Originally posted by faulconandsnowjob
Maybe, maybe not. They may have been using Paul's songs or song ideas he left behind through the end of the Beatles. Faul is not the vocalist Paul was. And anyway, there was studio magic involved. Notice the distortion on the voice in "Lady Madonna" & "You Never Give Me Your Money." Faul may or may not actually be playing bass. If he is, then he's had a long time to learn how to play left-handed. It's not impossible, I suppose, if one puts his mind to it. It does seem like Faul is more comfortable at the piano, though. Oh, & Faul's songs suck compared to Paul's - JMO.
1. If Paul dies in 1966, then the material he wrote wouldn't take them much further than Sgt. Pepper. While they were prolific writers, you just don't carry enough backlog to contribute as much as Faul is alleged to. That's why bands sometimes have a great first album, that they had their whole life to write for, and a crappy second that they wrote in a year. Musicians don't like using old stuff or previously rejected material, it's like saying you got worse.
2. I think Paul's vocals improved as the got into the later albums. The two tracks you mentioned had vocal effects applied but that was part of the song creation process. The same reason that Lennon's vocals on "Strawberry Fields Forever" and "I am the Walrus" sound odd. They speed up and slowed down tracks. They used a lot of slightly shifted double tracks and experimented with mic'ing. I actually think "You Never Give Me Your Money" is one of Paul's best songs and vocals.
3. I have no way of proving Faul had someone else play bass, as they weren't touring then, so that is a possibility. Paul getting better at the piano is, in my opinion, more about him becoming a better piano player and writer. Also, you can see his bass tendencies in the types of piano songs he wrote. "Penny Lane", very bass driven. Same with "Martha, My Dear", focused on rhythm.
4. Faul's songs suck compared to Paul's? I don't know how you make that argument song for song. What do you consider pre 1966 Paul's best songs to be?
Have you ever actually seen "Let It Be"? They were fighting a lot. There was no chemistry. No doubt the others resented having to play along w/ the charade. The imposter could never fill Paul's shoes.
Band tension is always present, it doesn't make the Beatles immune to it. They were writing at least an album a year for almost a decade at point. They were all older, had their own lives and developed interests. It's gonna happen. Plus, what trumps all of that is the fact that they stopped recording "Let it Be" midway through and said let's put our problems to the side and write an album. Then they wrote Abbey Road, one of the greatest albums of all time (greatest imo).
And about those tampered pics. In the first one, Paul's face has been stretched to resemble Faul's more. Paul actually had a pretty round face.
The first place you lose weight is the face. Even a five pound difference will make your face look more one way or the other. The angle of the photos are also different.
