|
Post by NowhereMan on Dec 27, 2004 11:36:31 GMT 1
Paul and John were big rivals when it came to writing music.
But were they?
|
|
|
Post by Imagine on Jan 27, 2005 23:44:31 GMT 1
Paul and John were big rivals when it came to writing music.But were they? Yes. Yes they were.
|
|
|
Post by Beatall on Jan 28, 2005 1:52:43 GMT 1
No, I don't think they were rivals generally. If you take the music away what was there for them to be rivals about?
The music rivalry was a healthy one. I think they wrote better songs as a consequence of it.
|
|
|
Post by turn707 on Jan 28, 2005 4:59:10 GMT 1
I think they challenged each other...Like sports rivals..They make each other perform at a higher level because of the competition...Now..the question is...who made whom better..? I wonder..
|
|
|
Post by Dr Winston on Jan 28, 2005 12:13:37 GMT 1
I think they challenged each other...Like sports rivals..They make each other perform at a higher level because of the competition...Now..the question is...who made whom better..? I wonder.. Now, that is very interesting question..... Let me think carefully.... I'll be back,
|
|
|
Post by Beatall on Jan 28, 2005 15:24:46 GMT 1
A good question, but surely an impossible one to answer? 50/50 has got to be the best guess.
I believe they would have both become superstars even if they had never met. They both ooze natural talent, flair and originality.
|
|
|
Post by mojo on Jan 28, 2005 15:36:33 GMT 1
i agree, 2 musical geniuses
|
|
|
Post by turn707 on Jan 29, 2005 4:01:29 GMT 1
I think Paul brought more complete songs to the table... Not that they were better songs...overall....John ..stretched the art form more...making it a bit incomplete at times...commercially speaking..There is greatness on both sides...One of my favorites is Oh darling...A paulie number...And I'm so tired..from John...amongst others...The list goes on and on and on....
|
|
|
Post by Dr Winston on Jan 29, 2005 12:30:16 GMT 1
Paul was writing complete songs before John even started songwriting. Paul did have a broader musical knowledge.
John tended to work on an idea, a thought, a lyric, an image, and create a song. His music would then follow.
Paul tended to create his music first, and then added lyrics later. John made Paul think more about his choice of lyrics.
When they collaborated, they both brought their own elements to the song. There was a competition though, and it helped them expand their songwriting horizons.
turn707, said ' John ..stretched the art form more '. Which is very true. He entered into unknown songwriting 'areas', and in this way, he was more adventerous than Paul.
Paul is an excellent songwriter, who can create music anywhere and forever, but his greatest work was with the Beatles, while he had John's imagination with him.
John would write music as he wanted to, regardless of anybody else, and if he were alive today, he would be writing in the same style.
turn707, also said, ' Now..the question is...who made whom better..? I wonder.. '. I think they both made each other better. John increased Paul's imagination, and Paul increased John's musical ability.
|
|
|
Post by turn707 on Jan 30, 2005 5:58:24 GMT 1
I agree..it was a mutual reception of talent...Opposites do attract and make wonderful music.. even better..they made each other better...And it sometimes depends on the song..
|
|
|
Post by turn707 on Feb 4, 2005 3:56:00 GMT 1
Speaking of Paul..Can't wait for thr Superbowl performance...And he announced a US tour ...come September. NFL channel interview..http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/020305/sup_mccartney.shtml
|
|
|
Post by girl on Feb 4, 2005 11:09:41 GMT 1
Another tour!! Yippee , will he come to england?
|
|
|
Post by New York City on Feb 6, 2005 13:56:17 GMT 1
Paul and John were big rivals when it came to writing music. But were they? Yes! All the way through their careers.
|
|