Eleanor Rigby

a reply to: CJCrawley

To be fair, we can only compare Paul and John up to 1979.

Lennon was more content to trip out than focus on music and that's what he did. A lot of his solo work feels like demos instead of the final product that the Beatles set a standard for. That isn't to say he didn't come out with great tunes. He obviously did.

I'm always fascinated by people who loved The Beatles but hated Wings. Quite a mystery

a reply to: CJCrawley

Ringo's solo work is laughable (well, you wouldn't expect much from a drummer, I suppose).

Hey, guess who's solo stuff has the highest sales... that's right, Ringo. Of course that's not a gauge of musical ability or songwriting talent but interesting none the less.

a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha

To be fair, we can only compare Paul and John up to 1979.

Aye, fair enough. And music is in the ear of the listener.

But Paul did have more UK and US No 1 albums than John in that period.

And some of John's post-Beatles work is really nasty - the first 3 albums failed to chart in any country except the US, and then was in the 100s.

Problem was Yoko, who had far too much influence on him and - let's face it - wasn't and isn't noted for her musical prowess.


a reply to: wtbengineer

Well, if true, that is indeed astonishing.

Ringo's biggest hit post-Beatles, for me...Thomas The Tank Engine.

a reply to: CJCrawley

Also to be fair, I'm a 2nd generation Beatles fan. I basically found a stash of Wings albums and Lennon stuff and had to judge for myself.

I wasn't alive when Silly Love Songs came out or whatever.

I still find Wings much more enjoyable than Lennon's depressive dirges. Mind Games is probably the best.

You couldn't ask me to pick a favorite Wings album. And I eagerly await Paul's latest studio album coming soon!