I know he seems pretty smug and self-important in his old age, but you gotta give it up for his bass playing! DAMN! Forget about it! I remember growing up liking John the best but the more and more I listen to Paul's bass playing, I am blown away! Listen to "Rain" or "Something". He is working overtime!

George has the best post-Beatles catalog.

John the best voice and depth.

Ringo... Well those drum sounds ARE a standard, am I right? (OK, maybe that was due to George Martin or Geoff Emerick...) Oh, wait! What about his crazy lefty-playing-righty fills? Killer!

yawn wrote:I'd like to know in what way(s) Paul has tried to covince the public that he was the"truly avant garde Beatle".

In the Anthology book (and maybe some other places, I'm not sure which) Paul says that he was doing tape loop stuff before John. He also says that he was the one bringing in all these strange things to the group while John was at home in the suburbs. I don't begrudge Paul a little attention, but when you compare, say, 'Two Virgins' with 'Give My Regards To Broadstreet', the comments seem to ring a little hollow.

none of you are thinking existentially. sure they're spelled differently and refer to completely different things, but still, i'd have to go with dung, or the 2004 GL 2.0L

Dylan wrote:I don't begrudge Paul a little attention, but when you compare, say, 'Two Virgins' with 'Give My Regards To Broadstreet', the comments seem to ring a little hollow.

This statement is nonsensical and intellectually dishonest. It compares two records from completely different time periods (1969 and 1984). I could certainly argue that excellent solo McCartney mini-suites such as "Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey", "Back Seat of My Car" and "Band on the Run", or the inspired surrealism of "Jet", are far more forward looking, than, say, Lennon's "(Just Like) Starting Over". But then again, by comparing Beatles solo releases from different time periods, I would be employing the same illogic set forth in the statement above.

By the way, this entire thread is nonsense. I hate it that something as supposedly sacred as a band is parcelled out and its individual components compared like so many beauty pageant contestants. We do not have that right. For all of the mythology surrounding The Beatles as individual people and artists, the bottom line is that they operated as a band (yes, even The White Album, "Eleanor Rigby" and "The Ballad of John and Yoko"). They played shows as a band, and they released records as a band. All that we may do is listen to their records and pass judgment on their work as a band.

So my vote for favorite Beatle is The Beatles.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:

Dylan wrote:I don't begrudge Paul a little attention, but when you compare, say, 'Two Virgins' with 'Give My Regards To Broadstreet', the comments seem to ring a little hollow.

This statement is nonsensical and intellectually dishonest.

It was also meant as a joke. Forgive me. Sarcasm is difficult in on-line forums.

By the way, this entire thread is nonsense. I hate it that something as supposedly sacred as a band is parcelled out and its individual components compared like so many beauty pageant contestants.

Again, all in fun. I mean, do we really have the right to take an artist like Bob Dylan, evaluate his whole career, and then proclaim it to be worthless or not? Not really, but we do it in fun. It is fun, isn't it?

Well, in defense of parcelling I'll say that if you admire the Beatles as much as your post suggests you must wonder how four profoundly divergent (or not) personality types came together to do something that so cogently channeled or transcended their individual bents and flaws. Certainly all bands are comprised of personalities whose sameness and difference are what make the band move but perhaps there is no other band whose members complemented each other in the mythic proportions that these guys did. This band established personality - archetypes that for better or worse bear upon our measurement of every band since.

Yes, all in fun.

another cheer for ringo!

caveman backbeat, timeless fills, simplistic complexity, tastey bongos tambs & such, gave the beatles GROOVE, one might argue that he doesn't DO much, but then i might say, what he does DO is H U G E. synergistically speaking....

i am the walrus
rain
lovely rita
she said she said
tommorrow never knows
baby you're a rich man
strawberry fields forever

you know what i'm talkin about!

love em all,
just giving ringo what he deserves.

I love johns songs.. But whenever i heard him talk i thought he sounded like a fucken ass. Bed in for peace? Shit i do that every sunday! Still no peace! HAHA!

I like Ringo best because I had one of his records on cassette and I lost it with all my Industrial records cassettes as well, so I have this fond memory of both Ringo and Industrial records cassette-only releases that mesh together very nicely in my mind though i'm pretty sure the IR records suck.

Hope this helps.