Paul rocks harder

RSS
Weiterleiten

22. Jan. 2006, 7:39

I was listening to a bunch of McCartney lately and I realised, people are always saying that Paul is all love songs and that John Lennon is some sort of badass revolutionary rocker. Yet I think that Paul rocks a little harder than John. I mean compare Monkberry Moon Delight to John's rocking Sunday Bloody Sunday. Sure Sunday Bloody Sunday rocks plenty hard but it doesn't pull off that vocal rawness that Monkberry Moon Delight does. And let us look at both of their Beatles contributions. Paul has The Beatles hardest rocking song of all time, Helter Skelter. Plus he has Back in the U.S.S.R., Birthday, and Why Don't We Do It in the Road on The White Album alone. Paul has always been able to reach notes that John can't and never could. That is why he sang lead vocal on Can't Buy Me Love. Because John knew he couldn't hit those notes.

Kommentare

  • elfregadero

    Eh, I've never really heard Lennon called a badass rocker. I've heard him be called a revolutionary, which he was, and that's it really.

    22. Jan. 2006, 8:06
  • FloydNut

    And the truth behind it is, ask any fan to name the 3 best songs and you'll get Let It Be, Yesterday and Hey Jude, which of course are all McCartney classics, as well as Lady Madonna and Long and Winding Road

    22. Jan. 2006, 13:41
  • giveuptheghost

    John was just better, that's all. ;)

    22. Jan. 2006, 14:25
  • okimeow

    ^ No way! Paul has always been my favorite Beatle! I haven't listened to his solo stuff much, though. It just sounds different...

    22. Jan. 2006, 17:45
  • elfregadero

    Only one of those 5 songs would have a chance at my top 10 songs, FloydNut, and that is Yesterday.

    22. Jan. 2006, 18:44
  • giveuptheghost

    Let It Be is a wonderful song, though.

    22. Jan. 2006, 19:17
  • tralf

    On the flipside, people always say that Paul wrote the best ballads, but John was the main writer behind If I Fell, In My Life, Across the Universe, Julia, Because, etc. And his solo work is loaded with sensitive non-rocking ballads... Love, Out of the Blue, Imagine, Woman, Jealous Guy, #9 dream, and so on. Truth is, when it comes to their musical tastes, John and Paul were more alike than different. It's only because they happened to be in the same band and co-wrote songs that people zero in on their differences.

    23. Jan. 2006, 20:44
  • ihateguitarists

    Not true at all. You have to hear songs like Monkberry Moon Delight, Smile Away, and Run Devil Run. Those songs rock harder than Plastic Ono Band. And to tralf: Paul did write better ballads and I think that is not debatable. I mean come on, look at Golden Slumbers, And I Love Her, Hey Jude, The Long and Winding Road, Let It Be, For No One, Michelle, Maybe I'm Amazed, etc...

    24. Jan. 2006, 5:49
  • ihateguitarists

    No, it's not punk at all. The Stooges' from 1969 were WAY more punk and really were the first to define punk. And John is not Punk at all. The only punk thing about him are his anti-establishment songs and political activism. And I never said that the harder the better. I was explaining how Paul is harder than John. But I guess Paul is better than John since we're on the topic.

    25. Jan. 2006, 15:58
  • giveuptheghost

    Well, rocks harder could've been a euphemism for better for all we knew. In which case, John rocks harder, of course. ;)

    25. Jan. 2006, 18:01
  • FifthofNovember

    Paul could rock hard, i don't deny it, but just look at some of John's stuff like Rock n Roll Music, Twist and Shout, Well Well Well, Yer Blues, I Want You (She's So Heavy), Come Together, and you tell me that Paul rocks harder. I don't even think Monkberry Moon Delight is that heavy at all. Sure it's kinda heavy, but if you want raw, listen to John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band, Paul could never touch the rawness, the brutal honesty, the emotion of that album, not in a million years.

    30. Jan. 2006, 0:10
  • ihateguitarists

    I know that you people will defend your John until the death. So I guess there is no use.

    30. Jan. 2006, 5:30
  • FifthofNovember

    Just like you'll defend your Paul to death, it's the same thing. The John/Paul issue won't ever die. It's inevitable, as new generations of Beatles fans are born, the arguements will continue. It's a neverending cycle. I personally think John rocks harder, and I'll defend that.

    30. Jan. 2006, 7:26
  • SergeantDuckie

    Yeah... post-beatles, though... for Paul, there's Live and Let Die, Jet, Old Siam Sir, Loney Road, Let Me Roll It... that stuff. For John, there's not an awful lot... I mean, there's Well Well Well, which is great... Power to the People... and of course there's the crazy electric expirament albums ... On the whole I agree with you. But I think, for the most part, John had better lyrics than Paul. It's kind of a trade-off in my mind.

    9. Apr. 2006, 17:14
  • megatoad

    Paul's album Ram is excellent and underrated. The lyrics aren't as great as Lennon's stuff, but it rocks as hard as any Lennon album.

    13. Apr. 2006, 4:13
  • FifthofNovember

    I wouldn't say Ram is underrated at all. In fact it's one of his most popular post-Beatles albums..

    14. Apr. 2006, 23:01
  • megatoad

    It's popular sales-wise, but Ram wasn't received well by critics when it was released.

    14. Apr. 2006, 23:19
Alle 24 Kommentare anzeigen
Sage etwas. Melde dich bei Last.fm an oder registriere ein neues Benutzerkonto (es kostet nichts).