Which one is better solo, John or George or Paul?

I love the Beatles but I'm not as familiar with these three artists' solo outputs.

Ok, just working off of vague impressions here: I prefer John’s, mostly because of Plastic Ono Band, which is an all-timer, but I feel history has been more kind to Paul. I think John Lennon worship was a gen-x thing, where now Paul’s influence is more widely felt these days.

Jim O'Rourke was a Paul guy. Checks out.

llllllllllllllllllll wrote: I think John Lennon worship was a gen-x thing, where now Paul’s influence is more widely felt these days.

McCartney was undoubtedly the more adventurous one, 'granny music' be damned. Other than Lennon's Yoko-inspired primal scream phase he kind of kept going back to '50s rock and roll. That McCartney could put out a song like this 3 years ago, how many 80 year olds are doing that..

Macca for all he reasons above.

Of the 2 options Lennon. Shaved Fish is meatier than any McCartney.

But the true answer of the Fab Four is Harrison

+1 for McCartney.

Fucking shame that we'll never know what Lennon would have done as he got older.

Also, agree with FM PASTA that Harrison might be the correct answer.

NOTE: I edited the thread to include Harrison but apparently by doing that all your votes have been erased. Sorry about that.
So you must vote again if you'd like to.

Lennon's 69/70 singles and POB are tops. Harrison's ATMP is also tops. After 1971 though I don't care much for either one's work.
Macca for the win I guess.

Since George was added, that's an easy vote for me.

No vote 'til Ringo.