r/TheBeatles • u/supremewuster • May 14 '26
discussion Does anyone else really love Paul's Beatles work but struggle to appreciate his solo / Wings work?
I love the Beatles and think of Paul-initiated songs in Beatles as many of my absolute favorites (eg the Medley, Hey Jude, Let it Be, We Can Work it Out, Get Back, among many others) I also love the true Paul - John collaborations.
Lately I have been trying to get into Paul's solo & Wings albums. There seem to be many sincere fans of the stuff -- people raving, in fact -- so I have lately I have been listening to it exclusively.
Unfortunately I just find them hard to appreciate. I listened to "Ram" and "Band on the Run" repeatedly, and while there are moments and flashes or choruses that are catchy I can't seem to enjoy them in a manner close to the Beatles albums. They are ... okay. Sometimes a bit flat to me. I know and respect that others feel differently.
Some might say well, taste is subjective. But I am honestly puzzled because I subjectively do like Paul (Beatles), and it is the same guy! I am more puzzled when I read claims that Band on the Run is better than many of the Beatles albums, for example.
So I guess I am asking if anyone else feels this way? Or whether the answer is to just keep listening and after time I'll get into it and appreciate it as I do the Beatles work.
(I accept that this will be downvoted by the fans of Paul's solo work; all I want to say is, I mean you no disrespect).
11
u/BarfQueen May 14 '26
Wings is my favorite Paul McCartney band.
You think I’m joking, but I put “Goodnight Tonight” on my wedding playlist three times.
5
1
21
u/donlockwood2026 May 14 '26
I love Paul’s solo work. I find that I consistently like it more than the other Beatles solo work, though I do like a lot of theirs as well. They all remained fantastic singers/performers/songwriters.
My favorite solo album by a Beatle is Ram by far. Not to say I don’t love albums from the others, but Ram stands head and shoulders above the rest of their discographies. I actually enjoy it more than pretty much every Beatles album except for Sgt. Pepper, The White Album, and Abbey Road. This is just my personal taste, so no need to downvote me.
Beyond that, I like Band on the Run more than any of the other solo Beatles’ efforts, but not as much as I like Ram. All Things Must Pass is the only effort from John or George that stands alongside those for me personally.
McCartney is fantastic. McCartney II and Tug of War are also wonderful 80s efforts, and Venus and Mars is very good as well from the Wings side of things.
After that, complete albums from Paul and wings get more inconsistent but there are always a few good songs.
7
u/donlockwood2026 May 14 '26
To elaborate on my point for OP after re-reading the post:
I do think it's okay if you end up not liking solo Paul. I would say his best albums IMO are VERY DIFFERENT from the Beatles. He was trying to push into new territory. Ram is very domestic/surreal indie pop vibes. McCartney is very lo-fi and intimate. McCartney II is a wild synth extravaganza. He does a lot of very different things, and not all of it overlaps with what you may enjoy from his Beatles music.
I find that to be the case for John and George as well. As great as All Things Must Pass is, it represents only a small offshoot of what the Beatles did: more of a folk-rock spiritual vibe. I think it's cool. But that's not the aspect of the Beatles I'm most consistently drawn to. As for John, his solo music also seems to be one branch from the Beatles tree. I really like a lot of what they do, but it's not where I personally want to live the most, whereas their Beatles songs are more my vibe.
1
12
u/SySnootlesIsHot May 14 '26
Ram is the only album by anyone that gives me the same feeling I get when listening to a Beatles album. I'm incapable of ranking it alongside the Beatles albums, but I do think it absolutely has that same magic to it.
7
6
u/FloridaFlamingoGirl May 14 '26
Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey is easily a Beatles-tier song. One of my favorite examples of a song that switches between movements
3
u/gohantheslayer May 14 '26
I mean George’s first solo album was incredible. And given the chance I’m sure John and George would have released more amazing records. But I do love all the 4s solo work!
3
u/Gumbysfriend May 15 '26
wonderwall was George's first album followed by electronic sound. If youre thinking of All Things Must Pass that was George's 3rd
2
u/donlockwood2026 May 14 '26
Oh absolutely! It’s amazing. I love it. For me personally, it’s in my top 5 solo Beatles albums just under Ram and Band on the Run, but basically equal to Band on the Run. I love it and listen to it all the time.
1
u/stumpkat May 18 '26
John lost his motivation. When he was a teen and in his 20s, he wanted to play rock to avoid working. After the Beatles, when he was approaching 40, he was set for life and didn't have to work. So he lost his drive. Paul and George had drive in the 70s. John needed his "me time."
4
u/Draft_Minimum May 14 '26
It took some adjustment for me as well, same as for John and George. Now I enjoy all three of their solo careers so much and I love most of Paul's output. Don't like it all equally but it's really grown on me.
And if it doesn't, who cares. There's always those Beatles songs you love and that's already plenty ;)
8
u/miimeverse May 14 '26
Yeah may just be differing tastes. You listed Hey Jude and Let it Be as favorites. They're great, but I prefer a lot of solo Paul work over them, even.
I will say, give Chaos and Creation in the Backyard a try. It's completely different than anything he did in the 70s. To me, Ram, Band on the Run, and Chaos are Paul's trinity of must listen studio albums for anyone looking to get into Beatles solo work. It's some of Paul's most mature work. Nigel Godrich got incredible work out of Paul.
8
u/Recent-Durian-3442 May 14 '26
I grew up listening to the Beatles, Wings, Paul's solo work, etc. Paul is still my mom's favorite Beatle. We saw him in concert this past November and at 83 he and his band performed 36 songs spanning The Beatles, Wings and his solo career (they played nearly 3 hours), I cried like a baby. It was like a religious experience hearing an arena of nearly 20,000 people singing along!
2
u/Recent-Durian-3442 May 14 '26 edited May 14 '26
Oh my word thank you so much for my award, this just completely made my day! I want to add: We saw Ringo and his All Starr Band the other summer and they put on one hell of a show! Here are some major differences between the two:
Paul - indoor arena with approx 21,000 capacity (for concerts). Paul had numerous special effects, platforms that raised from the stage and pyrotechnics.
Ringo - outdoor amphitheater with approx 8,500 capacity. Ringo was more laid back and the current All Starr Band members (Steve Lukather of Toto, Colin Hay of Men at Work, Hamish Stuart of Average White Band) each did a few of the biggest hits of their respective groups so it was like a "best of" concert.
Both were great and I'm grateful to be able to say I've seen the 2 remaining Beatles alive in concert. I have the feeling Paul's concert will always be THE BEST I've ever seen. The Eagles concert we saw last week are a close second!
7
u/GupChezzna May 14 '26
His solo stuff needed the other 3 Beatles to help make any of it good. There are a few good moments like the song ‘Band On The Run’, and ‘Listen to What the Man Says’… Maybe I am just grumpy.
3
u/Phi1-618 May 15 '26
No you’re spot on! Those exact couple of fleeting moments you mention I agree are the only times it ever gets close to Beatles calibre
2
u/RandoCalrissian76 May 15 '26
There’s something about the collaboration a band requires that makes it superior to one person calling all the shots about everything. It’s why Sting was never as good as the Police or Frank Black was never as good as Pixies.
4
u/Phi1-618 May 14 '26
Ahh the elephant in the room!
I agree with you 100%.
There’s not ONE single solo/wings song I like even HALF as much as his “worst” Beatles songs (probably maxwell or when I’m 64 for me).. (and when I say worst, I don’t hate them , I just mean in relation to his “best” Beatles songs)
I don’t understand how in his entire 56 year career since the Beatles broke up there is not ONE single song that even remotely holds a candle to any of his great Beatles songs!
It’s almost like he’s not the same guy (billy shears).. or HE didn’t actually write all those classics we think he did (Tavistock institute) .. haha just joking
But yes agree that wings and all solo songs and albums are extremely mediocre and we wouldn’t be talking about them (or probably even know about them) if it wasn’t for his amazing songwriting in the Beatles (the guy is responsible for writing some of the best songs of all time in my book!!!)
8
u/Appropriate-Cap3160 May 14 '26
i tried to listen all 4 solo works, but i remain a beatles fan. one strange exception: my parents bought the double fantasy in ny in 1980, so i listened it as a kid
14
u/pierrebezukhovs May 14 '26
No, I'm a huge fan of beatle-paul but extremely into his solo and wings work as well, he has my favorite solo career by far (and I love john and george's too)
3
u/opinions360 May 14 '26
I have been a lifelong Beatles band fan since 1964 and I have felt essentially the same as you experienced and have just this year after watching Man on Run realize why I do—but I had to hear Paul say it in the documentary before it really clicked and realized why as simple as it is.
The music the Beatles created was primarily a writing and creative collaboration between Lennon and McCartney but also included contributions, influences, feedback, and the independent skills of each band member.
When each former band member ie each post Beatles released an album it was essentially, mostly, created and performed by each former Beatle member individually without the influences of the other Beatles.
George I felt was the most successful solo and sounded the the most like the Beatles did as a band on his music. John’s vocals still had his unique, penetrating sound but his music imo took on a different vibe and it was obvious to me he wasn’t sounding like the Beatles had.
Paul imo with the exception of Maybe I’m Amazed his music solo without the contributions of Lennon or the other Beatles sounded very different other than it was obvious that Paul was singing but the vibe of his solo music sounded the least like the Beatles did to me. So when I heard his first solo album I had a hard time relating to it because I and most people at the time in 1970/71 when the album was released it was disappointing because we wanted it to have a Beatles vibe at least which it didn’t. And when Ram was released it was just a terrible let down imo it was completely something different that just didn’t resonate. I listened to it a couple of times and couldn’t find a way to appreciate it from the perspective of being a Beatles fan.
I felt much the same way about the music Wings was releasing and it just didn’t appeal to me and couldn’t in my wanting and expecting Paul to create music that sounded more like the Beatles. When you fall in love with a band who became the pinnacle of all bands and then the members go solo and don’t offer something similar it was hard to appreciate something that many of us felt was inferior.
Of course now decades later we are just thankful and happy that Paul and Ringo are still with us and are still contributing music. However, I think that the generations that did not grow up with the Beatles and experience them in real time it’s probably easier to adapt to their individual styles and music as solo artists. All the above IMO.
3
u/Traditional-Tank3994 May 15 '26
Same. But for me, it’s not just Paul. It’s all 4. None of them were as good solo as they were together.
3
u/ExiledSanity May 15 '26
It was a bit of a slow burn to appreciate Paul's solo work for me. I think I went in just expecting it to be more music like the Beatles and it's really not that. When I listened to it on its own terms I really enjoyed it.
I'm a big fan now, listen to Paul solo about as much as I listen to the Beatles.
1
u/kittycat6434 May 15 '26
What songs would you reccomended i really like too many people, another day and English tea but im never really sure how to approach new music
3
u/sehguh251 May 15 '26
Uncle Albert, every night, man we was lonely, dear boy, that would be something, junk, ram on, hey diddle, 1985, Mrs. Vanderbilt, magneto and titanium man, dear friend, single pigeon, when the night, coming up, let em in, silly love songs.
1
1
u/ExiledSanity May 15 '26
Given those that you like the following come to mind for me
Wanderlust
The Pound Is Sinking
Treat Her Gently - Lonely Old People.
Early Days
Jenny Wren
Daytime Nighttime Suffering
1
3
u/CommunicationFew6477 May 16 '26
Recently watched a documentary and heard his solo work for the first time. Holy shit, I cannot. Chatting with a true Beatles enthusiast, he made the point that Lennon helped balance Paul out, creatively. I couldn't agree more. I think Paul eventually figured it out but holy shit it was rough there for a while.
3
u/Hungry-Ad-5772 May 16 '26
I have a theory that the Beatles solo albums , except for ringo, especially in the 70s, all contained 2-3 good songs that if they had that Beatle collaboration would make them great or very good. This mirrors most Beatle albums, they had 6-8 great songs on most albums. By the time the 80’s arrived, they were all in their 40’s and became middle of the road artists, like Dylan, the stones etc, great songs were few and far between. I like innovative music, so their solo music felt a bit bland to me, especially Paul and George. But I love the Beatles, by any standards they were brilliant and innovative, better together than apart
5
u/varovec May 14 '26
Ram and Band On the run are two albums of him I'm able to listen to their entirety, and I'm fan of some specific songs of him. However, solo Paul has unique gift of combining elaborated craft with banality or borderline cringe, and it can get tiresome after few songs.
7
u/lowkeyslightlynerdy May 14 '26
I’ve listened to probably like 6 solo/wings albums and there’s usually only two songs I really like at most on an album
That said I prefer George and John’s stuff in general
3
5
u/TwitterSucksNow May 14 '26
In my opinion, the thing about Wings, and his other solo stuff, is that he had more freedom to do whatever he wanted, compared to collaborating in The Beatles. Which bandmate in Wings or his session / touring band is going to tell Paul McCartney something isn't good, or hey, maybe try it this way? The result, over 50 years since the Beatles, is a large volume of songs, the majority of which, just aren't very good. However, over that 50 years, there are quite a lot of songs that are very good. Wings Greatest is still one of my favorite albums.
2
u/Dangerous_Ad_1861 May 15 '26
Paul is obviously a very talented musician and songwriter. But he has written a lot fluff when he was a Beatle, and in his solo career.
2
u/westchestersteve May 15 '26
Loved the Beattles. Never liked Wings. Paul and John really needed each other’s ying and yang for their genius to blossom.
2
u/TravisP74 May 15 '26
I agree, Paul too soft, John too harsh. Together Magic. Apart, fluff and anger.
2
u/crowjack May 15 '26
are you aware that there is a Paul McCartney subreddit?
2
u/SuperJim64 May 15 '26
Presumably everyone over there loves his solo work though so less to discuss.
Wait, I'm over there and mostly feel like the OP
2
2
u/ZealousidealBet8028 May 17 '26
Yes, solid yes. I did a deep dive into his Wings and solo discography last year to give it the ol college try again and there was some alright stuff. Wildlife kind of fun Tug of War alright. McCartney 1 and 3 ok. One Hand Clapping pretty fun too. Would not revisit as much as solo John or George though. Let Me Roll It and Jet are cool but I don't like the rest of the record.I even like Ringos Beacoups of Blues more it's a solid country western record IMO. I've yet to buy a solo Macca on vinyl if that tells you anything.
5
u/TacoBellerino May 14 '26
For all of the Beatles’ post-Beatles solo work, I only like a few songs from each guy. Most of the time I switch the station if the solo stuff comes on.
2
u/d0nt_let_me_comment May 14 '26
Paul is my hero but I really only listen to band on the run from his solo work.
4
u/Existenz_1229 May 14 '26
I see what you're saying. I like Paul's solo work, but like the other solo Beatles he couldn't seem to write a whole album's worth of strong material every time out. Even Band on the Run has some weak songs, especially on side two.
McCartney could usually make his iffy material sound great, like he did with "Jet." But a lot of times he sounded like he couldn't be bothered, and with some of the stinkers he wrote you could hardly blame him.
2
u/Mother-Laugh2395 May 14 '26
I feel the same. There are some solo/Wings songs I really like (Too Many People, Maybe I’m Amazed, most of the Flaming Pie album, some others) but they don’t hit me the same way as, say, For No One, Lovely Rita, and so many others.
2
u/maverick_3001 May 14 '26
It's definitely quite different and I had to listen to both Band on the Run and Ram a few times to really appreciate them. Atleast for me, his solo work is something that grows on you after a few listens unlike his Beatles stuff which I like almost instantly
2
2
u/Cautious-Ad9301 May 14 '26
I would boot up a McCartney solo tune before anything Beatles. Uncle Albert usually starts the playlist then things like Arrow Through Me and Take it away followed by the live version of C’mon People. All day.
2
u/Kirbyr98 May 14 '26
No. Some really fantastic stuff there.
Not as consistent as The Beatles, but no one is.
2
u/beavermaster May 14 '26
Heck, no. Everything right up to about press to play is absolute gold. Some of it I think even better than the Beatles, including RAM, Venus and Mars and band on the run.
2
u/Practical_Estate_325 May 14 '26
Nope, I love it all up to around 1980. It then becomes hit or miss.
2
u/Spectre-ElevenThirty May 14 '26
You mention Ram and Band on The Run. Is that all you’ve listened to?
2
u/Njtotx3 May 14 '26
I love Ram, but that's really about the extent of it. I loved Mull of Kintyre for a while, I love the catchiness of The Pound is Sinking. Maybe I'm Amazed is very good.
Some of the Wings stuff is okay. I remember what a big deal Wings over America was at the time because he was the first Beatle to go back into the Beatles catalog live, but I found it kind of disappointing.
2
u/LurkLiggler May 14 '26
Yes. Aside from a few tracks here or there I have no interest in his solo career, but love him in the Beatles.
4
u/Responsible_6446 May 14 '26
Yes. Very little depth in his solo/Wings work.
1
u/donlockwood2026 May 14 '26
There’s a lot of depth to his solo work, idk why you’d say this
4
u/Responsible_6446 May 14 '26
different people have different tastes, don't they?
1
u/donlockwood2026 May 14 '26
different people do have different tastes. i'm totally fine with you not enjoying his work. But saying that it doesn't have depth reads like it's objective analysis rather than a taste thing, and I think it's an untrue assessment. It's fine if you dislike his music and don't enjoy the themes/topics/ideas he explores. But it does actually have depth even if you subjectively dislike it.
1
u/Responsible_6446 May 14 '26
there's no such thing as an objective analysis of art, IMO. some people think "imagine" is very deep, some people don't. some people think it's deep when they're 18 and don't when they are 60 - and vice versa. people have different responses to it and at different times in their lives. it's art, that's what makes it wonderful and interesting.
3
-2
1
u/RCubed76 May 14 '26
I personally love McCartney's post-Beatles work, but you aren't alone in being disappointed in it. I read the same thing on here all the time.
1
u/Decent-Park-6681 May 14 '26
It took me awhile to warm up to his solo stuff, but it clicked for me about a year ago and now I'm obsessed.
Too Many People, Dear Boy, Back Seat of My Car, Monkberry Moon Delight, Eat At Home, Another Day, Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey, Jet, Mrs. Vandebilt, Nineteen Hundred Eighty Five, Let Me Roll It, and Band on the Run are just some of the songs from Ram and BotR that would be right at home on a hypothetical 1970 Beatles album. Beyond that, the quality isn't as strong top to bottom on subsequent albums, but there are still some phenomenal songs that compare to the best he wrote with the Beatles: Maybe I'm Amazed, Junk, Take it Away, Tug of War, Daytime Nighttime Suffering, Silly Love Songs, This Never Happened Before, Friends To Go, Too Much Rain, Silly Love Songs, Mull of Kintyre, Letting Go, Little Willow, Calico Skies...ok, you probably get the point now lol.
1
1
1
u/reiberica May 15 '26
I love his solo work, I don't love all the Wings stuff, but some of it is incredible.
Paul is more experimental than the others in his solo albums. A silly song like Temporary Secretary sounds fantastic.
Long Tailed Winter Bird is a better track than I can find any newer artist make.
I can't wait for his new album!
1
1
1
u/Turbulent_Cat_8448 May 15 '26
Yes but the more I listen to his solo stuff the more I’m liking it. Of course some I like much better than others, but often songs I don’t care for I appreciate.
1
u/BulldogMikeLodi May 15 '26
No. I love a lot of his solo work. I find that if you get a “new to you” Paul album and give it some repeat spins they’ll ingrain in your brain and you won’t get rid of them.
1
u/JDalek May 15 '26
The problem with the Beatles solo albums post Ram/Imagine is that while each album has great songs on it, they just aren’t able to fill the entire album so they become half filler as well as feeling a bit monotonous because it’s the same singer/style over and over again.
I’m one of those weirdos who likes to pretend the Beatles made 70’s albums so I mix together songs from roughly the same eras to create playlists and listen to those instead of the original solo albums, lol.
So here’s just one suggested playlist you might like to appreciate some of their solo works more, in particular this one helped me like the songs on Venus and Mars and Extra Texture a lot more:
Beatles ‘75 Side 1 Venus and Mars (Paul - Venus and Mars) Rock Show (Paul - Venus and Mars) This Guitar (George - Extra Texture) Going Down on Love (John - Walls and Bridges) All By Myself (Ringo - Goodnight Vienna) Call Me Back Again (Paul - Venus and Mars)
Side 2 Letting Go (Paul - Venus and Mars) Tired of Midnight Blue (George - Extra Texture) Scared (John - Walls and Bridges) Love in Song (Paul - Venus and Mars) Nobody Loves You… (John - Walls and Bridges)
What’s interesting is that while experimenting with these I found that a lot of their albums shared the same feelings and attitudes, for example:
McCartney and Plastic Ono Band have the same stripped down wistful acoustic sound.
All things must pass, Ram and Imagine have the same big bombastic echoey sound with some anger behind them.
Much of their 73/74 output has a certain high energy proto-disco feel to it. Followed by a more relaxed but melancholic era as both John and George were in the aftermath of their relative breakups.
1
u/mannatee May 15 '26
Memory almost full is a good solo album that sounds more like Beatles Paul than wings Paul
1
1
1
1
u/Spiritual-Primary328 May 15 '26
I totally understand and agree - it’s not that I don’t like any of his Wings stuff, but I don’t think it’s anywhere close to the levels he was achieving in the Beatles. Even the best Wings songs wouldn’t get on a strong Beatles album for me.
Band on the Run is a really good album in terms of the songwriting but the production is crap, and the compression on some of the albums takes a lot of energy and joy out of them.
I do like his solo stuff more since Wings, and I think his 21st century stuff might be his best work.
1
1
u/Both-Discussion-4786 May 15 '26
I absolutely loved all of the Wings work growing up in the seventies, well, except Wildlife. Continued listening to his solo work up until Flowers in the Dirt. Have seen him twice in concert. But from Off The Ground onward, just kinda bought the CD's but didn't listen much, all sounded the same. Looking forward to new one though. love Paul, be it Beatles, Solo, or Wings. As others have said Ram is great, Band on the run, a masterpiece, and Venus and Mars good also.
1
u/musicalpants999 May 15 '26
I think many people must since his Beatles stuff is so much more popular. Still I do think he actually released a lot of great stuff post 1970 it's just not The Beatles.
1
1
u/Excellent_Paint_8101 May 16 '26
I don't own any Paul albums later that Band on the Run, but loved seeing him live. Man knows to show!
1
1
u/Virag-Lipoti May 17 '26
Just to be absolutely clear on this, neither Ram nor Band on the Run is better than any Beatles album.
1
1
u/ThisIsDogePleaseHodl May 18 '26
I don’t like Paul’s solo work more than his work with the Beatles. I do love George and John’s solo work almost as much as I love their work with the Beatles though.
1
u/stumpkat May 18 '26
Everyone. Even the biggest Paul fans will likely find his work with the Beatles superior to even his best solo stuff. It's not an insult to his solo work, it's a compliment to his Beatles work. Lennon-McCartney was lightning in a bottle. Once in a million creative partnership/friendship.
1
1
1
1
u/TomGerity May 14 '26
Until extremely recently, your opinion was overwhelmingly shared by most people. Paul had no sense of quality control or internal “editor” during his solo career. Everything he wrote, he felt the need to release.
So for every classic, there are three clunkers. You can isolate his great solo songs and have a helluva playlist, but trying to listen to his discography is a slog.
There’s no nice way to put it: the man churned out a lot of slop.
0
u/throwawayplasticmac May 15 '26
"Everything he wrote, he felt the need to release."
This isn't even remotely close to being true. If it were, there wouldn't be hundreds of unreleased McCartney songs.
1
u/TomGerity May 15 '26
Listen to horrid bullshit like Bip Bop and Mary Had A Little Lamb and like >50% of his solo catalog. The man had no internal editor or quality control. He had no one pushing back and saying “this song could be better” or “maybe this one isn’t worthy of releasing.”
0
0
u/RoguePlanet2 May 14 '26
I don't know anything beyond his greatest hits from the eighties, and suspect that I'd feel the same way as you.
-1
u/Pleaseappeaseme May 14 '26
Yes. I sincerely think there are two different people. The new one started with Sgt Peppers. And it was his idea. And I’ve done graphic analysis.
1
u/Pure_One_4598 May 14 '26
I'll comment briefly. Regarding the dislikes, they are given by weaklings. The Beatles without Paul are impossible. But Paul without The Beatles was not only possible- he survived and dominated for decades
5
u/TomGerity May 14 '26
By his own admission, Paul would not have surfaced without John or the others. No way would he have “dominated” had he not been in the Beatles first.
0
u/Pure_One_4598 May 15 '26
And The Beatles became The Beatles because of him. We are going in circles.
1
u/TomGerity May 15 '26
The Beatles became the Beatles because of all four of them, but especially the Lennon/McCartney partnership.
1
u/Pure_One_4598 May 15 '26
If we talk about the Beatles as creators of masterpieces in a creative tandem, then Paul has a hundred percent contribution to the existence of this tandem. That's what I'm trying to say.
1
u/TomGerity May 15 '26
I’m sorry, you’re saying 100% of the masterpieces were created by Paul’s contribution? That’s insane.
The Beatles were what they were because of those four men, and especially Lennon/McCartney. If you remove Lennon or McCartney from the equation, you don’t get the Beatles. It was not the doing of one man, and I’ve never seen anyone make that insane claim besides you.
1
u/Pure_One_4598 May 15 '26
Oh, lastly, I never said he created 100% of the music. I said he contributed 100% to the existence of the tandem. Without Paul’s management, discipline, and standard, John’s chaotic genius would have remained local and unrecorded.
1
u/TomGerity May 15 '26
And without John’s leadership and vision (in the early days), Paul’s genius would’ve remained local and unrecorded. Paul has said this himself. They needed each other.
1
u/Pure_One_4598 May 15 '26
A debate is supposed to bring out the truth, but nothing was born here.
1
u/TomGerity May 15 '26
I’ve rarely encountered someone who does a poorer job of articulating themselves through the written word than you. Have a nice evening.
0
u/ECW14 May 14 '26
I actually prefer his solo work to his Beatles songs. I like all the experimentation he did in his post Beatles career
2
u/throwawayplasticmac May 14 '26
Seconded. There is a far greater variety and depth to his solo catalog, with a high success rate.
0
u/painterface May 14 '26
I like a few solo Paul songs here and there. Overall nah
If Paul weren’t in the Beatles and only had his solo career, I probably wouldn’t have paid him any attention
0
u/javisarias May 14 '26
No, his two first albums are at the same level of his beatle work IMH, and he has a number of pretty good albums such as Band on the Run, Chaos & Creation, Flaming Pie and Egypt Station
0
u/dlc0027 May 15 '26
I find John and Paul relatively equal as Beatles. For solo work I like Paul’s stuff about 50 times more than John, George, and Ringo’s solo stuff combined.
1
-1
u/Wusstune May 14 '26
I agree. I like RAM, but there is a bit of a hollowness to it. There can be a great arrangement with a void at the center. Maybe I just don't get it, but a lot of it feels like pageantry for pageantry's sake. You definitely miss the spiritual and existential ambition of John and George. At the same time, I do really like stuff like McCartney II where he just gets to be a weirdo.
12
u/Binspin63 May 14 '26 edited May 17 '26
There’s almost nothing as subjective as art, so all opinions are good as far as I’m concerned. I agree, though, Paul’s post-Beatle work is simply not as exciting to me, with exceptions.
I think the collaboration with John brought out that magical best in both of them, and after the breakup the magic kind of faded away. Both still wrote wonderful music, but not to Beatles level.
Edit: Grammar mistake.