tough for Paul now, I don't think he's ever really been consistently great after he and John split up as a duo, I mean he's had several great songs and many number ones, but compared to what he was, he never achieved a Hey Jude in his solo career. But the man loves to make music and has every right to make as much good or bad music as he pleases.
I sat on a rug, biding my time, drinking her wine
6.05am
27 February 2010
Offline No, George isn't the most talented beatle AT ALL. The question itself is aggravating. But he had the best moustache in the band…
I'd like to say "thank you" on behalf of the group and ourselves and I hope we passed the audition.
John Lennon
12.10pm
19 April 2010
Offline Comparing Lennon against McCartney is sort of like comparing the Grand Canyon to Mt. Everest – it's impossible to do.
What is obvious is this – if you want to compare something – compare Lennon and McCartney together against either just Lennon or just McCartney. Then it's obvious – Lennon and McCartney together is an unbeatable combination.
Even though during the Beatles years, John or Paul wrote more often seperately, the very presence of the other (if only in the studio) immediately established a creative friction – iron sharpens iron as they say.
Add to that the creative presence of George and Ringo and you have, well … The Beatles!
"She looks more like him than I do."
1.55pm
4 December 2010
Offline Inner Light said:
Paul is the most successful song writer in Pop music history because of all the Lennon/McCartney songs which includes the Lennon songs that he had nothing to do with. Take out the Beatle songs and he would not be the leader.
The vast majority of the no.1 singles were almost entirely by Paul or genuine double-acts. The exceptions were Help !, Day Tripper (which was carried to number 1 by We Can Work It Out , not that that’s relevant), All You Need Is Love , Come Together and The Ballad Of John And Yoko (and Elton John’s cover of Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds ), and Something of course. Eleanor Rigby and Ticket To Ride are disputed. So, Paul wrote or co-wrote 20 Beatles songs to reach no. 1 for the Beatles on either side of the Atlantic, plus 7 with Wings and 3 solo (not including The Girl Is Mine, which Michael Jackson wrote). 30 songs is crazy, though that is America and the UK combined.
I told her I didn’t
2.08pm
19 September 2010
Offline I think Paul is the only person to have Number 1Single in all these categories: Solo (Coming Up ), Duo (Ebony And Ivory , With Stevie Wonder), Trio (Band On The Run ), quartet (Take Your Pick), Quintet (Get Back with Billy Preston), and Chatity ensemble (Band Aid 1984)
As if it matters how a man falls down.'
'When the fall's all that's left, it matters a great deal.
5.35pm
30 December 2010
Offline GniknuS said:
I think you guys are right about John, it's nothing against the others, but just look at some of those songs that he wrote and recorded! The list goes on and on and he was at the forefront of pushing music to new levels. Was he the most talented? It just depends on how you define the word, I think he was the most driven to push the boundaries of music, but does that make him talented or just passionate? Paul's talent as a musician truly blows my mind, I don't understand how someone could get so good at all those different instruments in not that long of a span, but is that talent or just practice and determination? I don't think there is any big secret about music, obviously some are blessed with more musical talent than others, but the only thing required of a musician is practice because it's basically up to you how good you get.
I think it's probably just tough for Paul now, I don't think he's ever really been consistently great after he and John split up as a duo, I mean he's had several great songs and many number ones, but compared to what he was, he never achieved a Hey Jude in his solo career. But the man loves to make music and has every right to make as much good or bad music as he pleases.
John's desire to keep the band moving was one of the key factors in the Beatles being so good. Particularly towards the end the variety between albums is astonishing.
Personally I don't find it that surprising that Paul is so good at all the instruments. I know a number of multi-instrumentalists and you learn that talent with one instrument bleeds into another quite quickly. Music has only three parts: Melody, Rhythm and Harmony. Obviously all instruments have their quirks but you if you've mastered the guitar you can pick up Piano in a matter of days, and vice versa. What astonishes me still is that Paul could play the basslines he did and sing – it's madness in itself! Madness!
As for George – for me a lot of his songs come across as overly preachy. I think he went a bit too spiritual and not necessarily in a good way.
3.41pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline As George is my favorite, this thread caught my attention. Except for the inevitable derail / Instant Messaging in the middle (this time it was not me) this has to be one of the most interesting discussions I've read in some time. To me, trying to measure who was the most talented Beatle is moot (but obviously loads of fun to discuss) because they all possessed certain talents or traits that were independent of the others.
The thing I admire most about this thread is that everyone is right to a certain degree.
Well done everyone.
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
3.49pm
19 September 2010
Offline I Totally agree, but with a question Zig. If Your Favourite Beatle Is George, Why is John Your Avatar
As if it matters how a man falls down.'
'When the fall's all that's left, it matters a great deal.
4.10pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline mr. Sun king coming together said:
I Totally agree, but with a question Zig. If Your Favourite Beatle Is George, Why is John Your Avatar
I've metioned this a few times in the past, but that was B.E. (Before Evan).
It's simply my favorite picture of any of the Beatles. I've also read that it happens to be Cynthia's favorite photo of John. My second favorite is the one of George on the cover of Concert for George.
This way, I get to honor my 2 favorites – John in the avatar and George in the signature.
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
4.15pm
19 September 2010
Offline Perfect Solution.
I should probably get used to the fact Almost all of Zig`s Posts are hilarious, but, I Never Can
*Zigs*
As if it matters how a man falls down.'
'When the fall's all that's left, it matters a great deal.
4.17pm
1 May 2010
Offline I've been thinking of something.
Maybe Paul's career at the beginning of his solo career he was trying to figure out what to do without John. He looked up at him remember he said that in the Anthology? Well, maybe that's why his early career is considered a hit-and-miss. I don't mean he was trying to impress John all the time, (we know he was) but I feel that John had grown up “out” of the Beatles, that's why his solo work is stronger.
I don't mean that John didn't need the Beatles. I guess the one not scared of leaving the Beatles was George, but in some extent, I think Paul needed more John to improve his work, when John didn't. And since George was used to working alone, he was happy to do it without restrictions.
But then all my theory falls when I listen to Band On The Run .
Wait . 
, I think Paul needed more John to improve his work, when John didn't. Somebody already said that here. Damn. 
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
4.22pm
19 September 2010
Offline mithveaen said:
I've been thinking of something.
Maybe Paul's career at the beginning of his solo career he was trying to figure out what to do without John. He looked up at him remember he said that in the Anthology? Well, maybe that's why his early career is considered a hit-and-miss. I don't mean he was trying to impress John all the time, (we know he was) but I feel that John had grown up “out” of the Beatles, that's why his solo work is stronger.
I don't mean that John didn't need the Beatles. I guess the one not scared of leaving the Beatles was George, but in some extent, I think Paul needed more John to improve his work, when John didn't. And since George was used to working alone, he was happy to do it without restrictions.
But then all my theory falls when I listen to Band On The Run .
No It Doesn`t. Paul always To The Critics The most To Heart, and The sharpest Critic was always John. He lost that, and So He Felt Some Songs on McCartney and Later albums were better than they actually were.
*9*
As if it matters how a man falls down.'
'When the fall's all that's left, it matters a great deal.
5.33pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline Von Bontee said:
Fly this thread to Cuba!
Now THAT's funny.
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
7.19pm
20 December 2010
Offline My favorite period of Paul's solo albums was from 'McCartney' to 'Back To The Egg ' and not 'McCartney II ' to 'Memory Almost Full '.
The further one travels, the less one knows
2 Guest(s)