Your favourite Beatles?

[The_Radiation_Specialist]

The Beatles is definitely the best band that ever existed, IMO. They changed music style in so many weird ways.

I always liked George Harrison's songs especially "Here comes the Sun" and "something".

Being a teenager I cannot stand most of the crappy music made today. There are some good ones but I think no one yet can beat the Beatles.

[The_Radiation_Specialist]

oops, can a moderator put the extra "s" at the end of the title. or whatever is right i don't know

[C18H27NO3]

John, without a doubt, is my favorite.

[Gillianren]

Ditto. Can't stand Yoko, but John was a great artist.

[The_Radiation_Specialist]

I have my respect for Yoko. She has remained faithful to John's memories since his death.

And interesting to see George Harrison up ahead. I was under the assumption I was among the few who liked the songs he composed.

[Lianachan]

George Harrison for me.

[Chuck]

Paul McCartney, out of respect for the first Beatle to die.

[Donnie B.]

Paul McCartney, out of respect for the first Beatle to die.
Trying to get this thread moved to Conspiracy Theories? :lol:

[The_Radiation_Specialist]

He may not have died but he sure like using colourful language in his tracks. ;)

Listen to "Hey Jude" at 2:57. Use headphones.

[novaderrik]

the Beatles were ok for the time frame when they came out, but they just don't do it for me.
i guess i just can't relate to their music.
give me some Skynyrd for when i feel like getting back to my southern roots, some M.O.D. for when i just need to laugh, and some Metallica or SLAYER or Anthrax pretty much any other time. of course, lately i've been on a Cinderella kick- especially their more bluesy stuff..

[Gillianren]

All right, 'fess up. Who voted for Ringo?

[Tog_]

I went with George, but Ringo would have been second.

From my sheltered little view, it always seemed like they were the two that just seemed to take it all in stride. It seemed, to me, that thew way the four looked back at their time in the band was:

John never let anyone forget he was a Beatle.
Paul never got over the fact he was a Beatle.
George never seemed to care he was a Beatle.
Ringo may not even remember he was a Beatle.

[TriangleMan]

I voted for John because musically I consider him the most visionary but if I could only meet one of them in person it would have been George.

[Maksutov]

Nasty, Barry, Stig, or Dirk? How does one choose?

Oh, this is about the Beatles, not the Rutles.

I have always liked the Best Beatle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Best).

But of the Fab Four, John was a lot of fun due to his way with the language and defiance of authority.

George was a close second. I became a fan of his after seeing A Hard Day's Night in 1964, in which there's a scene where George is essentially kidnapped by a proto-yuppie who grills him about the impact the advertising campaign for one of his programs has had on the youth of the day.

George's response is priceless:Simon Marshall: If you don't cooperate you won't get to meet Susan.
George: And who's this Susan when she's at home?
Simon Marshall: Only Susan Canby, our resident teenager.
George: Oh! You mean that posh bird who gets everything wrong?
Simon Marshall: Excuse me?
George: Oh, yeah. The lads frequently sit around the telly and watch her for a giggle. One time we actually sat down and wrote these letters saying how gear she was and all that rubbish.
Simon Marshall: She's a trendsetter. It's her profession.
George: She's a drag. A well known drag. We turn the sound down on her and say rude things.
Simon Marshall: Get him out of here! He's knocking the program's image!
George: Have I said something amiss?
Simon Marshall: Get him out!
George: Sorry about the shirts!

[iron4]

Being a teenager I cannot stand most of the crappy music made today. There are some good ones but I think no one yet can beat the Beatles.

I'd agree that by and far the music of the 2000's has not the same standards of quality of the past, though there's a band that I like and has been compared numerous times with the Beatles: Oasis. I remember when I bought their casette "What's the story morning glory" when it was issued in 1995 or whereabouts. It remained my favourite album during some time.

[Serenitude]

John. We are idiealogically very much alike. Peace-loving hippies, and what-not.

[mahesh]

I am not sure that it's fair to pick one favourite 'Beatle'.
They together made / make The Beatles. They've produced wonderful music together. They individually contributed their 'bits' to the songs, to make a composite whole. I can't point to one favourite and say yeah this one.

and in my book (for what it's worth), Beatles beat Rolling Stones hands down. i do not much care for their music and i have never owned / bought a single Rolling Stone record

[jrkeller]

Don't like 'em/don't listen to them much. If I had to pick I'd probably go with McCartney.

For me the Beatles were old when I was a kid in the 1970s. I was more of a KISS fan.

[peteshimmon]

Well I have evened it up for Ringo though
it is a pointless exercise. I was thinking of
the film transmitted over here just before
midnight last night. I caught most of it and
saw them doing their first hits. And the
marvellous song "And I love her so". Not a
note out of place and so simple. And Ringo on
the Bongo Drums (if that is atill what they
are called). They were so smart and young and
neat. Younsters today seem to like folks who
look like they have just come off a building
site before donning their instrumments!
They were super and...and...sigh..

[Doodler]

I'd have to go with Paul. Actual post-Beatle career without using his old material as a crutch.

John and George were too bizarre with the Eastern philosophical peacenik crap.

[farmerjumperdon]

John. My perception is that Paul did what he did in order to continue making a living, and John did what he did in order to make a difference.

The result is that Paul remained pure pop while John always had something to say.

Either way is OK, everybody gets to pick their path; but for me they contributed very differently and John's contributions meant much more to me.

[Doodler]

Hippy zen claptrap has meaning? Someone get me an interpreter!

I'm also trying to think of any difference John Lennon made in the world, and aside from one really stupendously pathetic hippy peacenik chant anthem, I'm at a complete loss for any longterm contribution to society.

[KaiYeves]

I voted "Don't like 'em...", because there wasn't a "before my time" option. But I think it's kinda cool to hear what music was in at the time of Apollo. Imagine rocks. But I like songs, not bands or artists.

[jrkeller]

Hippy zen claptrap has meaning? Someone get me an interpreter!

I'm also trying to think of any difference John Lennon made in the world, and aside from one really stupendously pathetic hippy peacenik chant anthem, I'm at a complete loss for any longterm contribution to society.

Doodler,

I don't agree with much of what you say, but this is dead on.

[Gillianren]

The Beatles, as a group, changed the face of music. This is true whether you like their music or not. John Lennon showed that you could be both a rock musician and an intelligent human being. And the poor thing was battling J. Edgar Hoover at the same time.

As to "before my time," they're before mine, too. I don't remember a living John Lennon, only finding out (a few days after my fourth birthday) that he was dead. It hasn't stopped my enjoyment of them any more than the centuries between us have stopped my enjoyment of Bach.

[Casus_belli]

John for me. Working class hero is a classic song.

I do remember the whole beatle-mania thing. I was kinda mystified by it but as I was only 8 years old when the beatles split I didnt really apprieciate their music until I was 13 or 14.

[phaishazamkhan]

I want to hijack and ask this question.

Who do you think will outlive the other? Ringo or Paul?

My money's on Ringo.

[Donnie B.]

On the John vs. Paul front, I remember reading a good description of the difference between them as songwriters. I don't recall it verbatim, but here's the gist:

Paul wrote novels; his songs are generally little made-up stories.

John wrote non-fiction; his songs reflect his actual life experiences and feelings.


My vote goes to John, though I gave serious consideration to George. In many ways I think he had the most meaningful post-Beatle career. If you have a chance, buy or rent the "Concert for George" DVD. It's a tribute in which many truly great rock musicians performed Harrison's music in an amazing live concert. You'll be astonished at the number of outstanding songs.

In the end, though, I gave the nod to John, who was clearly the most intellectually ambitious member of the group. His mark on music history is the equal of any of the great masters of the past.

Incidentally, I recently picked up my old guitar and began playing again. The first thing I did was pull out my old Beatles Songbook and revisit their impressive body of work.

[mike alexander]

Doodler wrote:
I'm also trying to think of any difference John Lennon made in the world, and aside from one really stupendously pathetic hippy peacenik chant anthem, I'm at a complete loss for any longterm contribution to society.

He wrote some good songs.
And where will you be in a hundred years, Ozymandias?

[Frantic Freddie]

I voted Ringo,I'm a drummer myself & I've always thought he got a bad rap.

He's actually a pretty good drummer,in the context of their music.

I've heard all the crap,"He didn't know how to play when they started!"...well,no,he was already playing with a well-established & popular band.The other guys welcomed his contributions,as Best could only pound out straight 4/4 beats & couldn't handle the time changes,fills,accents & breaks that John & Paul were writing into their songs.

He was a sickly child,but never let it get him down,he developed a sense of humor to deal with it.

But deep down in my soul,there'll always be that little nugget of envy & hate...he got to Barbara Bach before I did ;)

[phaishazamkhan]

I voted for Ringo. Second choice would've been John because he didn't get the chance to continue competing with Paul with creations and contributions. Even tho Lennon was a layabout house husband, he did write many great songs besides a "hippy peacenik chant anthem". Third choice would be George because he didn't write nursery rhymes and finally there's Pete Best who filled in on drums until they found Ringo.

[SeanF]

He was a sickly child,but never let it get him down,he developed a sense of humor to deal with it.

But deep down in my soul,there'll always be that little nugget of envy & hate...he got to Barbara Bach before I did ;)
I voted for Ringo, too, and his apparent sense of humor and not taking himself too seriously was a big reason why.

Heck, the greatest contribution any of the Beatles ever made to popular culture was this (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082146/).

;)