Who has the better Vocal - Paul or John?

[Analog]

Opinions? Songs?

 

[IronWing]

John Paul II

 

[RSaylors]

John:
Strawberry Fields
Lucy in the sky
Across the Universe

I can go on, but that's all you need.

 

[JM Aggie08]

John:
Strawberry Fields
Lucy in the sky
Across the Universe

I can go on, but that's all you need.

Twist and shout!

On that note, the Beatles would not have sucked if it were john taking the lead on every song.

 

[Gothgar]

I voted John

 

[KeithTalent]

George!

KT

 

[Analog]

No Ringo?

 

[dwell]

John - Most character.
Paul - Most powerful/range.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

It's a toss up which of them was a better singer; they sound virtually indistinguishable on many tracks. Across the Universe (John) may be my favorite vocal performance, but She's Leaving Home (Paul) is right up there... I think I'll give the nod to John as the better songwriter.

 

[Farang]

This is like asking whats better, peanut butter or jelly. You take them apart and jelly is better in crepes, peanut butter is better with chocolate. But both of them are damn good, and better together.

 

[Mr. Lennon]

I accidentally voted for John....

It really is a toss up on their vocal abilities.

John definitely was a more emotional songwriter.

Paul's songwriting was more technical and catchy as fuck.

My vote goes to Paul because I favor his voice over Lennon's. Plus Paul didn't have a crazy asian bitch of a girlfriend.

 

[BUTCH1]

Paul, even though Michelle was sappy sweet I always loved how he sang it..

 

[rasczak]

I accidentally voted for John....

It really is a toss up on their vocal abilities.

John definitely was a more emotional songwriter.

Paul's songwriting was more technical and catchy as fuck.

My vote goes to Paul because I favor his voice over Lennon's. Plus Paul didn't have a crazy asian bitch of a girlfriend.

no, just a crazy ex model/ex wife. plus, there's nothing wrong with crazy asian girlfirends/wives. so long as they aren't yours.

 

[Mr. Lennon]

no, just a crazy ex model/ex wife. plus, there's nothing wrong with crazy asian girlfirends/wives. so long as they aren't yours.

Haha at least Paul's crazy bitch didn't help destroy The Beatles.

 

[ProfJohn]

I don't think either of them were really great singers.

But they were both amazing song writers.

 

[biggestmuff]

I thought ATOT hated boy bands.

 

[rasczak]

I thought ATOT hated boy bands.

hey now, this is THE original boy band. For that, they get much respect. (and probably enough pussy to have de-virginized ATOT a thousand times over)

 

[acheron]

Depends on what you mean by "boy band", I guess. They weren't created by a label executive, they played all their own instruments, and wrote all their own songs (ok, excepting "Twist and Shout" and a few others early on). And this at a time when that was uncommon. But yes, they were young men, and a band, so.

In any case, I think Paul was maybe a slightly better singer, but it's really close. I probably like Paul a bit more as a songwriter, too, but they were usually best when working together.

 

[Gibson486]

Paul was a better singer....

but John was a better front man.

 

[Platypus]

It really depends on my mood, but I went with John just for sheer power/impact.

 

[Gibson486]

Haha at least Paul's crazy bitch didn't help destroy The Beatles.

she just destroyed his bank account

 

[Analog]

I always thought Paul's vocals were more sappy, but I have come to appreciate him more over the years. I watched his Obama show on PBS a couple of weeks ago and I though he was great.

 

[Gibson486]

I always thought Paul's vocals were more sappy, but I have come to appreciate him more over the years. I watched his Obama show on PBS a couple of weeks ago and I though he was great.

It comes down to application. For a rock/pop band, John hands down. If you want to swoon a chick, then you need Paul's voice. It's better for love songs. If you just want to bang...you just need to be the guitarist.

 

[shortylickens]

Ringo.

End thread.

 

[Dufusyte]

From a technical perspective, Paul is the better vocalist. He was a choir boy, and the training shows.

John, meanwhile, like many great artists, does not have a technically great voice, but he has the raw emotion that will convey drama and impact. He might not make it into a choir, but he can sell a million albums. An extreme case of this type of performer would be the vocalist for Dire Straights - that guy cannot even sing (he talks all the songs) but there is something in his voice that makes it a great performance nonetheless.

If you want to talk "best voice from a trained and technical perspective," the winner would probably be Celine Dion. She won a boat load of international vocal competitions even before she became famous. I'd put Brad Delp of Boston up there too. Most people cannot sing the songs he did. Try a Boston song on Karaoke sometime.