Calling All Beatles Fans - Saddo Boxing Beatles Discussion Thread!!

[BIG H]

I like The White album because it is so ecletic but so full of really excellent tunes. It's also quite deranged in its scope which appeals to me too. McCartney is producing ballads like I Will and Blackbird whilst at the same time producing mentalist brillance like Helter Skelter and Why don't we do it in the road. Not only that but also 30's style piano pop in the shape of Martha My Dear and Honey Pie. They are brilliant pop songs. Lennon is also in really good form with Sexy Sadie, I'm so tired and Yer Blues. But on the whole I think McCartney is a bit better than Lennon on this album. And you can't really argue with Harrison's While My Guitar Gently Weeps. It's such a good song and I quite like Piggies too, in a strange kind of way. Admittedly there are a few tracks you can skip over, but I think there are about 18 songs that you can call quality.

It's the best double album of any artist for me closely followed by The Clash's London Calling. It puts a beat down on The Stones Exile on Main Street, which I think is a bit turgid in places and unmemorable in others.

Nice post Buddy!

Agreed on a lot of those songs and in general I like the album, I just wish they had've conednsed it down and removed some of the weaker tunes.
Interesting what you say about McCartney being better on this album, he arguably had more influence on Rubber Soul, Revolver & St Pepper too, (definitely did on Sgt Pepper) which were obviously their most successful period!


I have never bought 'London's Calling' it's probably the only album that is recognized as an ATG that I don't own - just never got into the Clash - may give it a chance though as so many people rave about it!

The Lennon/McCartney relationship is always interesting to look at. People often bring it down to the level of saying one is better than the other with it being far cooler to say Lennon was better. I was of that way of thinking when I was growing up and having heard their solo work, but now I have backtracked on that a fair bit. McCartney seemed to get more active when the Beatles had become established. A Hard Day's Night was Lennon's album, but McCartney did come into his own afterwards and especially on the albums you mentioned above. I have just finished reading "Many Years from Now" by Barry Miles (no relation) and it tries to go the whole other way by saying Lennon was a lazy druggie whilst McCartney was the experimental hard worker of the group. I think that is too extreme as well. They were both incredibly talented songwriters, but there is no doubt that the pendulum swung on key albums in the catalogue.

London Calling is a very good album. It's not really punk, just another eclectic collection of pop songs with a lot of guitars. The Clash got a bit rubbish towards the end, but the first 3 albums are sound. I find London Calling to be their best.

Interesting stuff mate. I completely agree on 'The Pendulum swinging' part. I also really like 'A Hard Day's night' which as you say was pretty much a Lennon album.

I think together they were both great, apart Lennon was marginally better, but both of their solo careers (witha few song exceptions) were complete shite

[Gandalf]

Nice post Buddy!

Agreed on a lot of those songs and in general I like the album, I just wish they had've conednsed it down and removed some of the weaker tunes.
Interesting what you say about McCartney being better on this album, he arguably had more influence on Rubber Soul, Revolver & St Pepper too, (definitely did on Sgt Pepper) which were obviously their most successful period!


I have never bought 'London's Calling' it's probably the only album that is recognized as an ATG that I don't own - just never got into the Clash - may give it a chance though as so many people rave about it!

The Lennon/McCartney relationship is always interesting to look at. People often bring it down to the level of saying one is better than the other with it being far cooler to say Lennon was better. I was of that way of thinking when I was growing up and having heard their solo work, but now I have backtracked on that a fair bit. McCartney seemed to get more active when the Beatles had become established. A Hard Day's Night was Lennon's album, but McCartney did come into his own afterwards and especially on the albums you mentioned above. I have just finished reading "Many Years from Now" by Barry Miles (no relation) and it tries to go the whole other way by saying Lennon was a lazy druggie whilst McCartney was the experimental hard worker of the group. I think that is too extreme as well. They were both incredibly talented songwriters, but there is no doubt that the pendulum swung on key albums in the catalogue.

London Calling is a very good album. It's not really punk, just another eclectic collection of pop songs with a lot of guitars. The Clash got a bit rubbish towards the end, but the first 3 albums are sound. I find London Calling to be their best.

Interesting stuff mate. I completely agree on 'The Pendulum swinging' part. I also really like 'A Hard Day's night' which as you say was pretty much a Lennon album.

I think together they were both great, apart Lennon was marginally better, but both of their solo careers (witha few song exceptions) were complete shite

I think some of Lennon's solo career was really good. Plastic Ono Band is a superb album and Imagine is decent enough. Mind Games and Walls and Bridges also had their moments, but were too inconsistent. Rock and roll doesn't really count and Double Fantasy was a bit shit apart from the two main singles (who wants half an album of Yoko Ono? ). McCartney truly was awful in the '70's and 80's. It's tough to find a really consistent album. I think he gave it a decent shot with Band on the run and Tug of War, but even they have their fair share of filler content. For me Flowers in the Dirt was the first real sign of McCartney showing real signs of life as a solo artist. McCartney's last two albums have been pretty good too. I liked Chaos and Creation and Memory almost full was semi-decent. Flaming Pie released just after the anthology albums was also pretty decent as far as Beatles solo albums go. But the best Beatles solo album might well be All things Must Pass by George Harrison. The final disc is a bit shoddy, but there are a whole heap of great tunes on there. What was it? A triple album or something?

[BIG H]

The Lennon/McCartney relationship is always interesting to look at. People often bring it down to the level of saying one is better than the other with it being far cooler to say Lennon was better. I was of that way of thinking when I was growing up and having heard their solo work, but now I have backtracked on that a fair bit. McCartney seemed to get more active when the Beatles had become established. A Hard Day's Night was Lennon's album, but McCartney did come into his own afterwards and especially on the albums you mentioned above. I have just finished reading "Many Years from Now" by Barry Miles (no relation) and it tries to go the whole other way by saying Lennon was a lazy druggie whilst McCartney was the experimental hard worker of the group. I think that is too extreme as well. They were both incredibly talented songwriters, but there is no doubt that the pendulum swung on key albums in the catalogue.

London Calling is a very good album. It's not really punk, just another eclectic collection of pop songs with a lot of guitars. The Clash got a bit rubbish towards the end, but the first 3 albums are sound. I find London Calling to be their best.

Interesting stuff mate. I completely agree on 'The Pendulum swinging' part. I also really like 'A Hard Day's night' which as you say was pretty much a Lennon album.

I think together they were both great, apart Lennon was marginally better, but both of their solo careers (witha few song exceptions) were complete shite

I think some of Lennon's solo career was really good. Plastic Ono Band is a superb album and Imagine is decent enough. Mind Games and Walls and Bridges also had their moments, but were too inconsistent. Rock and roll doesn't really count and Double Fantasy was a bit shit apart from the two main singles (who wants half an album of Yoko Ono? ). McCartney truly was awful in the '70's and 80's. It's tough to find a really consistent album. I think he gave it a decent shot with Band on the run and Tug of War, but even they have their fair share of filler content. For me Flowers in the Dirt was the first real sign of McCartney showing real signs of life as a solo artist. McCartney's last two albums have been pretty good too. I liked Chaos and Creation and Memory almost full was semi-decent. Flaming Pie released just after the anthology albums was also pretty decent as far as Beatles solo albums go. But the best Beatles solo album might well be All things Must Pass by George Harrison. The final disc is a bit shoddy, but there are a whole heap of great tunes on there. What was it? A triple album or something?

I haven't actually listened to much of their solo stuff, that's going to be my next venture.

You know your stuff mate, we should have a top 10 albums of all time discussion

[Andre]

Here you go mate, right at the start of the Beatles, The Quarrymen> There's some interesting stuff on utube all around this vid if you head in there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jz6GI...eature=related


The world renown, Mick Green the best british (if not the worlds best) rock n roll guitarist passed away just recently.



Did it make the news at all over there? I would hope so.

Its funny how the world hasnt a clue who is behind alot of the riffs and writings ,its like Americas Carl Perkins; people say who? And the great musicians bow down to him as they did to Mick.

Rip Mick Green.

[lamble39]

Good post. I would probably have to rate Revolver and Rubber Soul as my favourites. Both albums are eclectic yet commercially sound. Personally find that 'And you're Bird Can Sing', 'For No One' and 'Dr Robert' are the most solid three back to back songs that you can find on any album. Just opinion mind. Also love Abbey Road. Would say 'Let It Be' is the weakest as I don't think it sounds warm if that makes any sense. I probably think this as it is well known that it was when they were at their lowest ebb. Though there are some beautiful tunes on there! Don't think they've really made a bad album really.

P.S - Would say War of the Worlds Or Songs in the Key of Life by Stevie Wonder would be the best double album of all time. White Album's great but not quite consistent enough.

P.P.S - to the post that said that Mccartney's 70's output was shite, Band On The Run? Classic Album!

[BIG H]

Good post. I would probably have to rate Revolver and Rubber Soul as my favourites. Both albums are eclectic yet commercially sound. Personally find that 'And you're Bird Can Sing', 'For No One' and 'Dr Robert' are the most solid three back to back songs that you can find on any album. Just opinion mind. Also love Abbey Road. Would say 'Let It Be' is the weakest as I don't think it sounds warm if that makes any sense. I probably think this as it is well known that it was when they were at their lowest ebb. Though there are some beautiful tunes on there! Don't think they've really made a bad album really.

Would agree with pretty much all of that mate!

Strange how Abbey Road is so much better than Let It Be, even though it was recorded after Let It Be (although released before). I guess the fact that they had all come to terms with the fact that this would be the last album, gave them some calm and insired them to produce one of their best albums. The Long Medley is fantastic!

[lamble39]

Yeah the medley's fantastic. Awesome drum solo! Dunno about you but I find that you can't listen to one segment. The whole medley has to go on! And did you know that 'Her Majesty' was originally going to be put somewhere else in the medley? hence the gap and sudden big note to enter it.