Would you like John, Paul, George, and Ringo based solely on their solo work?

No, I still see their solo careers as post-coital things, where none of them made any essential music and pretty much lived on their reputations after 1973. Lennon comes off best as he didn't have to produce music in the 80s, a painful decade for all ex-Beatles and 60s acts in general.

 

I collect all of the solo albums, but that was mainly because they were once The Beatles. I think I would have still bought Paul's records anyway because he was a good hit maker, and just had so many great songs when I was a kid. The same for John's best solo songs. I'm pretty sure I would have still loved "My Sweet Lord" and "Give Me Love" by George, had there never been a Beatles. Ringo also had great commercial singles when I was a kid, like "It Don't Come Easy" and "Photograph" - so I'm sure I would have liked those too, regardless. One thing is, I probably wouldn't have felt a need to be a "completest" and have EVERY album.

 

Good point, but that gets us into another area. I'm just going by the songs as they did come out.

 

But when he started out solo he had more hits than George and John...

 

I know, amazing isn't it?

 

George and Paul - I would want their albums.
Ringo - a one disc comp
John - a comp, maybe one or two of his best albums

Wait a second... this is real life, I need to think harder

 

Or maybe more people WOULD pay a lot more attention to it, since so many are prejudiced against it because "it's not Beatle Paul".

 

I think it's fair to say that Paul, at least, went way beyond his Beatles Boundaries, and did well re-inventing himself with Wings in the '70s. And without help from the others.

 

I was a kid in the '70s, and I bought the MIND GAMES single, and loved WHATEVER GETS YOU THROUGH THE NIGHT and #9 DREAM. John retired from music for five years after this, as we know... I think it's a real shame and disservice how John gets marginalized and forgotten a lot, just because he was taken from us in an untimely fashion 34 years ago. This didn't give Lennon much of a chance to "compete" with McCartney.

 

Some of his songs are just as good, definitely. Some are even better, But of ccourse in order to be aware of them, one must actually listen to every track of every album. If they do and are still of the same generic conclusion, then they're just Beatle-Biased.

 

I got to enjoy George Harrison's music in the 80s first, through his solo work. I figured I might want to check out the solo work of his former bandmates, too, because I liked his so much.

 

I don't think Paul wrote a single solo song that out shinned any of his work with the Beatles. Not to say that some of his solo stuff isn't great but nothing beats Eleanor Rigby, Penny Lane etc... The same can be said about Johnn Lennon too except for maybe Imagine which I think is his greatest song he ever wrote. George Harrison wrote his greatest songs with the Beatles as well.
I think anyone that says any of The Beatles solo stuff is better than what they did as a group is only up to ones opinion like all music is.
The only solo work I get into is George Harrison. If you take his top 2 songs from all of his solo albums just like his Beatles share, you get a really great album that outshines what the others did as a whole. I know I will get blasted with the people wearing the "I love Paul buttons" crowd.
I only wish George came out with an all Ukulele album like Eddie Vedder did a few years ago before George passed. There has to be tape of just him and his ukulele somewhere Dhani.

 

If Wings count as solo Paul, then yes, I still would have liked them. But I prolly wouldn't have cared much for any of the other solo stuff. Well, I actually DO not care...

 

"3 Legs" out shins all his Beatles work.

 

Maybe I'm Amazed is a great song. Up there with Penny Lane, Yesterday, etc. imo.

 

Paul yes for the long haul. RAM would have made me a forever fan.
George yes for a few albums.
John maybe - POB and a Greatest Hits would suffice.
Ringo probably not except for a Greatest Hits.

 

Not sure they would have solo careers, without being in the beatles.

Not that any are horrible, per se, but honestly, simply being in the beatles seems to be the over riding reason they have solo careers.

Honestly while all did some good stuff, I see them as having a couple albums and being forgotten.

Simply being a beatle, draws many to their solo careers, far more than other artists that were just as good and forgotten mostly years ago.

 

By a factor of three.

 

I have a minimal interest in their solo careers as is... Band on the Run, Rock 'n' Roll, 2 Lennon compilations and All Things Must Pass are all I own. Would that have been different without the Beatles preceding them? Yes, I would not have bought ATMP. Otherwise, that seems about right. Oh, and I see that I've slighted Ringo, so I need to get a comp of his.

 

You don't think "Maybe I'm Amazed" out-shined "All Together Now"?

"Jet" did not out-shine "What You're Doing"? (I like WYD..)

"Somedays" does not out-shine "PS I Love You"? (I love "PS")..

 

Liking the beatles, creates a bias, where you view their work far differently, than if they had no connection at all to a group you already like.....

If it was some random guy "Joe smith", his work would be viewed far differently.....

 

When I was growing up in the 70s Paul Mccartneys solo stuff was all over the radio waves and was good and popular. I'm a fan of his career all through Wings and not so much at all afterwards. Always thought Lennons solo music strange and never really connected to it so I would have forgotten him long ago if not for the FREAKIN genius he was during the Beatles era! George and Ringo in my estimation had equal amounts of notable hits after the Beatles.... In other words, not many and their combined best efforts would have filled precisely 1/2 an lp. So for my money only Paul and Lennon would have stood the test of time solely on their individual efforts.

 

Not necessarily. I grew up in the early '70s without "Beatle Bias". I liked new singles such as "Uncle Albert", "My Sweet Lord", "It Don't Come Easy", "Mind Games, and "Photograph". I didn't even associate these fine songs with "Beatles".

I became a diehard Beatlefan around 1975, but had not gotten to REVOLVER yet... so when they re-released "Got To Get You Into My Life", I thought it was a Wings song.

 

Always amazes me that you seem to know more about my own thoughts than I do.

Hey, I'm unsure of what I should have for breakfast today...can you tell me what I should eat? Thanks, bud!

 

As a soon to be guitar player in the mid 70s I adored the guitar break in Got to Get You Into My Life. For years the hairs on my head would stand up at the utter genius of the riff and more importantly the guitar sound. The other amazing thing was the flipside of the 45 it was on which was Helter Skelter!