Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I'm not sure...probably Lennon's but this is brilliant
I'd probably say Lennon's. stuff like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl7wz4MLf84 especially at the BRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr bit and obviously this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CMdqWh_J8I&feature=email&fmt=18
who hate any notion of collective involvement in music.
"dude, why are you singing along? Just, like, stand and watch?"
you got it man.
I just love the way he sings the first line of the chorus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNMhPQoEbJE
Paul's got a great voice too but it lacks a certain edge/bite.
Oh dear. Time for your nap?
bitch is just a term of reference, like dame, or babe, or slag. No offenc.
I'm sure I read that he thought it was really weak, hence a lot of double tracked vocals on his songs.
Forsooth, I don't think you can pick between the two. They are both awesome.
He did hate his voice, he tried everything to make it sound better. Some of the studio tricks he invented have become standard techniques.
Though he didn't invent it, he just gave it that name, ish.
"woke up, got outta bed, dragged a comb across my head"
ruining a day in the life forever
Bom bom bom - by-i-yah,
Bom bom bom - by-i-yah.
I think Paul makes A Day In The Life. Especially his 'ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh' bit.
i like the music in that section, it's a welcome change from a downbeat opening, but i hate the lyrics and the way he sings them; lennon's words are so good at that point and it just sounds like mccartney taking an enormous shit all over the song, which i guess explains the "ahhhhhhhhhhhhh" bit.
always root for the dead legend over the living embarrassment. i was fortunate enough not to be born when lennon was embarrassing himself.
For the screaming at the end of Mother, his infinitely superior plaintive bits in A Day In The Life, and for ripping it up in Twist & Shout
due to having a more distinctive sound. Paul's is a little more boring. But to be honest, they're both pretty great. All the examples of apparently horrifying singing given in this thread are, when considered in the grand scheme of things - still excellent.
25 posts in and nobody has mentioned Ringo?
McCartney had more range and technical ability, but Lennon had more expression and raw emotion. McCartney often spanned an octave in a single line, whereas Lennon had more of a droning sort of quality which I prefer.
The answer is thus: No-one could have sung Back In The USSR but McCartney.
HOWEVER! No-one could have sung I Am The Walrus but Lennon.
I know it's a fence-sitting answer, but I have to say they go together like peas and carrots. McCartney provided the sobering Yin to Lennon's raging Yang. Hence why their solo careers never came close to their collective power.
but whilst the song isn't the best, I've always felt McCartney's vocal on When I'm 64 is brilliant (as are the backing vocals by the others).
McCartney's vocals on most of Sgt Pepper are brilliant actually.
But Paul's was good too. Helter Skelter - hmmmm!
Over Paul in 'standard mode' any day. But there are quite a few cool weird-ish vocals Paul did, like Rocky Raccoon. I like it when Paul really belts it too, but I don't really like his voice in his ballads.