They both could truly do it all. Great Rock And Roll Singers And Writers, Great Pop Singers, and Writers, Great on Harmonies, Great Originality and Avant Garde, Paul is a great Musician. John was good,but didn't work hard enough to be great,as they were so dynamite together that their mediocrity sounded good.
I've always thought of Lennon as the composer of the "cool/rocking" songs and McCartney as the composer of the "beautiful/catchy" songs, but there are exceptions to this.
They were both capable of either direction, and both enjoyed raw rock´n´roll as much as sublime melodies. I view them as equals with extremely similar talent - Lennon´s tunes sometimes tend to repeat notes more often than McCartney´s, therefore seem to be less classical in style. But that´s a very minor difference.
Yes that is REALLY valid when Paul wrote the first ROCKER hit they had in the UK. You people need to understand there are freaks like (ME) who know none of them was circumcised and that Mell was banging Pete Best mother, or that Ringo walked into his house and found George Harrison "penetrating" Maurine OR that George Martin wrote and played The Fool on the hill piano was written and played by George Martin so look the stuff up.
"Lennon as the composer of the "cool/rocking" songs and McCartney as the composer of the "beautiful/catchy" songs" i stopped classifying Beatles songs' this way the day I finally GREW UP and decided Paul's songs were usually better.
I prefer John Lennon. I love his creative and experimental sense in songs like Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields Forever, etc. I love his ability to present different, bold, distinct and unparalleled songs.
@@zaziou711 Where do you get your history or knowledge of music? Recording some tape loops is not equal to creating a song, they were an embellishment to a song created by John Lennon, and never were "all the instrumentals" created by PM - but I get it, you're a Macca wanker so all bets are off. Imbecile. Macca could not and would not ever write or even consider a song like TNK. Think Honey Pie and Here, There and Everywhere and O Bla Di - that's Macca.
Maybe one day someone will make a movie about Georges Martin and the fact that nobody ever put him in the debate. Without him, no experimental testings, no classical instruments added to the mix, no complex harmonies, which is exactly why the Beatles were so ahead of their time.
I agree. Literally elevated John and Paul's work. It's utterly a weird coincidence in history John, Paul, George came together, grabbed the most perfect drummer for them and the one guy who could develop their stuff by bringing in classical but also fully understanding how to bring in new instruments, influences and what good experimentation is. George Martins contribution to the Beatles is well know and yet also his influence and importance is understated.
I think Paul was more musically talented, but I prefer John´s raw approach and his personal lyricism. John´s songs are my favourite from the beatles catalogue
He was more prolific as well. Paul was responsible for about 65% of their hit material. But Lennon wasn't so driven to be always producing masterpieces; Macartney was always working on a song, or trying to get the guys to make the next album.
@@danwall6662 I'm talking about total individual input into all their hit material. Their credits were "Lennon /McCartney, but the percentage contributions to each varied greatly- some were entirely Paul ( eg Yesterday, Michelle etc) and some were entirely John ( Ticket to ride, Nowhere Man, ), and a few were 50/50 , but overall, Paul is thought to have contributed more
John and Paul were THE songwriting team all the way back to Mozart and Beethoven! For me I don't think it's possible to pick the best and unfair to the other!
Paul wrote 'Yesterday', been recorded over 3,000 times worldwide. The creative genius of both Paul and John were unstoppable. I think they each contributed to trim raw edges of each piece. The balance was the best song writing team in history.
@@hw343434 except Lennon didn't have any unusual or elaborate chords with his solo output so that's obviously not true whereas McCartney invented a new genre of music with his first few albums
It’s hard to say anyone was a better songwriter than Lennon but McCartney was absolutely brilliant. Your talking about the 2 greatest songwriters of the last 100 years.
"It’s hard to say anyone was a better songwriter than Lennon" oh yeah sure - Nowhere man, Help and I Am the Walrus" - real catchy - AND DEFINITELY DATED.
@@heavensdoor844They were both brilliant. McCartney had to be pretty darn good to get the approval of John. John certainly was the leader of the group during the early years and Paul was deeply competitive with the drive to push the band. Ringo talked about how Paul was the one who kept pushing to record while the others were less ambitious.
@@gutenbird - Why would you care if John approved of Paul? John’s music sucked on its own and his melodies are typically awful. Paul will always be a better songwriter, Harrison too. I think the Bee Gees and The Beach Boys and many other groups surpassed John and occasionally even the Beatles in songwriting. The Beatles are legendary but John was a pretentious ass and mostly overrated. He contributed great songs to the Beatles catalogue but is he tied with Paul as the best in the last 100 years? Fuck no
" Strawberry Fields Forever ", is the tie breaker for me. Featuring mind-blowing, innovative, arrangements. Fusing classic music arrangements, blended with baroque sounds & trippy electronic, studio arrangements. Sounds today, as trippy as it did, back in 1967.
@@inmundo6927 John not being satisfied with SFF was much later, in retrospect. In 1967 he was blown away with how it turned out - as were all his fans!
“Strawberry Fields Forever” is such a prime example of classic groundbreaking songwriting that that song would’ve worked in a hundred different ways. John could e played That on his acoustic guitar alone and it would’ve been amazing
@@ismaeliglesias8594 lack of evidence, selection-bias, cherry picking and such (like interpreting 'Every Little Thing' whatever way you choose.. ) DO NOT constitute 'evidence' of anything.. Furthermore, only untalented fools could ever dream that talent is as easy to replicate or to emulate, as this conspiracy would suggest.
It’s a matter of taste but the quantifiable facts are clear: 1, McCartney dominated Beatles sales. 2, McCartney dominated other artists’ cover of Beatles songs in terms of raw numbers and the breadth of styles they represent. 3, McCartney dominated post Beatles sales and was the #2 artist in the 1970’s, won longevity battle. 4. Paul Simon placed McCartney in the top tier of greatest all time songwriters, above Lennon and Bob Dylan; Dylan said “Paul McCartney is the only one who truly amazes me.” 5, I love Lennon’s songs. For him to go toe-to-toe with McCartney and even make it a legitimate question as to who was better proves what a great talent he was and would’ve continued to be if a crazy American hadn’t assassinated him. 6, Lennon said McCartney was a “brilliant f*****g songwriter.” True and an understatement.
Well, Dylan has opinions just like the rest of us. His opinions aren't any more correct than a music critic's or even the rest of us. It's possible that he was in awe of Macca's ability to create melodies, which he wasn't as good at. In contrast, Dylan was amazing at writing lyrics, just like Lennon. This is just speculation though. Also, it's hard to have longevity when a deranged person commits a certain horrific act. That was uncomfortable to type. Peace and Love!
It's true that Paul wrote many hits in the later period but John was writing all the hits from 63 up to end of 65 and then Paul maybe 66 to 68/69. I think John lost interest after 66 but I always preferred John for his voice and honesty in his songs. Paul was a bit too bubblegum for me.
Maybe you should count whose songs were more innovative. Most crazy ideas, even if added by Paul, landed in John’s songs. Best drums? John’s songs. Backward music? John’s songs. Tape speed variations? John’s songs. Voice distortions? John’s songs. Psychedelic and more poetic lyrics? John’s songs. Crazy experiments? John’s songs. McCartney kept his experiments, like musical collages, private, whereas John thought those innovations should take part in the band’s albums. His bravery was second to none, in my opinion. I love Macca too, to me the two are the f***g best, but people tend to forget these facts about JL songs and that’s very unfair. We can list songs if you want. What about a song like “Because”? Simply magical.
@@arcarsan Paul came up with the backward guitar idea (he’s also the only one who actually played backwards on one of their songs, Taxman). Paul is on video right after Revolver came out explaining that he came up with the backward tape loop. Paul helped make all of those songs more cutting edge, and Lennon helped him as well. Paul and John were exceptionally creative. The best of Paul’s Wings and solo work is extremely creative and musical. Don’t kid yourself.
This video is right. They are two different kinds of geniuses, and together made the band what it was. It's hard for people who hero worship Lennon for being such a rebel and tortured soul and everything to think of McCartney as a genius too--because he's a more subdued and introverted genius (and hid a lot of his true feelings in a time when everyone wanted rock stars to "let it all hang out") Lennon kind of screams "legendary rock star" while McCartney is more of an "acquired taste".
@@91dodgespiritrt And, who wrote such "classics" like "Silly Love Songs", "Let Em In", and "Coming Up" ? Those must have been contractual obligation songs
@@91dodgespiritrt Ringo in 1974 to People Magazine: “We all have our fans now. Paul got the Teenagers, John got the educated ones, George got the mystics and I got the mothers.” That explain it doesn’t it?
@@MartinJHeneburyI used to like Lennon better than Mac., but these days my older self prefers Mac. However you must be living a very sheltered life not to be able to think of a great Lennon song...magine, I'm losing you, mind games, Watching the wheels, are a few.
@@MartinJHenebury Dude, that’s an embarrassing comment. Listen to “Mind Games”, “#9 Dream”, “Watching the Wheels”, “Woman”, “God”, “Love”, “Nobody Loves you when you’re down and out”, “Jealous Guy”, “Instant Karma”, Happy Christmas War is Over”, “Beautiful Boy”… you really think Paul and Wings are on THAT level??
And the end of the day i really do think the were equal...both geniuses who wrote the best songs of our lifetime...the competition between themselves spurred them on to great heights...unsurpassable...
In his book Summer of Love, George Martin writes: ” Paul McCartney has a sense of structure in his compositions that very few popular songwriters have ever had. He instinctively had much more musicianship in him than any of the others did: Paul had the makings of a great composer”. “John would probably have ended up as a sort of Lou Reed…”
In an interview 1982 George Martin said: “…John was inclined to leave things to us and do his rock n roll bits …while the music side was basically Paul…”
@@tonymccusker501 Beatles producer, George Martin, in his book, “The Summer of Love", calls Paul McCartney the most talented Beatle. His skills were effortless and fluent. John had to work harder at his craft, much like, according to George Martin, “driving without a clutch”.
@Tony Mc cusker "George Martin said John was the better writer than Paul" - ??? NO, definitely wrong, when and where did Georga M. say that? He couldn´t have stated that because he said nummerous times that Paul was the more prolific and talented musician by far. And that´s true. However, John had great initial ideas - and some of the earlier songs which were more "Rock n´Roll" were sung and played quite straight foreward by him (A Hard Day´s Night, Help, I Feel Fine etc.), but later he had to rely more and more on the others (Paul, George M., George H.) to finish his raw ideas and create a fitting arrangement ... especially with songs usually credited to him, like In My Life, Rain, Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields.., Being For The Benefit ..., I Am The Walrus, Dont Let Me Down, Come Together and others. He often had problems to finish a melody, write a proper middle-eight ... or find the proper second voice to Paul´s melody ... On the other hand he made suggestions to improve the lyrics for some songs ... so I don´t want to deny his qualities ... and he wrote some great songs ... but "the better writer" - NO!
@@mp-dd7pn Paul's music was always much more advanced and complex than John, it's like George Martin said. Paul in other times would have been a great classical composer, problably on the level of Mozart and Beethoven.
i think johns solo carrer was amazing, his songwriting got so much better, and paul kind of start writing more catchy songs, both were great, but if i had to pick one, john would be the one, by far the two greatest songwriters of all the time
Rolling Stone Magazine's Greatest 100 Songwriters of all time.....1 - Bob Dylan - 2. Paul McCartney - 3. John Lennon ("I'm in awe of McCartney," Bob Dylan told Rolling Stone in 2007. "He's about the only one that I'm in awe of.")
Rolling Stone magazine was a notorious Homer of Bob Dylan. They had the gall to choose "Like a Rolling Stone as the greatest Rock and Roll Song of all time. Wow. I love the song but it would not be in my top 100.
@@johnsain No, but they think they are more hip and cerebral than everyone else who has a pair of ears and half a brain. Opinions are like assholes everyone has one. And that is mine. 🤪 IMO
@@ismaeliglesias8594 to be fair I have seen the comparisons. Apparently his real name is billie Shepard and he is a foot taller and has different teeth patterns 🤷♂️also seen some very sceptical interviews!!!!!
When it comes to song writing, I think they're on par with one another. Paul's edge was his musicianship. Just like George Martin & Geoff Emmerich said, Paul can articulate what he wants in song. What he wanted a song to sound like. But when it comes to vocal, John definitely has an edge. Sure, Paul has a range. But John's voice was unique, it's iconic. More recognizable. It has a heart & soul & very convincing. Actually when I listened to NO REPLY...it feels as if John was stalking me. Though we can never understand why John doesn't like his voice. There's a lot of tweaking on his voice when recording his song. But to add. George Harrison has that 'pure' Beatles vocal.
The harmony on the bridge of No Reply is truly pro singing. McCartney and Lennon standing side by side at the same microphone is awesome. Same with Baby's In Black.
Lennon is always the best. A lot of people can write pop songs like Paul did, but I didn't seem to find another person can write Lennon's cool and rock song. Lennon's song is so simple but extremely cool, just like Mozart. His raw talent is the gift from heaven.
Ugggh. A lot of people can write pop songs like Paul BECAUSE of Paul. If you understand that you’ll understand that songwriting isn’t about just being ‘cool’.
Because Of Paul? Or because of Brian Wilson? Lmfao, to say McCartney is the best Pop Artist of the 60s is a little convoluted, even when in comparison we had The Beach Boys setting up the score for The Beatles to speed run their sound evolution
No need to make this choice. When you get to the level of Lennon, McCartney, Stevie Wonder, Paul Simon, Brian Wilson, Prince, Springsteen, and on and on......it's a waste of time to choose the "best".
John Lennon all the way. It's only because of "Band on the run" that McCartney is even in this conversation. If you take away band on the run , forget it, Paul would have NO legs to stand on in this competition
A very well informed, articulate and intelligent video you have produced. I think you captured the essences of both John and Paul in a very balanced and with appreciation. Thank you.
Listen to 'We Can Work it Out' to hear the differences between their writing. The 'try to see it my way' section is classic McCartney, upbeat and optimistic. The 'life is very short' bridge section is classic Lennon, darker and more introspective. Both are great, but I always preferred John Lennon's work.
@@dannyboy4140 can’t compare Paul’s ballads to “Strawberry Fields Forever”, “In My Life” & “Across the Universe”. Much deeper songs. As far as singing, John is rated higher but it’s subjective, both could do it all
@@hw343434 Paul wrote the melody for In my life. It's well known fact now. For example Eleanor rigby is miles stronger song than Across the universe, which wasn't received well either by fans or critics in that particular time. It's about how well you hit with as few bullets as possible as far as lyrics go. That's were Mccartney succeeded very well. Fool on the hill, Fixing a hole, She's leaving home are another great examples.
Post Imagine, Paul was definitely the better song writer. Paul is the better singer. I can’t imagine John being able to sing Maybe I’m Amazed. That’s the greatest vocal performance of the entire Beatles and solo Beatles songbook
@@juliuscepeda9655 nah, John is ranked higher than Paul as a singer. Post “Imagine” John wrote “Free as a Bird”, “Real Love”, “Woman”, “Watching the Wheels”, “Beautiful Boy”, “Mind Games”, “#9 Dream”, “Starting Over”, etc…. Enough said.
They were both amazing songwriters and on the same level but in their own writing genres, John normally wrote these sad and poetic songs that were mostly about him, Paul wrote happy upbeat songs that focused on the melody and rhythm of songs and usually made them happy go lucky songs, So I believe they were equal and that’s why they made such an unstoppable team because they had the variety that people could appeal to in all moods, If the listener was happy they could listen to Paul songs, If they were feeling down they could look to some of Johns songs, That’s why The Beatles are still talked about today and will be into the far future.
Both Lennon and McCartney were/are extremely intuitive songwriters. It seems they channeled what came to them without much filtering (which is why they were so prolific). This often led to very original songs. But also often led to pastiche type songs - songs that are quite derivative of established styles (though they always did them to an excellent level). In the early Beatles days a lot of the tracks are pastiche. Later on they produced a lot more truly original stuff. In my opinion, Lennon produced the greater proportion of truly original songs. McCartney continued to be a master of the pastiche e.g. Back in the USSR (Beach Boys), Martha My Dear (music hall), Your Mother Should Know (music hall), Got to Get You Into My Life (Motown) etc. Not to say that Paul didn't have very original songs e.g. Eleanor Rigby, Hey Jude, but I think John brought more very original tracks - e.g. the basic templates/concepts for Strawberry Fields Forever, Tomorrow Never Knows, I Am the Walrus are strikingly original and different from what others were doing. The Beatles are great because they combine these excellent new takes on established styles with strikingly original tracks. And that's what made them so widely popular: they were simultaneously very mainstream, but also very boundary-pushing.
Both of them are great songwriters but with different approach.Thats why the Beatles is a successful band ever..because of the contrast of Paul and Johns writings and contrast of their voice quality.
Paul's dad had piano-bar playing style as I recall it, hence his own style of song influence...to me, they were equally talented . Perhaps their sense of competitiveness made them even better
It's down to personal opinion really. I prefer mostly Lennon's songs. You've got to hide your love away, Ticket to Ride, Norwegian Wood, Nowhere Man, Girl, In My Life, Rain, I'm only Sleeping, She Said She Said, Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields Forever, Being for the benefit of Mr.Kite, I am the Walrus, Revolution, Dear Prudence, Happiness is a warm gun, Yer Blues, Hey Bulldog, Don't Let Me Down, Come Together. I know some of these were co-written, but mostly they were John's. I think Paul was the better melodist. He wrote some beautiful songs. And I Love Her, Yesterday, Eleanor Rigby, Here, There and Everywhere, She's Leaving Home, Fool on the Hill, Hey Jude, Blackbird, Let it Be, Long and winding road. I think they both brought something different to the table. Which when you put those 2 songwriting signatures into a test tube and mix them up, you have pure gold. It was amazing that both John and Paul evolved into the greatest songwriters ever. Let's not forget George Harrison. He started to really shine around Revolver, and by the time of Abbey Road, his contributions, Something and Here Comes The Sun, were 2 of the best tracks on the album. I've always loved While My Guitar Gently Weeps. It's always been a favourite of mine.
Paul was the one to first be experimental and try out new directions. Sgt Pepper, which is commonly regarded as the greatest album in music history is primarily McCartney's work. And then just look at his solo work: RAM has got to be one of the greatest indie records of all time, and he didn't stop there.
John’s experimentation went into gear on Revolver, before Pepper, and John’s Pepper stuff is more experimental than Paul’s contributions. And Pepper was influential for its time, but many people don’t rank it as their best.
@@theonlyguiltymaninshawshan7909 I myself don't consider Pepper their best work, nevertheless it is commonly regarded as their best and it is "Paul's album" (as Lennon put it). He was the driving force in the Beatles, as all the others have pointed out many times over the years. It's all subjective, but for my ears McCartney is superior to Lennon on Revolver. Here, There and Everywhere outshines Tomorrow Never Knows imo. On the other hand, on Rubber Soul I tend to prefer Lennon. And while I also prefer John's songs on Abbey Road, it was McCartney who once again came up with something revolutionary (the medley) on this record. In the end both of them were great artists, among the greatest of all time imo. I have a preference for Paul tho.
@@hannahg8439 I respect your opinion. While “Here There and Everywhere” is a great song (even Lennon complimented Paul after the recording), it is “Tomorrow Never Knows” that is cutting edge and much more interesting to me. Typical Lennon pushing the envelope, a la his amazing “I Am the Walrus” b-siding the a-side #1 drivel that is Paul’s “Hello Goodbye.” No accounting for taste. Some folks want bubblegum and ice cream 24/7, other folks appreciate a wide variety of flavors. In my ears, Lennon is the superior songwriter and it’s not even close. I place Pete Townshend ahead of Macca’s drivel on the all time songwriting list. I’m in the minority, I’m sure, but Paul’s songs are by and large weak art. All icing, no cake.
@@theonlyguiltymaninshawshan7909 I agree. While Paul pushed the group into the studio to record after Epstein's death, it was always John that was pushing the band to new artistic heights.
Paul was not the first one to be experimental. Lennon with rain, tomorrow never knows, I’m only sleeping, Lucy in the sky with diamonds, I am the walrus, what song in McCartney‘s Beatles catalog is anywhere close to being experimental as these Lennon songs? Plastic Ono Bond is considered the start of the grunge movement. As far as the Abbey Road medley, John did that on happiness is a warm gun where he put together three songs together, Lennon was always the one to take the risk not care about conventional songwriting structures. Your McCartney bias is shining through, try to be objective.
Very subjective/impossible question to answer. But to simplify in terms of the Beatles, if we look at the Red & Blue 'Greatest Hits' Albums, John was perhaps the more dominant partner up to All You Need is Love. After which Paul stepped up a gear and took over. But all along both were writing mind blowing hits and album tracks. And then this Harrison character started writing classics like While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Here Comes the Sun and Something! I mean it's all just unbelievable...
I feel like if you only look at their solo careers John is the winner, but in terms of their Beatles career they are equal because they are phenomenal together and good apart.
@@SelectaWaynazz I love Paul's solo work, I just prefer John's. I didn't say that Paul was worse, it was just a matter of which one of the two greats I liked more.
Paul took a lot of crap in the 70s for writing sugary music but it has aged better than John's material. What I am wondering is when or if Paul will write songs with his older formula again. He changed his formula and I like it whole lot less. Sadly I believe that some of this is based upon the deterioration of his voice. He as at an age wherein even operatic tenors can't really hit high notes anymore. Expecting the kind of singing he could do even 10 years ago is not reasonable. He has to write for what his voice can do now, and sadly that does not allow for as much melodic lyricism. John sadly was not permitted to age. What's more a frank comment upon Double Fantasy, with the emotion of 1980 and nostalgia for John's better solo material waived, deserves an admission that it is not a particularly great album. He didn't end on a "low note", just a mediocre note.
When asked by Dick Cavett if Paul ever envied the "edge" that John brought to the table after they broke up, (or was asked how he would respond to someone telling him that his music was simple and lacked the edge that John contributed) Paul said (and I am paraphrasing here)..." Of course I lacked the edge John had, he had a very unhappy and tough childhood and I did not. The only way for me to have developed that would have been to gone through really tough times and I would never wish to give up my happy life for what John went through." Found that really interesting.
I would say they were equals. John could write beautiful melodies like "strawberry fields forever", hard rockers like "Revolution", and songs like "I am the walrus" and "Tomorrow never knows. Paul wrote beautiful ballads like "Hey Jude" and "Let it be", hard rockers like "Helter skelter" and folk songs like "Blackbird" It`s very hard to pick between the two. They are both geniuses.
Tomorrow never knows is john - mccartney contributed as did george and ringo. The backward tapeloops and guitar are not attributed to mccartney. The tape loops were a hobby initiated by mccartney yes, but the whole band made them over time and the ones used were chosen by martin and agreed by lennon from over 30 loops produced by all members. I dont know why some Mccartney fans seem obsessed on paul having fair share credit on johns songs.
@@eviticus5575 Because Paul contributed a lot on Tomorrow Never Knows and other John songs to the point where it is only right to give Paul his fair share of credit.
@@ewest14 okay, so in that case we can agree that Paul’s most inspired experimental work came on being inspired by John’s songs. Cause he sure as hell didn’t do anything experimental like that on ANY of his Beatles songs… no tape loops or avante grade orchestration on “Let it Be”, “Hey Jude” “Yesterday” or any of his tunes. Thus, its either all garbage (likely) or John inspired him to produce his best experiments (also very likely)
This was the most fair analysis of John and Paul I've ever watched. It didn't have a bias that I could detect. I tend to favor Lennon's stuff, but I readily agreed with his points about McCartney's greatness as well.
Neither of them would've been anywhere as prolific and great without the other. The whole is far greater than the sum of the parts. They honed the work in the studio in a collaboration that involved George and Ringo as well. It was all about the amazing collaboration.
On their own they were brilliant, togheter they were an unstoppable force, they complemented each other so perfectly that they could not be touched or compared
John wrote more Rock & Roll songs. .George Martin said their competition make them great.Paul pushed John not to be lazy they were always trying to top each other that creates a hit factory for The Beatles.
John and Paul as a team were amazing songwriters. However, when listening to the Beatles, I'm always drawn to Lennon's songs. I think John burnt out early, not because he lost his talent but because the Beatles experience became too much for him - he was too fragile. Life overall was difficult for him. Still, his bursts of creativity were amazing. That he could do so despite his personal demons makes him the better songwriter, in my opinion. And this is not meant to detract anything from Paul, because John needed Paul's support. I hope my comment makes sense.
It’s silly to go on and on about which one was the better songwriter. It all comes down to individual taste and interpretation. They were so different in their approaches and I think they were both great! One person’s “Paul” is another person’s “John”.
This type of question is truly ridiculous. It's as if I'm asking: Who's the better writer Shakespeare or Dostoyevsky? Like Lennon and McCartney, they wrote differently because their styles were different but they were both great writers.
Paul would have made it in the music business just based on his singing abilities alone. Luckily he could also write #1 hits, play any instrument he wanted, and he was cute as a button. Don’t you just wanna SLAP the shit outta him? Seriously tho, it’s a matter of taste as Paul and John both have winners and duds (like all writers do). I prefer Paul’s voice and all his best compositions go straight to my heart in a way nothing else can. His post-Beatles career spans literally fifty years and it’s a whole new world that I appreciate just as much as his Beatles tenure. Some people call Paul “the musician” and John “the artist” but I’d argue that Paul was both. He just wasn’t a “tortured” artist which is apparently, to some people, a prerequisite to make good music.
McCartney has always been my favourite Beatle and I have all of the Wings CDS but I have to say I think Lennon's songwriting is superior. Silly love songs V Imagine. or Mary had a little Lamb v Woman or C Moon V Startin Over.........I rest my case
Paul wasn’t into “moving” people or saying something deep the way John and George were. He was into singalongs and he was amazing at that. John had something to say with his art. Together best of both worlds
@@MartinJHenebury I agree Paul was just as moving about personal issues I'm much more moved by any of his songs than most of John Lennon's who focuses on large abstract pictures instead of relevant issues I deal with everyday
No time for fussing and fighting, my friend...and so I ask you once again.... It's actually a very positive lyric, not the negative one people almost make it out to be. He saying "don't waste time - work it out!"
Neither of these guys had met anyone who could write songs like each other. John was more experienced in writing than Paul early on. As they evolved they became more equal to each other. Paul was considered a more versatile musician and had a better feel for what would be successful. John was the Mozart of the 20th Century and less concerned about commercial success. John also took 5 years off after the Beatles to be a stay at home Dad. Paul had great success with the Wings, which was like a Beatles continuation band. John came out with Imagine, which was a complete 360 from his work with the Beatles. He was shortly gone after that and who knows what else he would have written. As far as song writing he is unmatched by any artist. Paul is an all time great writer and is unmistakable the greatest musician of our generation.
7:20 what? After Sgt Pepper, Lennon made Happiness Is A Warm Gun, Sexy Sadie, Dear Prudence, I Want You, Because, Don’t Let Me Down, the Plastic Ono Band LP and much more. He was always on fire. Great video by the way!
And “Revolution”, “Come Together”, “I am the Walrus”, “Imagine”, “Mind Games”, “Instant Karma”, “Watching the Wheels”, “Real Love”, “Free as a Bird”, “Across the Universe”, etc....
@@inmundo6927 Yes, and there are those who hail his books "In His Own Write" and "A Spaniard In The Works" as the works of "genius". here's the problem: at the time of Beatlemania, anything they put out was hailed as the Second Coming of Christ , but when you take away the hype, and read with an open mind, it's all nonsense bullshit, badly written too. Later in life, as he'd make off the cuff "funny" remarks, missing words, and emphasizing his Liverpool accent and expressions, I found them tiring, recycled, boring. Still, it's John Lennon!!!
@Kate I can't argue with that. Any other composer would have been roasted endlessly for his poor lyrics, but Paul got only an occasional slap on the wrist because he's a Beatle.
@@aarontimmins4161 across the universe!!!!! Poetic genius, I am the Walrus, A Day in the life, Strawberry fields forever, Norwegian wood, Lucy in the sky with diamonds, Help, Nowhere Man, Instant Karma, etc, etc, etc. Have you ever listened to the lyrics of these amazing songs?
Crazy that one band had 2 of the greatest songwriters in rock history. Also add a batch of Harrison gems
Dont pass me by
it was planned that way
3 really. George was amazing too once he started writing
@@Logicalhuman83 George was the best in my opinion.
@@ScarletVoodoo omg his 33 1/3 album is still one of my favorites of all time. I def think he’s up there with the others
True Beatle fans don't choose between John and Paul, or just can't.
I can. McCartney is better.
Harrison
Truer Beatles fans break it down by albums. Paul: Pepper, MMT, Abbey Road, Let It Be. John: HDN, Rubber Soul, Revolver, PPM. Tie: Help, White.
True, if I have to chose it’s John all the way, but why chose when you can have both
@@91dodgespiritrt McCartney is better in selling out and making cringy 70s commercial jingles. True that, Michael 👍
The sheer amount of absolutely incredible tracks that these two wrote is absolutely mind boggling.
The sad part is that if John hadn’t been murdered, I’m sure John and Paul would have gotten together again to write songs. One can only Imagine.
I don't think so dude,
John clearly stated he didn't want to make music in a group ever
@@Sg-tb7uu Actually he did want to get back together as early as 1973.
@@summer-turtle i didnt know that, but there is a video on this channel only, thst says so
@@Sg-tb7uu Not true dude. Never say never
With LSD there's no limits to what we can........... imagine.
As the great George Martin has said, Paul was jealous of Johns Songwriting ability, and John was jealous of Paul’s melody making ability
They both could truly do it all. Great Rock And Roll Singers And Writers, Great Pop Singers, and Writers, Great on Harmonies, Great Originality and Avant Garde, Paul is a great Musician. John was good,but didn't work hard enough to be great,as they were so dynamite together that their mediocrity sounded good.
@@vernpascal1531 You're misquoting George Martin
Where the he'll did George Martin say that?? You lie.
Sir you are mighty suspicious
hard rockers and beautiful ballads from both Paul and John. Both are great poets/lyricists. ✅Beatles ✌
It’s like asking, what is the sound of one hand clapping?
Can you explain to US mere idiots what the similitud of the 2 songos is?
Wow..... that's actually a nice analogy
No it isn't, the answer is simple the answer is PAUL MCCARTNEY
WOW! great analogy. Thanks
I always preferred johns songs tbh but both needed each other obviously
I agree
I agree too
I've always thought of Lennon as the composer of the "cool/rocking" songs and McCartney as the composer of the "beautiful/catchy" songs, but there are exceptions to this.
They were both capable of either direction, and both enjoyed raw rock´n´roll as much as sublime melodies. I view them as equals with extremely similar talent - Lennon´s tunes sometimes tend to repeat notes more often than McCartney´s, therefore seem to be less classical in style. But that´s a very minor difference.
Yes that is REALLY valid when Paul wrote the first ROCKER hit they had in the UK.
You people need to understand there are freaks like (ME) who know none of them was circumcised and that Mell was banging Pete Best mother, or that Ringo walked into his house and found George Harrison "penetrating" Maurine OR that George Martin wrote and played The Fool on the hill piano was written and played by George Martin so look the stuff up.
@@mickavellian um I can't tell if this is satire because these facts sound accurate...
Helter skelter: McCartney
Julia: Lennon
"Lennon as the composer of the "cool/rocking" songs and McCartney as the composer of the "beautiful/catchy" songs" i stopped classifying Beatles songs' this way the day I finally GREW UP and decided Paul's songs were usually better.
I prefer John Lennon. I love his creative and experimental sense in songs like Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields Forever, etc. I love his ability to present different, bold, distinct and unparalleled songs.
Yea mate John Lennon
Me too, perfect comment
Tomorrow never knows is mainly Paul's creation. He created all the loops and the instrumentals.
@@zaziou711 Where do you get your history or knowledge of music? Recording some tape loops is not equal to creating a song, they were an embellishment to a song created by John Lennon, and never were "all the instrumentals" created by PM - but I get it, you're a Macca wanker so all bets are off. Imbecile. Macca could not and would not ever write or even consider a song like TNK. Think Honey Pie and Here, There and Everywhere and O Bla Di - that's Macca.
Tomorrow Never knows is a Beatles song envisioned by Lennon.
They are the wizards of songwriting.
Just as good as each other but Together absolutely incredible!!!!
That says it. Just another thing to argue about. To think there are idiots out there who won't acknowledge the greatness of each.
This is the TRUTH. Anybody who picks one over the other is just comparing apples and oranges
They definitely gelled on the rockers.
@@hw343434 unless you compare Innovation and experimentation with music then John easily falls below McCartney with any critical analysis
@@eziospaghettiauditore8369 🤡 😂
Maybe one day someone will make a movie about Georges Martin and the fact that nobody ever put him in the debate. Without him, no experimental testings, no classical instruments added to the mix, no complex harmonies, which is exactly why the Beatles were so ahead of their time.
True.
I agree. Literally elevated John and Paul's work. It's utterly a weird coincidence in history John, Paul, George came together, grabbed the most perfect drummer for them and the one guy who could develop their stuff by bringing in classical but also fully understanding how to bring in new instruments, influences and what good experimentation is.
George Martins contribution to the Beatles is well know and yet also his influence and importance is understated.
Other than the Beatles, who else had success with Martin as a producer
@@joeyconservative Martin produced some of the best Bond themes.
No, it was all John and Paul.
Lennon/McCartney was the greatest songwriting combination.
Nobody else even comes close.
That's just a fact.
Quit believing in lies. Lennon/McCartney's songs (also those with Billy Shepherd) were all written by George Martin and a London satanic cult.
I think Paul was more musically talented, but I prefer John´s raw approach and his personal lyricism. John´s songs are my favourite from the beatles catalogue
I agree.
He was more prolific as well. Paul was responsible for about 65% of their hit material. But Lennon wasn't so driven to be always producing masterpieces; Macartney was always working on a song, or trying to get the guys to make the next album.
@@mikev4621 not sure that is true. 62-66 vast majority of singles/45s were John. After 66, there weren't so many singles, although majority were Paul.
John had a better timbre to his voice
Paul sounded flat at times.
@@danwall6662 I'm talking about total individual input into all their hit material. Their credits were "Lennon /McCartney, but the percentage contributions to each varied greatly- some were entirely Paul ( eg Yesterday, Michelle etc) and some were entirely John ( Ticket to ride, Nowhere Man, ), and a few were 50/50 , but overall, Paul is thought to have contributed more
No one was better then john and paul and never will be the greatest band ever and always will be
John and Paul were THE songwriting team all the way back to Mozart and Beethoven! For me I don't think it's possible to pick the best and unfair to the other!
Paul wrote 'Yesterday', been recorded over 3,000 times worldwide. The creative genius of both Paul and John were unstoppable. I think they each contributed to trim raw edges of each piece. The balance was the best song writing team in history.
Schubert-Muller, Rodgers-Hart and Gershwin-Gershwin were all better than Lennon-Mccartney
lennon adds an exotic ingredient to create a unique flavor
They were very good, but certainly not geniuses. Maybe brilliant, but not geniuses.
Macca for melody, Lennon for lyrics.
Still there are exceptions
A lot of Lennon’s work is softer stuff with lots of melody and McCartney did a lot of wordplay, complex lyrics, and rockers
*Lennon for composing chords and writing songs... Macca better for melody
@@flamingpi2245 including everything noteworthy about day in the life
Lennon wrote great melodies though, and Paul wrote great lyrics.
@@hw343434 except Lennon didn't have any unusual or elaborate chords with his solo output so that's obviously not true whereas McCartney invented a new genre of music with his first few albums
I prefer McCartney but this is a win-win situation and pretty much strictly subjective.
I don’t agree with you because I will always prefer Lennon
I do agree with you because I will always prefer McCartney
@@angiethebeatlesgirl228 there has always got to be the one who can't respect someone's opinion
I prefer McCartney too
John, every time.
They both wrote a huge amount of timeless songs and Paul's amazing bass playing is on nearly everyone of them.
It’s hard to say anyone was a better songwriter than Lennon but McCartney was absolutely brilliant. Your talking about the 2 greatest songwriters of the last 100 years.
"It’s hard to say anyone was a better songwriter than Lennon" oh yeah sure - Nowhere man, Help and I Am the Walrus" - real catchy - AND DEFINITELY DATED.
@@91dodgespiritrt Imagine if Lennon wrote something else.
Its fucking tie
McCartney have better music compose while John better at making Lyrics
@@heavensdoor844They were both brilliant. McCartney had to be pretty darn good to get the approval of John. John certainly was the leader of the group during the early years and Paul was deeply competitive with the drive to push the band. Ringo talked about how Paul was the one who kept pushing to record while the others were less ambitious.
@@gutenbird - Why would you care if John approved of Paul? John’s music sucked on its own and his melodies are typically awful. Paul will always be a better songwriter, Harrison too. I think the Bee Gees and The Beach Boys and many other groups surpassed John and occasionally even the Beatles in songwriting. The Beatles are legendary but John was a pretentious ass and mostly overrated. He contributed great songs to the Beatles catalogue but is he tied with Paul as the best in the last 100 years? Fuck no
both are masterminds when it came to music, that’s why together they were at the top of every chart
" Strawberry Fields Forever ", is the tie breaker for me. Featuring mind-blowing, innovative, arrangements. Fusing classic music arrangements, blended with baroque sounds & trippy electronic, studio arrangements. Sounds today, as trippy as it did, back in 1967.
credit George Martin for the 'classic fusing' arrangements... Either way, John wasn't satisfied with it.
@@inmundo6927 John not being satisfied with SFF was much later, in retrospect. In 1967 he was blown away with how it turned out - as were all his fans!
Don't forget the tape loops with the mellotron which is also Pauls idea
“Strawberry Fields Forever” is such a prime example of classic groundbreaking songwriting that that song would’ve worked in a hundred different ways. John could e played That on his acoustic guitar alone and it would’ve been amazing
My favourite
both of them are genious when it come to music.they are great
@@ismaeliglesias8594 So what? If he did the dude that took his place was even greater....
@@ismaeliglesias8594 he didn’t die
@@ismaeliglesias8594 Interpreting Every Little Thing the way you see fit does not provide any evidence whatsoever. Sorry.
@@ismaeliglesias8594 and I wrote Every Little Thing like that as a hint that in fact I'm also a witch. I know all that happened...
When you don't know what else to comment - "parrot" everyone's stupid over-used comment.
Both of them are good
@@ismaeliglesias8594 Yes, and he was replaced by some guy who was a Doppelganger who wrote Penny Lane,Let It Be,Long And Winding road...Oh Brother!
@@ismaeliglesias8594 of course there were 29 pauls
I'd go further than that. They were both pretty good.
@@ismaeliglesias8594 lack of evidence, selection-bias, cherry picking and such (like interpreting 'Every Little Thing' whatever way you choose.. ) DO NOT constitute 'evidence' of anything..
Furthermore, only untalented fools could ever dream that talent is as easy to replicate or to emulate, as this conspiracy would suggest.
I like both of their works ❤️
Hi John McCartney, i’m Paul Lennon
Without Paul the Beatles wouldn't be as popular. Without John they wouldn't be as significant.
Yes...
George Harrison: "Oh, forget it"
It’s a matter of taste but the quantifiable facts are clear: 1, McCartney dominated Beatles sales. 2, McCartney dominated other artists’ cover of Beatles songs in terms of raw numbers and the breadth of styles they represent. 3, McCartney dominated post Beatles sales and was the #2 artist in the 1970’s, won longevity battle. 4. Paul Simon placed McCartney in the top tier of greatest all time songwriters, above Lennon and Bob Dylan; Dylan said “Paul McCartney is the only one who truly amazes me.” 5, I love Lennon’s songs. For him to go toe-to-toe with McCartney and even make it a legitimate question as to who was better proves what a great talent he was and would’ve continued to be if a crazy American hadn’t assassinated him. 6, Lennon said McCartney was a “brilliant f*****g songwriter.” True and an understatement.
Well, Dylan has opinions just like the rest of us. His opinions aren't any more correct than a music critic's or even the rest of us. It's possible that he was in awe of Macca's ability to create melodies, which he wasn't as good at. In contrast, Dylan was amazing at writing lyrics, just like Lennon. This is just speculation though.
Also, it's hard to have longevity when a deranged person commits a certain horrific act.
That was uncomfortable to type.
Peace and Love!
It's true that Paul wrote many hits in the later period but John was writing all the hits from 63 up to end of 65 and then Paul maybe 66 to 68/69. I think John lost interest after 66 but I always preferred John for his voice and honesty in his songs. Paul was a bit too bubblegum for me.
Maybe you should count whose songs were more innovative. Most crazy ideas, even if added by Paul, landed in John’s songs. Best drums? John’s songs. Backward music? John’s songs. Tape speed variations? John’s songs. Voice distortions? John’s songs. Psychedelic and more poetic lyrics? John’s songs. Crazy experiments? John’s songs. McCartney kept his experiments, like musical collages, private, whereas John thought those innovations should take part in the band’s albums. His bravery was second to none, in my opinion. I love Macca too, to me the two are the f***g best, but people tend to forget these facts about JL songs and that’s very unfair. We can list songs if you want. What about a song like “Because”? Simply magical.
McCartney was always a poppy Cliff Richard type. I find a lot of his music embarrassing. Certainly not cool.
@@arcarsan Paul came up with the backward guitar idea (he’s also the only one who actually played backwards on one of their songs, Taxman). Paul is on video right after Revolver came out explaining that he came up with the backward tape loop. Paul helped make all of those songs more cutting edge, and Lennon helped him as well. Paul and John were exceptionally creative. The best of Paul’s Wings and solo work is extremely creative and musical. Don’t kid yourself.
This video is right. They are two different kinds of geniuses, and together made the band what it was.
It's hard for people who hero worship Lennon for being such a rebel and tortured soul and everything to think of McCartney as a genius too--because he's a more subdued and introverted genius (and hid a lot of his true feelings in a time when everyone wanted rock stars to "let it all hang out") Lennon kind of screams "legendary rock star" while McCartney is more of an "acquired taste".
Lennon/McCartney...the greatest most prolific songwriting duo of quality diverse songs in the last 200 years....
But only one wrote "Hey Jude", "Yesterday", "Maybe I'm Amazed", "Jet"....
@@91dodgespiritrt While the other wrote 'In My Life', 'Help', 'Imagine', 'Working Class Hero' etc...as I was saying...
@@blindcritic3309 And they "SUCK" etc ...as I was saying.
@@91dodgespiritrt And, who wrote such "classics"
like "Silly Love Songs", "Let Em In", and "Coming Up" ? Those must have been contractual obligation songs
@@91dodgespiritrt Ringo in 1974 to People Magazine: “We all have our fans now. Paul got the Teenagers, John got the educated ones, George got the mystics and I got the mothers.” That explain it doesn’t it?
I think that John Lennon wrote many extremely good songs when solo
Like what? I can't name one
@@MartinJHenebury remember
I guess I'm the only one who prefers melodies and more personal lyrics
@@MartinJHeneburyI used to like Lennon better than Mac., but these days my older self prefers Mac. However you must be living a very sheltered life not to be able to think of a great Lennon song...magine, I'm losing you, mind games, Watching the wheels, are a few.
@@MartinJHenebury Dude, that’s an embarrassing comment. Listen to “Mind Games”, “#9 Dream”, “Watching the Wheels”, “Woman”, “God”, “Love”, “Nobody Loves you when you’re down and out”, “Jealous Guy”, “Instant Karma”, Happy Christmas War is Over”, “Beautiful Boy”… you really think Paul and Wings are on THAT level??
A better question was asked by Greg Lake to Ringo: "How the hell did you guys make over 300 hits???"
And the end of the day i really do think the were equal...both geniuses who wrote the best songs of our lifetime...the competition between themselves spurred them on to great heights...unsurpassable...
When you don't know what else to comment - "parrot" everyone's stupid over-used comment.
@@91dodgespiritrt 🤣
In his book Summer of Love, George Martin writes: ” Paul McCartney has a sense of structure in his compositions that very few popular songwriters have ever had. He instinctively had much more musicianship in him than any of the others did: Paul had the makings of a great composer”. “John would probably have ended up as a sort of Lou Reed…”
In an interview 1982 George Martin said: “…John was inclined to leave things to us and do his rock n roll bits …while the music side was basically Paul…”
George Martin said John was the better writer than Paul
@@tonymccusker501 Beatles producer, George Martin, in his book, “The Summer of Love", calls Paul McCartney the most talented Beatle. His skills were effortless and fluent. John had to work harder at his craft, much like, according to George Martin, “driving without a clutch”.
@Tony Mc cusker "George Martin said John was the better writer than Paul" - ??? NO, definitely wrong, when and where did Georga M. say that? He couldn´t have stated that because he said nummerous times that Paul was the more prolific and talented musician by far. And that´s true. However, John had great initial ideas - and some of the earlier songs which were more "Rock n´Roll" were sung and played quite straight foreward by him (A Hard Day´s Night, Help, I Feel Fine etc.), but later he had to rely more and more on the others (Paul, George M., George H.) to finish his raw ideas and create a fitting arrangement ... especially with songs usually credited to him, like In My Life, Rain, Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields.., Being For The Benefit ..., I Am The Walrus, Dont Let Me Down, Come Together and others.
He often had problems to finish a melody, write a proper middle-eight ... or find the proper second voice to Paul´s melody ... On the other hand he made suggestions to improve the lyrics for some songs ... so I don´t want to deny his qualities ... and he wrote some great songs ... but "the better writer" - NO!
@@mp-dd7pn Paul's music was always much more advanced and complex than John, it's like George Martin said.
Paul in other times would have been a great classical composer, problably on the level of Mozart and Beethoven.
i think johns solo carrer was amazing, his songwriting got so much better, and paul kind of start writing more catchy songs, both were great, but if i had to pick one, john would be the one, by far the two greatest songwriters of all the time
Rolling Stone Magazine's Greatest 100 Songwriters of all time.....1 - Bob Dylan - 2. Paul McCartney - 3. John Lennon
("I'm in awe of McCartney," Bob Dylan told Rolling Stone in 2007. "He's about the only one that I'm in awe of.")
Rolling Stone magazine was a notorious Homer of Bob Dylan. They had the gall to choose "Like a Rolling Stone as the greatest Rock and Roll Song of all time. Wow. I love the song but it would not be in my top 100.
@@danielvolk237 Does that mean they got everything wrong?
@@johnsain No, but they think they are more hip and cerebral than everyone else who has a pair of ears and half a brain. Opinions are like assholes everyone has one. And that is mine. 🤪 IMO
Lennon and Paul are both better than Dylan
Reverse the order
Lyrics - Lennon. Writing catchy melodies that can sell miilions - Paul.
@@ismaeliglesias8594 No, the real Paul McCartney is sitting in his home in sussex and is laughing at your dumb believes.
@@ismaeliglesias8594 to be fair I have seen the comparisons. Apparently his real name is billie Shepard and he is a foot taller and has different teeth patterns 🤷♂️also seen some very sceptical interviews!!!!!
@@vinobinto4310, Yeah and I've seen the tooth fairy!
@@vinobinto4310, I did , that's why this is ABSOLUTE DELUSION!
@@ismaeliglesias8594 give it a rest it's become very tiresome this crap
As a solo artist they are one of the greatest song writers. As a group they are second to none.
When it comes to song writing, I think they're on par with one another. Paul's edge was his musicianship. Just like George Martin & Geoff Emmerich said, Paul can articulate what he wants in song. What he wanted a song to sound like. But when it comes to vocal, John definitely has an edge. Sure, Paul has a range. But John's voice was unique, it's iconic. More recognizable. It has a heart & soul & very convincing. Actually when I listened to NO REPLY...it feels as if John was stalking me. Though we can never understand why John doesn't like his voice. There's a lot of tweaking on his voice when recording his song. But to add. George Harrison has that 'pure' Beatles vocal.
that "being stalked" feeling was so real to me
The harmony on the bridge of No Reply is truly pro singing. McCartney and Lennon standing side by side at the same microphone is awesome. Same with Baby's In Black.
on "wait" Lennon is extraordinary
... Paul most defintely was a better vocalist than john be for real lmao
The two together were a phenomenon!
Lennon is always the best. A lot of people can write pop songs like Paul did, but I didn't seem to find another person can write Lennon's cool and rock song. Lennon's song is so simple but extremely cool, just like Mozart. His raw talent is the gift from heaven.
Ugggh. A lot of people can write pop songs like Paul BECAUSE of Paul. If you understand that you’ll understand that songwriting isn’t about just being ‘cool’.
Agree, Paul is greatness but Lennon is otherworldly original Genius
@@hw343434 Totally agree.
Because Of Paul? Or because of Brian Wilson? Lmfao, to say McCartney is the best Pop Artist of the 60s is a little convoluted, even when in comparison we had The Beach Boys setting up the score for The Beatles to speed run their sound evolution
No need to make this choice. When you get to the level of Lennon, McCartney, Stevie Wonder, Paul Simon, Brian Wilson, Prince, Springsteen, and on and on......it's a waste of time to choose the "best".
John is the Goat
John Lennon all the way.
It's only because of "Band on the run" that McCartney is even in this conversation.
If you take away band on the run , forget it, Paul would have NO legs to stand on in this competition
A very well informed, articulate and intelligent video you have produced. I think you captured the essences of both John and Paul in a very balanced and with appreciation. Thank you.
Both of them were genius, but i prefer lennon
Totally agree
@@angiethebeatlesgirl228 totally disagree LOL
Listen to 'We Can Work it Out' to hear the differences between their writing. The 'try to see it my way' section is classic McCartney, upbeat and optimistic. The 'life is very short' bridge section is classic Lennon, darker and more introspective. Both are great, but I always preferred John Lennon's work.
Paul wrote Yesterday,Hey Jude, and Let it Be. Plus he sings better. So for me he is the best Beatle.
@@dannyboy4140 can’t compare Paul’s ballads to “Strawberry Fields Forever”, “In My Life” & “Across the Universe”. Much deeper songs. As far as singing, John is rated higher but it’s subjective, both could do it all
@@hw343434 Paul wrote the melody for In my life. It's well known fact now. For example Eleanor rigby is miles stronger song than Across the universe, which wasn't received well either by fans or critics in that particular time. It's about how well you hit with as few bullets as possible as far as lyrics go. That's were Mccartney succeeded very well. Fool on the hill, Fixing a hole, She's leaving home are another great examples.
it's a completely subjective question that could never be answered. It's like asking if the color blue is better than red
Both they were great TOGETHER AND APART!
Together they're better than anyone else........'nuff said
When you don't know what else to comment - "parrot" everyone's stupid over-used comment.
I can’t pick a favorite loved songs by both of them but After John took his five year break I loved Watching the Wheels and Woman just great tunes
Both are great.
The best musicians songwriters legends of all time I think Paul always my favourite but both were great
Post Imagine, Paul was definitely the better song writer. Paul is the better singer. I can’t imagine John being able to sing Maybe I’m Amazed. That’s the greatest vocal performance of the entire Beatles and solo Beatles songbook
@@juliuscepeda9655 nah, John is ranked higher than Paul as a singer. Post “Imagine” John wrote “Free as a Bird”, “Real Love”, “Woman”, “Watching the Wheels”, “Beautiful Boy”, “Mind Games”, “#9 Dream”, “Starting Over”, etc…. Enough said.
@@juliuscepeda9655 Absolutely. People tend to forget how emotional and difficult that song is, it’s perfect in fact.
Lennon was the King of Rock. McCartney was the King of Pop. Together the best of all worlds
One they THEY'LL BE TOGETHER again! And they will shine forever!
They are both great!!!!
John was by far my favorite. Love both however
They were both amazing songwriters and on the same level but in their own writing genres, John normally wrote these sad and poetic songs that were mostly about him, Paul wrote happy upbeat songs that focused on the melody and rhythm of songs and usually made them happy go lucky songs, So I believe they were equal and that’s why they made such an unstoppable team because they had the variety that people could appeal to in all moods, If the listener was happy they could listen to Paul songs, If they were feeling down they could look to some of Johns songs, That’s why The Beatles are still talked about today and will be into the far future.
Both Lennon and McCartney were/are extremely intuitive songwriters. It seems they channeled what came to them without much filtering (which is why they were so prolific). This often led to very original songs. But also often led to pastiche type songs - songs that are quite derivative of established styles (though they always did them to an excellent level). In the early Beatles days a lot of the tracks are pastiche. Later on they produced a lot more truly original stuff.
In my opinion, Lennon produced the greater proportion of truly original songs. McCartney continued to be a master of the pastiche e.g. Back in the USSR (Beach Boys), Martha My Dear (music hall), Your Mother Should Know (music hall), Got to Get You Into My Life (Motown) etc. Not to say that Paul didn't have very original songs e.g. Eleanor Rigby, Hey Jude, but I think John brought more very original tracks - e.g. the basic templates/concepts for Strawberry Fields Forever, Tomorrow Never Knows, I Am the Walrus are strikingly original and different from what others were doing.
The Beatles are great because they combine these excellent new takes on established styles with strikingly original tracks. And that's what made them so widely popular: they were simultaneously very mainstream, but also very boundary-pushing.
Fans hate that bands don't stay together longer but I'm impressed that they can stay together at all.
Both of them are great songwriters but with different approach.Thats why the Beatles is a successful band ever..because of the contrast of Paul and Johns writings and contrast of their voice quality.
Also george and ringo
George's voice is a fusion of both of theirs and he arguably wrote 3 of the top 5 Beatles songs
Paul's dad had piano-bar playing style as I recall it, hence his own style of song influence...to me, they were equally talented . Perhaps their sense of competitiveness made them even better
You know who's better? When both of them are together
It's down to personal opinion really. I prefer mostly Lennon's songs. You've got to hide your love away, Ticket to Ride, Norwegian Wood, Nowhere Man, Girl, In My Life, Rain, I'm only Sleeping, She Said She Said, Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields Forever, Being for the benefit of Mr.Kite, I am the Walrus, Revolution, Dear Prudence, Happiness is a warm gun, Yer Blues, Hey Bulldog, Don't Let Me Down, Come Together. I know some of these were co-written, but mostly they were John's. I think Paul was the better melodist. He wrote some beautiful songs. And I Love Her, Yesterday, Eleanor Rigby, Here, There and Everywhere, She's Leaving Home, Fool on the Hill, Hey Jude, Blackbird, Let it Be, Long and winding road. I think they both brought something different to the table. Which when you put those 2 songwriting signatures into a test tube and mix them up, you have pure gold. It was amazing that both John and Paul evolved into the greatest songwriters ever. Let's not forget George Harrison. He started to really shine around Revolver, and by the time of Abbey Road, his contributions, Something and Here Comes The Sun, were 2 of the best tracks on the album. I've always loved While My Guitar Gently Weeps. It's always been a favourite of mine.
Paul was the one to first be experimental and try out new directions. Sgt Pepper, which is commonly regarded as the greatest album in music history is primarily McCartney's work.
And then just look at his solo work: RAM has got to be one of the greatest indie records of all time, and he didn't stop there.
John’s experimentation went into gear on Revolver, before Pepper, and John’s Pepper stuff is more experimental than Paul’s contributions. And Pepper was influential for its time, but many people don’t rank it as their best.
@@theonlyguiltymaninshawshan7909
I myself don't consider Pepper their best work, nevertheless it is commonly regarded as their best and it is "Paul's album" (as Lennon put it). He was the driving force in the Beatles, as all the others have pointed out many times over the years.
It's all subjective, but for my ears McCartney is superior to Lennon on Revolver. Here, There and Everywhere outshines Tomorrow Never Knows imo.
On the other hand, on Rubber Soul I tend to prefer Lennon.
And while I also prefer John's songs on Abbey Road, it was McCartney who once again came up with something revolutionary (the medley) on this record.
In the end both of them were great artists, among the greatest of all time imo. I have a preference for Paul tho.
@@hannahg8439 I respect your opinion. While “Here There and Everywhere” is a great song (even Lennon complimented Paul after the recording), it is “Tomorrow Never Knows” that is cutting edge and much more interesting to me. Typical Lennon pushing the envelope, a la his amazing “I Am the Walrus” b-siding the a-side #1 drivel that is Paul’s “Hello Goodbye.” No accounting for taste. Some folks want bubblegum and ice cream 24/7, other folks appreciate a wide variety of flavors. In my ears, Lennon is the superior songwriter and it’s not even close. I place Pete Townshend ahead of Macca’s drivel on the all time songwriting list. I’m in the minority, I’m sure, but Paul’s songs are by and large weak art. All icing, no cake.
@@theonlyguiltymaninshawshan7909 I agree. While Paul pushed the group into the studio to record after Epstein's death, it was always John that was pushing the band to new artistic heights.
Paul was not the first one to be experimental. Lennon with rain, tomorrow never knows, I’m only sleeping, Lucy in the sky with diamonds, I am the walrus, what song in McCartney‘s Beatles catalog is anywhere close to being experimental as these Lennon songs? Plastic Ono Bond is considered the start of the grunge movement. As far as the Abbey Road medley, John did that on happiness is a warm gun where he put together three songs together, Lennon was always the one to take the risk not care about conventional songwriting structures. Your McCartney bias is shining through, try to be objective.
Very subjective/impossible question to answer. But to simplify in terms of the Beatles, if we look at the Red & Blue 'Greatest Hits' Albums, John was perhaps the more dominant partner up to All You Need is Love. After which Paul stepped up a gear and took over. But all along both were writing mind blowing hits and album tracks. And then this Harrison character started writing classics like While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Here Comes the Sun and Something! I mean it's all just unbelievable...
They are both equally good! But personally I liked Paul's solo work more but that's my opinion.
Your opinion is worth shite mate
@@Kelvinack and why is that?
@@KilianMcCartney Because I'd rather kill myself than live in a world where to me Silly Love Songs is better than Mind Games
Lennon is my hero, but i love all 4 Beatles. And you are entitled to your opinion despite what junior thinks. Mccartney is great!
@@elizajohn5 I love them all too!
I feel like if you only look at their solo careers John is the winner, but in terms of their Beatles career they are equal because they are phenomenal together and good apart.
I assume you haven’t listened to Paul’s solo material.
Lennons solo stuff has aged terribly, Paul’s solo and Wings stuff is timeless.
@@SelectaWaynazz I love Paul's solo work, I just prefer John's. I didn't say that Paul was worse, it was just a matter of which one of the two greats I liked more.
Paul took a lot of crap in the 70s for writing sugary music but it has aged better than John's material. What I am wondering is when or if Paul will write songs with his older formula again. He changed his formula and I like it whole lot less.
Sadly I believe that some of this is based upon the deterioration of his voice. He as at an age wherein even operatic tenors can't really hit high notes anymore. Expecting the kind of singing he could do even 10 years ago is not reasonable.
He has to write for what his voice can do now, and sadly that does not allow for as much melodic lyricism.
John sadly was not permitted to age. What's more a frank comment upon Double Fantasy, with the emotion of 1980 and nostalgia for John's better solo material waived, deserves an admission that it is not a particularly great album. He didn't end on a "low note", just a mediocre note.
Lennon's work has aged terribly????? You must be tone deaf !!! @@SelectaWaynazz
@@joelleibovitch233 no.
When asked by Dick Cavett if Paul ever envied the "edge" that John brought to the table after they broke up, (or was asked how he would respond to someone telling him that his music was simple and lacked the edge that John contributed) Paul said (and I am paraphrasing here)..." Of course I lacked the edge John had, he had a very unhappy and tough childhood and I did not. The only way for me to have developed that would have been to gone through really tough times and I would never wish to give up my happy life for what John went through." Found that really interesting.
Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band doesn't happen without the genius of Sir Paul McCartney.
John was the superior songwriter and was the obvious best Beatle.
Paul McCartney had a #1 hit in every year from 1962 to 1983 except for 2 years
I would say they were equals. John could write beautiful melodies like "strawberry fields forever", hard rockers like "Revolution", and songs like "I am the walrus" and "Tomorrow never knows. Paul wrote beautiful ballads like "Hey Jude" and "Let it be", hard rockers like "Helter skelter" and folk songs like "Blackbird" It`s very hard to pick between the two. They are both geniuses.
the coolest part of tomorrow never knows, the tape loops and backwards guitar, have been attributed to Paul. so that one was definitely a team effort
@@colin8007 Thats how they often worked:)
Tomorrow never knows is john - mccartney contributed as did george and ringo. The backward tapeloops and guitar are not attributed to mccartney. The tape loops were a hobby initiated by mccartney yes, but the whole band made them over time and the ones used were chosen by martin and agreed by lennon from over 30 loops produced by all members. I dont know why some Mccartney fans seem obsessed on paul having fair share credit on johns songs.
@@eviticus5575 Because Paul contributed a lot on Tomorrow Never Knows and other John songs to the point where it is only right to give Paul his fair share of credit.
@@ewest14 okay, so in that case we can agree that Paul’s most inspired experimental work came on being inspired by John’s songs. Cause he sure as hell didn’t do anything experimental like that on ANY of his Beatles songs… no tape loops or avante grade orchestration on “Let it Be”, “Hey Jude” “Yesterday” or any of his tunes. Thus, its either all garbage (likely) or John inspired him to produce his best experiments (also very likely)
Great, gives insight in the incredible Beatles (hi)story. Thank you
This was the most fair analysis of John and Paul I've ever watched. It didn't have a bias that I could detect. I tend to favor Lennon's stuff, but I readily agreed with his points about McCartney's greatness as well.
Paul
@@georgemccartney5428
Stop this crap.
@@georgemccartney5428 stop it already
@@georgemccartney5428 boring
No doubt that together they were an unstoppable musical engine! On their own they never seem to fire on all cylinders!
Neither of them would've been anywhere as prolific and great without the other. The whole is far greater than the sum of the parts. They honed the work in the studio in a collaboration that involved George and Ringo as well. It was all about the amazing collaboration.
On their own they were brilliant, togheter they were an unstoppable force, they complemented each other so perfectly that they could not be touched or compared
Thanks God He gave them to us people of the world.
John wrote more Rock & Roll songs. .George Martin said their competition make them great.Paul pushed John not to be lazy they were always trying to top each other that creates a hit factory for The Beatles.
John and Paul as a team were amazing songwriters. However, when listening to the Beatles, I'm always drawn to Lennon's songs. I think John burnt out early, not because he lost his talent but because the Beatles experience became too much for him - he was too fragile. Life overall was difficult for him. Still, his bursts of creativity were amazing. That he could do so despite his personal demons makes him the better songwriter, in my opinion. And this is not meant to detract anything from Paul, because John needed Paul's support. I hope my comment makes sense.
I agree.
It’s silly to go on and on about which one was the better songwriter. It all comes down to individual taste and interpretation. They were so different in their approaches and I think they were both great! One person’s “Paul” is another person’s “John”.
i am in awe of John Lennon but Paul McCartney is at the very top of the list of the greatest popular songwriters. credit where it's due.
This is the best and IMO the most accurate analysis of the magical partnership. Thank you. Indeed LennonMcCartney should and cannot be separated.
This type of question is truly ridiculous. It's as if I'm asking: Who's the better writer Shakespeare or Dostoyevsky? Like Lennon and McCartney, they wrote differently because their styles were different but they were both great writers.
LENNON‼️✌️
How can anyone possibly say John wasn't a musician? Wow that's crazy!
I've always tended to prefer Lennon's songs
Paul would have made it in the music business just based on his singing abilities alone. Luckily he could also write #1 hits, play any instrument he wanted, and he was cute as a button. Don’t you just wanna SLAP the shit outta him?
Seriously tho, it’s a matter of taste as Paul and John both have winners and duds (like all writers do). I prefer Paul’s voice and all his best compositions go straight to my heart in a way nothing else can. His post-Beatles career spans literally fifty years and it’s a whole new world that I appreciate just as much as his Beatles tenure.
Some people call Paul “the musician” and John “the artist” but I’d argue that Paul was both. He just wasn’t a “tortured” artist which is apparently, to some people, a prerequisite to make good music.
McCartney has always been my favourite Beatle and I have all of the Wings CDS but I have to say I think Lennon's songwriting is superior. Silly love songs V Imagine. or Mary had a little Lamb v Woman or C Moon V Startin Over.........I rest my case
John always moved me more than Paul did. So did George.
Paul wasn’t into “moving” people or saying something deep the way John and George were. He was into singalongs and he was amazing at that. John had something to say with his art. Together best of both worlds
@@hw343434 Well said!
@@hw343434 I mean he was more into expressing his own personal feelings like in yesterday or Fixing a Hole
@@MartinJHenebury I agree Paul was just as moving about personal issues I'm much more moved by any of his songs than most of John Lennon's who focuses on large abstract pictures instead of relevant issues I deal with everyday
George who?
Paul: We can work it out.
John: Life is very short and there’s no time.
No time for fussing and fighting, my friend...and so I ask you once again....
It's actually a very positive lyric, not the negative one people almost make it out to be. He saying "don't waste time - work it out!"
Paul will always be the greatest imo but John too was a genius.
agree
Also george and Ringo...
George wrote arguably 3 of the top 5 Beatles songs, but yeah he didnt write much
@@Sg-tb7uu arguably 3 of the top 10, but not top 5
@@hannahg8439 top 7
Neither of these guys had met anyone who could write songs like each other. John was more experienced in writing than Paul early on. As they evolved they became more equal to each other. Paul was considered a more versatile musician and had a better feel for what would be successful. John was the Mozart of the 20th Century and less concerned about commercial success. John also took 5 years off after the Beatles to be a stay at home Dad. Paul had great success with the Wings, which was like a Beatles continuation band. John came out with Imagine, which was a complete 360 from his work with the Beatles. He was shortly gone after that and who knows what else he would have written. As far as song writing he is unmatched by any artist. Paul is an all time great writer and is unmistakable the greatest musician of our generation.
John, hands down.
These comparisons absolutely kill me. Two writing geniuses that were opposite, that’s the beauty.
Perfectly said.
7:20 what? After Sgt Pepper, Lennon made Happiness Is A Warm Gun, Sexy Sadie, Dear Prudence, I Want You, Because, Don’t Let Me Down, the Plastic Ono Band LP and much more. He was always on fire. Great video by the way!
And “Revolution”, “Come Together”, “I am the Walrus”, “Imagine”, “Mind Games”, “Instant Karma”, “Watching the Wheels”, “Real Love”, “Free as a Bird”, “Across the Universe”, etc....
The song "love" is fucking beautiful
@@hw343434 Gimme Some Truth!!
@@Jaestarexplodes and so is "Oh my Love" !
And "Working Class Hero", "Jelaous Guy", "Give Peace A Chance", "Woman", "Woman Is The Nigger Of The World", "The Luck Of The Irish", etc.
John was the better lyricist of the two.
he did write poetry..
@@inmundo6927 Yes, and there are those who hail his books "In His Own Write" and "A Spaniard In The Works" as the works of "genius". here's the problem: at the time of Beatlemania, anything they put out was hailed as the Second Coming of Christ , but when you take away the hype, and read with an open mind, it's all nonsense bullshit, badly written too. Later in life, as he'd make off the cuff "funny" remarks, missing words, and emphasizing his Liverpool accent and expressions, I found them tiring, recycled, boring. Still, it's John Lennon!!!
@Kate I can't argue with that. Any other composer would have been roasted endlessly for his poor lyrics, but Paul got only an occasional slap on the wrist because he's a Beatle.
@Kate Most of John Lennon's songs (especially solo career) were lyrically awful, few exceptions. Paul was far better lyrically
@@aarontimmins4161 across the universe!!!!! Poetic genius, I am the Walrus, A Day in the life, Strawberry fields forever, Norwegian wood, Lucy in the sky with diamonds, Help, Nowhere Man, Instant Karma, etc, etc, etc. Have you ever listened to the lyrics of these amazing songs?
Haven't got a clue about technically, but it's Lennon's words that truly gripped me.
I have my thoughts about the subject, but you said it all! Great video