Paul Simon > McCartney or Lennon

Lets not overlook The Grateful Dead who have IMO by far the most nuanced and beautifully poetic lyrics of any band second to Dylan of course.
 


Respect.

This thread just solidifies my theory that 90% of Beatles bashers simply aren't familiar with the second half of their career and think all they did was "Hard Day's Night" sort of stuff.

Tomorrow Never Knows being made in 1966 will forever be shocking to me. Radiohead were considered brilliant for coming up with similar stuff in the early 2000s.

The Beatles were super versatile and it's really a crime that so many are unaware. More non-sugary greatness:







 
Last edited:
People loved the Beatles back then because it's all there was. Their primacy was then justified on the basis of their talents, not their timing. I feel that rationale has since stuck in history. We've seen some similar, albeit smaller waves happen in the years since: Nirvana is another good example (although, unlike the Beatles, they were decidedly NOT a pop act).

<TrumpWrong1><TrumpWrong1>

Acts active in the mid-late 60s, alongside the Beatles:

-Pink Floyd
-Led Zeppelin/The Yardbirds
-Jimi Hendrix
-Bob Dylan
-The Beach Boys
-The Rolling Stones
-The Doors
-The Who
-Janis Joplin
-The Stooges
 
Respect.

This thread just solidifies my theory that 90% of Beatles bashers simply aren't familiar with the second half of their career and think all they did was "Hard Day's Night" sort of stuff.

Tomorrow Never Knows being made in 1966 will forever be shocking to me. Radiohead were considered brilliant for coming up with similar stuff in the early 2000s.

The Beatles were super versatile and it's really a crime that so many are unaware. More non-sugary greatness:










I am aware of all of this music and still have the same mind. Its not that everyone who doesn't like the Beatles has not heard them, its that not everyone likes them due to having different tastes.

I did go through a beetles stage when I was 17 but then moved on to other bands who held by attention longer and some of them permanently.

The Beatles are a great band though.
 
Idk but the Brits are easily the song writing goats


Americans have the top 3 slots for sales -1 band has 2 of them.


I’d say when you include bands like Skynard, Aerosmith, CCR, The Eagles, The Allman Bros. And so in.. it balances out pretty well. There’s a shit ton of great American classic rock bands. And the Americans dominate the 50’s and early 60’s era rock scene.
 
<TrumpWrong1><TrumpWrong1>

Acts active in the mid-late 60s, alongside the Beatles:

-Pink Floyd
-Led Zeppelin/The Yardbirds
-Jimi Hendrix
-Bob Dylan
-The Beach Boys
-The Rolling Stones
-The Doors
-The Who
-Janis Joplin
-The Stooges



The Kinks.
 
Lol at people hating on the Beatles itt btw. They’re tied with Zeppelin imo as the greatest band ever. 3 of them were brilliant song writers. Paul is my favorite of them writing wise.. ‘Band on the Run’ is one of the single greatest songs ever written and a great example of absolute song writing mastery at an expert level.


Similar to hating on Cobain, but Cobain was another song writing genius who just had the ability to put things together and make them work.
 
Before the Beatles, not many popular rock bands wrote their own music. Not only did other bands start copying their sound, but also their sense of creativity. You'd have disputes within bands like the Rolling Stones, where some of them wanted to stay a blues cover band, and others wanted to actually start writing and creating their own music like the Beatles. The Beatles even gave them some of their songs, like I Wanna Be Your Man.

I don't know of many other bands who had the same impact on the entirety of the music industry like The Beatles in their 10 years together. They innovated so much in the studio, or atleast made it popular for other bands to do. Most people probably think of "I Want to Hold Your Hand" or "Let It Be/Hey Jude" (still great songs), and don't know about the majority of their back catalog.

I think the Lennon/McCartney partnership is great not only for the *vast* number of top hits they made (as well as their more avant-garde stuff), but also the vast number of songs they wrote for other people.

Paul Simon is still a bad ass, though.
 
BTW, The Beatles and/or Lennon/McCartney must still be on everyone's minds after all these years, even if they are supposedly overrated. These kinds of threads pop up a lot in the Music section on Sherdog.
 
Respect.

This thread just solidifies my theory that 90% of Beatles bashers simply aren't familiar with the second half of their career and think all they did was "Hard Day's Night" sort of stuff.

Strange really as I grew up the other way listening to the 67-70 Blue best of album.





 
McCartney sucks and writes sappy bullshit. Lennon was a god with what he could imagine. Harrison was more straight forward, but still good.

I'm indifferent on Simon & Garfunkel. They came up with nice melodies, but I didn't find them very creative harmonically or ever really push it beyond their one style (which I find bland), and too easily copied.
 
Respect.

This thread just solidifies my theory that 90% of Beatles bashers simply aren't familiar with the second half of their career and think all they did was "Hard Day's Night" sort of stuff.

Tomorrow Never Knows being made in 1966 will forever be shocking to me. Radiohead were considered brilliant for coming up with similar stuff in the early 2000s.

The Beatles were super versatile and it's really a crime that so many are unaware. More non-sugary greatness:









Well said. I don’t expect everyone to like The Beatles, but to suggest that they weren’t innovative or were just bubblegum pop is ridiculous.
 
McCartney sucks and writes sappy bullshit. Lennon was a god with what he could imagine. Harrison was more straight forward, but still good.

I'm indifferent on Simon & Garfunkel. They came up with nice melodies, but I didn't find them very creative harmonically or ever really push it beyond their one style (which I find bland), and too easily copied.

McCartney definitely lost it more quickly post Beatles, I think his first solo album is nice but after that it does all become rather cheesey where as Lennon was excellent for a couple of albums and still putting out good stuff until just before he was killed.
 
McCartney definitely lost it more quickly post Beatles, I think his first solo album is nice but after that it does all become rather cheesey where as Lennon was excellent for a couple of albums and still putting out good stuff until just before he was killed.
i have to agree. check out this gem of post beatles lennon.
 
Back
Top