|
|
 Up |
|
  |
Author: DayTripper1966DayTripper1966 Date: Aug 12, 2007 06:42
I don't like to use the word "solo" because none of their post-Beatles
work was solo, except the first McCartney album. They all had bands.
1. Lennon - biggest disappointment. Plastic Ono Band was mediocre;
Imagine was fairly good, but certainly not up to his Beatle
standards. He was the top writer through Revolver, then dropped off
some after than, and a larger dropoff after Abbey Road. If Lennon
were unknown at the release of Plastic Ono Band, the album would have
bombed. Without the Beatles fame, he never would have made the Hall
of Fame.
2. McCartney. First album was the best, then Ram. After that, it
was some good, but mostly bad.
3. Harrison; All Things Must Pass is easily the best post-Beatles
album, though the songs are too long. That was about it for him.
4. Starr - did better as a post-Beatle than a Beatle.
|
| |
|
| | 166 Comments |
|
|
Author: BlackMonkBlackMonk Date: Aug 12, 2007 08:12
>I don't like to use the word "solo" because none of their post-Beatles
> work was solo, except the first McCartney album. They all had bands.
>
> 1. Lennon - biggest disappointment. Plastic Ono Band was mediocre;
If by "mediocre," you mean "widely considered a classic and perhaps the
single most influential solo album by any of The Beatles," I agree.
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Date: Aug 12, 2007 09:10
On Aug 11, 11:12 pm, "BlackMonk" email.msn.com> wrote:>>I don't like to use the word "solo" because none of their post-Beatles
>> work was solo, except the first McCartney album. They all had bands.
>
>> 1. Lennon - biggest disappointment. Plastic Ono Band was mediocre;
>
> If by "mediocre," you mean "widely considered a classic and perhaps the
> single most influential solo album by any of The Beatles," I agree.
Agree. Plastic Ono Band has some stunning songs. Mother. Working Class
Hero. God. Isolation.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: JeffJeff Date: Aug 12, 2007 14:40
On Aug 11, 11:42 pm, DayTripper1966 aol.com> wrote:> I don't like to use the word "solo" because none of their post-Beatles
> work was solo, except the first McCartney album. They all had bands.
"Solo" Beatles means/refers to work they released on their own,
without the other Beatles. It has nothing to do with them having bands
as solo artists.
>
> 1. Lennon - biggest disappointment. Plastic Ono Band was mediocre;
> Imagine was fairly good, but certainly not up to his Beatle
> standards. He was the top writer through Revolver, then dropped off
> some after than, and a larger dropoff after Abbey Road. If Lennon
> were unknown at the release of Plastic Ono Band, the album would have
> bombed. Without the Beatles fame, he never would have made the Hall
> of Fame.
Pure speculation.
>
> 2. McCartney. First album was the best, then Ram. After that, it
> was some good, but mostly bad.
Just your opinion.
|
| Show full article (1.25Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Sean CarrollSean Carroll Date: Aug 12, 2007 20:22
> "BlackMonk" email.msn.com> wrote:>>"DayTripper1966" aol.com> wrote in message>>>1. Lennon - biggest disappointment. Plastic Ono Band was mediocre;
>>
>>If by "mediocre," you mean "widely considered a classic and perhaps the
>>single most influential solo album by any of The Beatles," I agree.
I'm sure that's what he meant.
> Agree. Plastic Ono Band has some stunning songs. Mother. Working Class
> Hero. God. Isolation.
'I Found Out' is another one that should be much more widely recognised.
It even has one of the closest things to a pop-type 'hook' on the album,
IIRC. (It's been a while since I listened to it -- it's been a while
since I listened to much music at all, actually. One of these days soon
I'm gonna have to have some marathon mp3 download sessions.)
--
--Sean
http://spclsd223.livejournal.com/
House: Doesn't anyone on this plane speak Korean?
|
| Show full article (1.05Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: GodzillaGodzilla Date: Aug 12, 2007 20:29
On Aug 11, 10:42 pm, DayTripper1966 aol.com> wrote:> I don't like to use the word "solo" because none of their post-Beatles
> work was solo, except the first McCartney album. They all had bands.
>
> 1. Lennon - biggest disappointment. Plastic Ono Band was mediocre;
> Imagine was fairly good, but certainly not up to his Beatle
> standards. He was the top writer through Revolver, then dropped off
> some after than, and a larger dropoff after Abbey Road. If Lennon
> were unknown at the release of Plastic Ono Band, the album would have
> bombed. Without the Beatles fame, he never would have made the Hall
> of Fame.
>
> 2. McCartney. First album was the best, then Ram. After that, it
> was some good, but mostly bad.
>
> 3. Harrison; All Things Must Pass is easily the best post...
|
| Show full article (0.95Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Sean CarrollSean Carroll Date: Aug 12, 2007 20:59
Jeff wrote:
> DayTripper1966 aol.com> wrote:>>I don't like to use the word "solo" because none of their post-Beatles
>>work was solo, except the first McCartney album. They all had bands.
> "Solo" Beatles means/refers to work they released on their own,
> without the other Beatles. It has nothing to do with them having bands
> as solo artists.
I think it's pretty damn rare that a musician actually makes every sound
on an album entirely by herself, with absolutely no other people
involved whatsoever, isn't it?
--
--Sean
http://spclsd223.livejournal.com/
House: Doesn't anyone on this plane speak Korean?
Cuddy: I assumed you did.
House: I know how to ask if his sister is over 18, I just don't think
that'll help.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: JeffJeff Date: Aug 12, 2007 22:09
On Aug 12, 1:59 pm, Sean Carroll hotmail.com> wrote:> Jeff wrote:
>> DayTripper1966 aol.com> wrote:>>>I don't like to use the word "solo" because none of their post-Beatles
>>>work was solo, except the first McCartney album. They all had bands.
>> "Solo" Beatles means/refers to work they released on their own,
>> without the other Beatles. It has nothing to do with them having bands
>> as solo artists.
>
> I think it's pretty damn rare that a musician actually makes every sound
> on an album entirely by herself, with absolutely no other people
> involved whatsoever, isn't it?
Not these days with all of the home studio equipment that is available
today. I've been doing it as a one man musician since 1977. You might
ask why? Well,
it was very hard for me to find musicians that...
|
| Show full article (2.03Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: O'Leary IIIO'Leary III Date: Aug 13, 2007 00:04
Jeff wrote:
> I can't follow the instructions well enough to figure it
> out. Dang, those high notes are getting harder for me to hit.
Slow it down while recording, and then speed it up.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: DayTripper1966DayTripper1966 Date: Aug 13, 2007 00:19
On Aug 12, 1:12 am, "BlackMonk" email.msn.com> wrote:>>I don't like to use the word "solo" because none of their post-Beatles
>> work was solo, except the first McCartney album. They all had bands.
>
>> 1. Lennon - biggest disappointment. Plastic Ono Band was mediocre;
>
> If by "mediocre," you mean "widely considered a classic
If it were widely considered a classic, it would have sold better. I
was disappointed with it when it was released, and still do not like
it much. It is not a bad album, but compared to Lennon's Beatle work,
I expected more.
and perhaps the
> single most influential solo album by any of The Beatles," I agree.
|
| |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
|
|
