Am I the only one who doesnt care for the Beatles' solo efforts?

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

Okay, I will bite.

Yes, perhaps an argument can be made that their group efforts were better than their individual efforts in general. But the way you phrased your question in the thread title was an open invitation for a curt negative reply (or affirmative, since your question was "Am I the only one...").

I don't know your age or your background but Paul McCartney was the second or third most successful musician of the 70's by himself (I saw this on a American Top 40 special show). Lennon's Starting Over, I believe, was one of the top selling (if not THE top selling) album of 1980 or 1981 (I now can't remember the year). Lennon's song "Imagine" was the fastest to climb the charts to number 3 ever. McCartney's tune "Mull of Kintyre" (I am so bad with spelling), I understand, was the biggest selling single ever up to that point in the U.K. All this success (for well over 10 years after the breakup) can't be just people robotically buying their stuff because of their Beatles name, I would imagine (no pun intended).

If you rephrase the title of your thread, and really ask what you want to know, perhaps you will get a more intelligent response out of the folks here.

Don't shoot me, please. It is just a suggestion.

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

I find Lennon's solo career quite disappointing, actually. A few great tracks and a lot of average-to-dull ones. His records were never produced very well, and his singing wasn't as good as it was in the Beatles -- weaker and thinner.

I have gotten to like George's solo records more as I've gotten older; I used to think they were too MOR. I think, though, that in the end it was proven that in some odd way being repressed by John and Paul was actually good for George's creativity -- after he cleared his backlog with "All Things Must Pass" he seemed to struggle for inspiration much of the time, though records like "Material World" and "33 1/3" are generally good. He might have been better off stuck in the Beatles and releasing three songs at a time.

I've always felt a musical kinship with Paul so I enjoy his solo career, inconsistent as it is. I feel like he kept releasing the same number of good songs every year -- it's just that they were accompanied by a bunch of lesser Paul McCartney songs rather than a bunch of John Lennon and George Harrison songs.

Um... I like some of the songs on "Ringo."

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

I think The Beatles music got better and better up 'til the end. But as Paul once said they also came full circle and anything else they did would have been repeating themselves.

As for their solo careers sure they had their highs and lows, but a lot fewer lows than many artists that decide to go solo after great achievements in top league groups.

I'll always love most of their solo efforts, but I doubt there's anybody that loves 'em all.

Just my 2 cents for the day.

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

Another thing I like about the solo albums is the fact that they are solo voices. An entire album of Lennon signing, Harrison singing, etc. With the Beatles it was John and Paul back and forth, Harrion would have a couple and Ring may have one.

Of course when the other members of Wings has a vocal on one of the albums, people complain.

Hhhmmmm, maybe if the Beatles stayed together "Fly" could have been prevented. Just seeing if anyone was paying attention (honestly, I've never heard it)

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

You'd be the one....

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

...And that's just for starters...

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

I gotta admit, yes indeed, the heyday of Beatles solo recordings occured in the 70's, and they are too 70's for my tastes. None as 70's as the self titled George Harrison! Man, that is just so 70's!

I like "Back To The Egg" however, one of the best recordings ever.

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

No. It's too Phil Spector.

 

I'm a big fan of the solo works. I even love a lot of the albums that other people dismiss, like Dark Horse and McCartney II.

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

"Hate"? yikes!

yes you probably are the only one. At least two "Beatles-worthy" efforts could be cobbled together from various solo tracks, efforts that would surpass Let It Be at the least. The only problem is the inconsistent production.

 

I like much of George's solo stuff as well as Pauls. Its Johns solo efforts I really havent cared much for.

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

Heh. Well, if you read the amazon reviews half the reviewers give it 1 star and the other half give it 5 stars. It seems to be a love it or hate it album.

 

While everyone is entitled to their own opinion, this post seems VERY misguided. I can't possibly conceive that someone says they loved the Beatles...and hates ALL their collective solo work. It's makes no sense. Seriously, I think threads like this are unnecessary and surely will fan the flaming wars. So, 70's, 80's, 90's and music of this century is dated, but music from the 60's is not. PLEASE!! And yea, they should have all given up music while they were still in their 20's. Sorry, but that is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen written on SHF. Ron.

 

I'm really glad they kept on doing their own thing. They still had a lot of music left in them. You can't ask an artist to just shut off the faucet.

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

The post itself should be closed. He used the word "hate" to describe his feelings towards all of their solo material. I seriously think it was done to cause a ruckus.. and nothing else. Ron

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

Wild Life is a great album??

 

And so are threadcraps.

Let's keep this thread from getting ugly.

Thanks.

 

Re: Am I the only one who hates the Beatles' solo efforts?

I am so glad you asked. . .

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=82834

Engineered and recorded by the fine folks who gave us "Thrillington" - one I forgot to put on my list.

 

I am glad the thread title has been changed to invite more constructive responses rather than emotional.

 

I don't care for most of the music made by the Beatles after they broke up. There are a few songs I like, but most of it, no. I also think a lot of this stuff wouldn't have been released if not for the name of the artist. Can't say I "hate" it, but I sure don't like it. You are not alone.

 

I love the solo-beatles more than the beatles. But, I really love the beatles, so what does that tell you?

Paul by himself has some of the best songs and albums in history. Yes, including Wildlife and Mccartney II.

Cheers,
Rocco

 

Is it that people don't like the solo Beatles efforts or that it's just not THE BEATLES? Of course they are going to go their own way and do their own thing, but I think each Beatle produced works on their own that were every bit as good as the stuff they produced together.

If The Beatles had stayed together after Abbey Road, don't you think the next album would have been pretty good? I mean, look at all the hits on Ringo, POB, Imagine, Ram, and ATMP. Add a couple of more that they COULD have written together and you have a pretty solid album. I think they could have gotten along well enough to record it.

 

You know, I'm not overly impressed with much of their solo works either. Several of those albums I have NEVER purchased.

However, an earlier post gave me an idea: I'll bet even the "haters" could come up with a list of solo tracks that could be combined to compare to some of their earlier works as a "fictitious" Beatles album - maybe that should be another thread...

Tom