Lennon and McCartney

Cringe

Okay rerard

Paul was obviously a stealth ftm. Just look at him. (F)aul, however, is not. The original Paul was replaced with a cis doppelganger so no one would find out he was trans.

Attached: 1548971779063.png (225x225, 7K)

>tfw they put that faggot Crowly in the Sgt. Peppers cover art

They each had different strengths and weaknesses. I wish Paul wasn't such a boomer.

>comparing poo poo to doo doo

They ultimately balanced eachother perfectly. John was great at cleaning up bad lyrics, he came up with "you know what I mean" in I Saw Her Standing There, replacing "she was never a beauty queen" (a terrible line). He came up with "attracts me like no other lover" for George's song Something. He was good at that. Paul has a ton of songs that need little cleanups. He has a song that goes
>I Know I Was A Crazy Fool
>For Treating You The Way I Did
>But Something Took Hold Of Me
>And I Acted Like A Dustbin Lid
John would have put a stop to that right away.
Paul could clean up Johns lyrics too. Sexy Sadie is a satire of the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi being a sex pervert. It originally went "Maharishi you little shit, who the fuck do you think you are? who the fuck do you think you AAAAARRREE? Oh you cunt." Paul convinced him to be more subtle. John was very direct, and Paul was very subtle, in certain respects. Compare "Too Many People" to "How Do You Sleep?" and see how even in insulting each other they differ
Of course, that's not the only way they complemented eachother. John's darker style mixed with Paul's lighter style perfectly. Imagine Getting Better without the "it can't get no worse" line. We Can Work It Out without the "life is very short" part.
Paul also knew very much what he wanted and could express it musically, John couldn't quite do that. For instance, Johns request for Tomorrow Never Knows was "make my voice sound like the Dalai Lama on a mountain top." Paul came in specifically and said "we should use tape loops like Stockhausen did in Gesang der Jünglinge" and he showed them how to make tape loops.
A Day In The Life is a masterpiece of combining Paul and Johns styles, which is why it's the best Beatles song. John is dark and Paul is light. John knew he wanted a gap and something in there, Paul came up with the rising crescendo.

I'd say Paul. Lennon's songs reflected his personality--he muscled his way through them, both from a technical and lyrical standpoint. His charisma and determination alone often saved him more than his ability.

Paul was much better all around, lyrically and musically. He was just as witty, if not more so, than Lennon, but wasn't as up-your-ass about it; he was far more talented musically, and committed himself to his craft rather than drifting further into a devil-may-care arthouse bullshit persona; he was pretty stuck-up and had a stick up his ass when it came to following the rest, that's true, at least.

But I'd say Paul, far and above.

>Paul
The White Album happened and sucked. Most of the stuff up until Rubber Soul was disposable pop but in general terms there's no amount of weed/vodka/Sharpie fumes to make the post-Yoko recordings into music. The raw Let It Be cuts make me cry sometimes.

Without Paul, John becomes too dark and depressing. Paul wouldn't let John write shit like "Woman is the Nigger of the World." Listen to the entire Sometime In New York City album for the worst of a Paulless John. It's screechy and poorly experimental and embarrassing. Paul would have fixed it right up, made it nicer, with some poppier stuff and more subtle political imagery
Paul has a treasure trove of shitty lyrics he's written thanks to being without John though. I already posted The Other Me, but there are more. Paul wrote a song called "Getting Closer," it's a great song, but the girl in it is named "Salamander." "Say you don't love me, my Salamander." John would have told Paul no. He would have given her a proper name. He wouldn't allow that crap to be released
The Beatles are so great because they're more than the sum of their parts in every way. None of them are the best singers in the world, George isn't the best guitarist in the world, Ringo isn't the best drummer in the world, and none of the four of them individually are the best songwriter(s) in the world. Collectively though? They are the best band in the world

Ringo
I WANT TO LIVE UNDER THE SEA IN AN OCTOPUSSYS GARDEN IN THE SHADEEEEEE

heres how it works Paul and John together were great because they cancelled out the shit parts they contributed by themselves they were shit

also I liked george way more after he left the beatles he had more room to grow

this

>The raw Let It Be cuts make me cry sometimes.
the raw "the long and winding road" cuts are just as good, its overdone in the original orchestration version

They took turns being better than one or the other like said Lennon dominated pre-Revolver and then Paul took over after that slowly, really starting to be better than John in Sgt Peppers.

But unironically, they were both amazing songwriters and singers who have an apples/oranges thing going while still working together.

based and truepilled