Paul or John: who was the better songwriter?

[Phoenix Dark]

Both were two great songwriters in their own right, and they both made great songs. Personally I've always felt Paul was more melodic as a songwriter and especially as a singer, but John was more charasmatic and experimentive.

Some of John's Beatles songs:

- A Hard Day's Night
- Ticket to Ride
- You've Got to Hide Your Love Away
- Norwegian Wood
- Strawberry Fields Forever
- Nowhere Man
- Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds
- I Am the Walrus
- Revolution
- I Want You (She's so Heavy)

Some of Paul's Beatles songs:

- Fool on the Hill
- Can't Buy Me Love
- Michele
- Eleanor Rigby
- When I'm 64
- Get Back
- Blackbird
- Getting Better
- Yesterday


Fool on the Hill (Paul) is one of the greatest songs I've ever heard, but I could say the same thing about Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds. It's pretty hard to choose just one imo.

Although I think it's safe to say Paul was a much better singer and created better melodies.

[TVC15]

John, easy.  It becomes apparent when you look at their post-Beatles work.

[Mupepe]

John.

[BlueTsunami]

Neither.

[Phoenix Dark]

Neither.

Ringo?

[CajoleJuice]

John Paul Jones

[BlueTsunami]

Neither.

Ringo?

Meatloaf

[Phoenix Dark]

John Paul Jones

I see what you did there

Great musician indeed

[anthonyOA]

John. easily. Paul made nice nursery rhymes though. :arr

seriously, Lucy in the sky and strawberry fields are two of my faves ever.

so is the new mix of i am the walrus on "LOVE".

[whiteACID]

John by far

Eleanor Rigby is my favorite Beatles song

[CajoleJuice]

Looks like Paul is getting his shit pushed in in this thread.

[Phoenix Dark]

Consensus seems to be John>Paul

Personally I think songs like Blackbird, Yesterday, and Fool on a Hill show a level of acoustic songwriting mastery John never really showed. Overall John certainly has better songs though.

MALEK what is your opinion. I think I have an idea...

[Van Cruncheon]

they both really sucked

[Flannel Boy]

Dark, you are missing most of their best work. You don't even have songs like Let it Be, Hey Jude, Penny Lane, Helter Skelter and For No One listed under Paul. If I had the time I'd make a proper list, but I don't. I think their production was pretty even, but during certain periods one would outdo the other. During their prime John was dominant, but towards the end Paul was the main writing force. Much of John's Let It Be work was old material, while Paul's new stuff was all over that album and he put together the b side of Abbey Road.

John by far

Eleanor Rigby is my favorite Beatles song

... Paul wrote the melody and most of the lyrics for that song. John just added a few lyrics.

[Thee Reverend Gary Davis]

shut up about the beatles already. THEY ARE ALL DEAD OR DYING.

[Flannel Boy]

shut up about the beatles already. THEY ARE ALL DEAD OR DYING.

If artists, whatever their merits, are dead we should no longer talk about them? So because Mozart is dead we should no longer listen to his music nor discuss it? So because Rembrandt is dead we should no longer look at his paintings nor discuss them? So because Dostoevsky is dead we should no longer read his books nor discuss them either?

[whiteACID]

Dark, you are missing most of their best work. You don't even have songs like Let it Be, Hey Jude, Penny Lane, Helter Skelter and For No One listed under Paul. If I had the time I'd make a proper list, but I don't. I think their production was pretty even, but during certain periods one would outdo the other. During their prime John was dominant, but towards the end Paul was the main writing force. Much of John's Let It Be work was old material, while Paul's new stuff was all over that album and he put together the b side of Abbey Road.

John by far

Eleanor Rigby is my favorite Beatles song

... Paul wrote the melody and most of the lyrics for that song. John just added a few lyrics.

I know Paul wrote the song. I should have elaborated...Paul wrote my favorite but John wrote a majority of the best songs, which has already been said somewhere.

[Thee Reverend Gary Davis]

shut up about the beatles already. THEY ARE ALL DEAD OR DYING.

If artists, whatever their merits, are dead we should no longer talk about them? So because Mozart is dead we should no longer listen to his music nor discuss it? So because Rembrandt is dead we should no longer look at his paintings nor discuss them? So because Dostoevsky is dead we should no longer read his books nor discuss them either?

yes?

[Phoenix Dark]

Dark, you are missing most of their best work. You don't even have songs like Let it Be, Hey Jude, Penny Lane, Helter Skelter and For No One listed under Paul. If I had the time I'd make a proper list, but I don't. I think their production was pretty even, but during certain periods one would outdo the other. During their prime John was dominant, but towards the end Paul was the main writing force. Much of John's Let It Be work was old material, while Paul's new stuff was all over that album and he put together the b side of Abbey Road.

John by far

Eleanor Rigby is my favorite Beatles song

... Paul wrote the melody and most of the lyrics for that song. John just added a few lyrics.

I didn't list Hey Jude because I heard there was dispute over who "wrote it". They both worked on it alot didn't they?

[VALIS]

John, easy.

^

[whiteACID]

shut up about the beatles already. THEY ARE ALL DEAD OR DYING.

If artists, whatever their merits, are dead we should no longer talk about them? So because Mozart is dead we should no longer listen to his music nor discuss it? So because Rembrandt is dead we should no longer look at his paintings nor discuss them? So because Dostoevsky is dead we should no longer read his books nor discuss them either?

yes?

Those who can't appreciate the past need to go back to history class.

[Van Cruncheon]

shut up about the beatles already. THEY ARE ALL DEAD OR DYING.

If artists, whatever their merits, are dead we should no longer talk about them? So because Mozart is dead we should no longer listen to his music nor discuss it? So because Rembrandt is dead we should no longer look at his paintings nor discuss them? So because Dostoevsky is dead we should no longer read his books nor discuss them either?

no, we shouldn't discuss The Beatles because they suck and have been bettered by countless subsequent bands

[Phoenix Dark]

shut up about the beatles already. THEY ARE ALL DEAD OR DYING.

If artists, whatever their merits, are dead we should no longer talk about them? So because Mozart is dead we should no longer listen to his music nor discuss it? So because Rembrandt is dead we should no longer look at his paintings nor discuss them? So because Dostoevsky is dead we should no longer read his books nor discuss them either?

yes?

The Beatles deserve to be talked about because they changed music as we know it. Everything about them, from the way they looked to their original music videos to their coverart to the production of their songs - influences current artists. I've always felt they were overrated, but even I cannot deny their brilliance.

In music we must look back to the past. Most music today is basically a revision of things that were done years ago. Whether it's rock vocalists impersonating Kurt Cobaine or rap artists "sampling" previously recorded songs, the past's mark on today's music is very strong.

[whiteACID]

shut up about the beatles already. THEY ARE ALL DEAD OR DYING.

If artists, whatever their merits, are dead we should no longer talk about them? So because Mozart is dead we should no longer listen to his music nor discuss it? So because Rembrandt is dead we should no longer look at his paintings nor discuss them? So because Dostoevsky is dead we should no longer read his books nor discuss them either?

no, we shouldn't discuss The Beatles because they suck and have been bettered by countless subsequent bands

The Beatles aren't the best band to rock the earth, but they don't suck. Even it's merely for the fact that their music has influenced some of the best bands out there today.

[Flannel Boy]

no, we shouldn't discuss The Beatles because they suck and have been bettered by countless subsequent bands

That wasn't his argument and your argument is nothing more than an opinion. You are free to express it, and you seemingly do in every single Beatles thread.

I didn't list Hey Jude because I heard there was dispute over who "wrote it". They both worked on it alot didn't they?

Well they both worked on each other's songs a lot, at least until the last few years. Nevertheless Paul wrote it for John's son Julian and John was actually touched by the gesture. So no.

For the most part you can tell who wrote the song by who sung the lead vocals.

[Cheebs]

While in The Beatles
John > Paul

Post-Beatles
John >>>>>>>>>>> Paul

[Flannel Boy]

While in The Beatles
John > Paul

Post-Beatles
John >>>>>>>>>>> Paul

 

[Cheebs]

I'd even go as far to say John Lennon's post-beatles career is better than his songs from The Beatles.

[Flannel Boy]

I'd even go as far to say John Lennon's post-beatles career is better than his songs from The Beatles.

Your musical opinions are about as bad as your political opinions.

[Phoenix Dark]

I'd even go as far to say John Lennon's post-beatles career is better than his songs from The Beatles.

[Cheebs]

. I love  Lennon on his own much more so than with the beatles.

[Phoenix Dark]

Most of his albums were full of filler, with a few great songs mixed in.

Jacob, you lose

[Flannel Boy]

Well, Plastic Ono and Imagine were fantastic albums, but it was down hill from there.

[Phoenix Dark]

He'd probably be doing emo music if he was still alive

[xnikki118x]

LOLOLOL emo Lennon.