4 ms·

I’ve thought about their composition skills a lot though the years, being a musician myself. I’ve come to the conclusion that they are more than the sum of thei

I’ve thought about their composition skills a lot though the years, being a musician myself. I’ve come to the conclusion that they are more than the sum of their parts. After they broke up, each of them were still pretty good and popular artists, but the magic was gone. None of them were particularly virtuosos on their instruments either, but, TOGETHER, there was a catalyst between them that sparked pure songwriting gold, and each of them knew exactly how to add to the song to make it just right. Add to that Martin’s genius of production and his own musical talents, and that’s what made them magical. As I watched in this series kind of fumble their way through some of the compositions, I initially often thought the ideas were less than stellar, but then I witnessed the magic of them building the song, together, eventually molding and shaping it into something beautiful. I’ve been in bands myself and have experienced some of this myself, and also imagine many other bands work that way, but The Beatles had an extra spark most others did not. Only a few other bands in history have had that spark and you could really feel it, e.g., Nirvana, Queen, Led Zeppelin, early Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd. I don’t think we’re likely to ever have that kind of magic in popular music ever again.

strunz 3y ago
Paul was most certainly a virtuosic bass player, and both he and John could be called virtuosic singers. At least by rock music standards.
- polishdude20 3y ago
  Hearing actual virtuoso bass players, I'd say Paul isn't really a virtuoso. A lot of his bass lines are very simple. He's more of a piano player than a bass player.
  - strunz 3y ago
    Virtuoso does not mean "plays a lot of notes". Music isn't an olympiad. Paul is virtuosic in his creativity and originality, note choices, rhythms, tone, as well as playing many complex parts in relation to the rest of the song.
  - rc5150 3y ago
    Not sure who you're actually referring to in terms of virtuosos, but I'm assuming you're referring to the likes of Wooten and Miller and Graham and such, but as a band leader I'd pick Paul over any of them because his track record (heh) of elevating the song, even with his distinct simplicity, adds more to the composition (more often than not) than any other. Sure, I'm biased toward a steady diet of Beatles and blues as my musical foundation, but even dipping into jazz, latin, afro-beat, etc, his compositional contributions are second to very few, and to me, that beats out flashy playing (even when it showcases complicated understanding of theory) every single day of the week.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
musicale 3y ago
I don't actually know what other (classic rock or other) bands are famous for actually writing songs together - that's an interesting question. Pink Floyd? Rolling Stones? Eagles? AC/DC? U2? Aerosmith? Metallica? Bee Gees? Fleetwood Mac? R.E.M.? There are some amazing pop songwriters and producers though. For example it's hard to beat Max Martin's string of hits (e.g. 25 #1 songs in the US.) Also many successful singer-songwriters from Bob Dylan (and earlier) up to the current remarkable success of Taylor Swift.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
telesilla 3y ago
>I don’t think we’re likely to ever have that kind of magic in popular music ever again. I think there are still very special amazing songwriters to come, the world is ever-changing and there are still stories to tell and songs to tell them through.

strunz 3y ago

Paul was most certainly a virtuosic bass player, and both he and John could be called virtuosic singers. At least by rock music standards.

polishdude20 3y ago
Hearing actual virtuoso bass players, I'd say Paul isn't really a virtuoso. A lot of his bass lines are very simple. He's more of a piano player than a bass player.
- strunz 3y ago
  Virtuoso does not mean "plays a lot of notes". Music isn't an olympiad. Paul is virtuosic in his creativity and originality, note choices, rhythms, tone, as well as playing many complex parts in relation to the rest of the song.
- rc5150 3y ago
  Not sure who you're actually referring to in terms of virtuosos, but I'm assuming you're referring to the likes of Wooten and Miller and Graham and such, but as a band leader I'd pick Paul over any of them because his track record (heh) of elevating the song, even with his distinct simplicity, adds more to the composition (more often than not) than any other. Sure, I'm biased toward a steady diet of Beatles and blues as my musical foundation, but even dipping into jazz, latin, afro-beat, etc, his compositional contributions are second to very few, and to me, that beats out flashy playing (even when it showcases complicated understanding of theory) every single day of the week.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

musicale 3y ago

I don't actually know what other (classic rock or other) bands are famous for actually writing songs together - that's an interesting question. Pink Floyd? Rolling Stones? Eagles? AC/DC? U2? Aerosmith? Metallica? Bee Gees? Fleetwood Mac? R.E.M.? There are some amazing pop songwriters and producers though. For example it's hard to beat Max Martin's string of hits (e.g. 25 #1 songs in the US.) Also many successful singer-songwriters from Bob Dylan (and earlier) up to the current remarkable success of Taylor Swift.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

telesilla 3y ago

>I don’t think we’re likely to ever have that kind of magic in popular music ever again. I think there are still very special amazing songwriters to come, the world is ever-changing and there are still stories to tell and songs to tell them through.