Which Beatle Had The Best Voice? (In Your Humble Opinion)

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by saborlord123, Nov 11, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. saborlord123

    saborlord123 "I'm not a genius. I'm just a hard working guy." Thread Starter

    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Personally for me it's John. His voice sounds the best to me for a reason I can't explain. I could understand someone saying Paul though...
     
  2. Exotiki

    Exotiki The Future Ain’t What It Use To Be

    Location:
    Canada
    John

    I can’t explain it. It feels: sincere.

    Paul feels like he putting on a show
     
  3. saborlord123

    saborlord123 "I'm not a genius. I'm just a hard working guy." Thread Starter

    Location:
    U.S.A.
    Agreed.
     
  4. buzzzx

    buzzzx Forum Resident

    Location:
    Cal.
    John for sure.
     
  5. extravaganza

    extravaganza Senior Member

    Location:
    San Diego, CA USA
    Paul was certainly the most versatile, but jeez, when you have a band where at least two members had such fantastic and absolutely iconic voices, trying to choose the “best” seems kind of like a fool’s errand to me.
     
  6. smoke

    smoke Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago
    ^agree, plus they had George, and even Ringo was effective when need be.
     
  7. BDC

    BDC Forum Resident

    Location:
    Tacoma
    For me, there's John Lennon and than everybody else.
     
  8. smoke

    smoke Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago
    If forced to choose, John for me, because the harsh honesty resonates. I like Dylan's singing and Randy Newman's too, so maybe honesty isn't the best word, but I like raw voices. John could do traditionally great singing too, of course.

    Paul has delivered some of the greatest/most iconic vocal performances of our age, though. There's no denying it. If a voice from the 20th century is listened to by masses of people (if there are still people) in a thousand years it's as likely to be Paul's as anyone's.

    My money would be on Louie Louie, but that's another story.
     
  9. BluesOvertookMe

    BluesOvertookMe Forum Resident

    Location:
    Houston, TX, USA
    Paul, easily for me, although I like John's voice and George's has personality.

    (in before the lock) :D
     
  10. Somerset Scholar

    Somerset Scholar Ace of Spades

    Location:
    Bath
    John for me. But only just. And I like the combination of voices more.
    Having said that, I find his voice weakening during his solo career.
    Lennon 63 to 65 is his peak imo.
     
  11. JamesD1957

    JamesD1957 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Cypress, Texas
    Paul. In my humble opinion.
     
    Rockford & Roll and Paper Wizard like this.
  12. Trixmay 988

    Trixmay 988 Demere's Dreams

    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    John pre '68 has my favourite singing, but afterwards I prefer both Paul and George.
    Paul was the best vocalist in the band technically I think. The guy had insane range that not even John had, which is saying something.

    This is one of those times where the difference between 'favourite' and 'best' is actually worth mentioning and isn't just trivial or absurd because someone CAN technically be a better singer than another, easily. This is why I voted for Paul. If it was favourite I would've voted for John. I think Paul's the better singer but I prefer John's voice.
     
  13. Baldo

    Baldo Forum Resident

    Location:
    Butte, Montana
    Paul was a best singer, technically speaking, but John had the best voice, tonally (IMO). At least up through 1967; his vocal tone wasn’t as good from 68 on, IMO. I’d even go as far as saying George had a better tone than Paul. My loved ones always make note of how much they love John and George’s voices. What’s amazing is how loved John’s vocal on “Anna (Go To Him)” is in spite of his having a terrible cold when he recorded it. Just goes to show how great his voice was.
     
  14. dkmonroe

    dkmonroe A completely self-taught idiot

    Location:
    Atlanta
    Individually I pick Paul without hesitation, but the REAL magic of the Beatles was the harmony blend, whether it was 3 or 4 of them. It's the one thing that really sold them IMHO.
     
  15. Terrapin Station

    Terrapin Station Master Guns

    Location:
    NYC Man/Joy-Z City
    One of the few musical categories where I pick John over Paul.
     
    DK Pete likes this.
  16. Denim Chicken

    Denim Chicken Dayman, fighter of the Nightman

    Location:
    Bakersfield, CA
    Paul is probably my favorite vocalist of all time.
     
  17. beatlesfan9091

    beatlesfan9091 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Seattle
  18. mando_dan

    mando_dan Forum Resident

    Location:
    Beverly, MA
    They all sounded pretty good to me.
     
    Jerk The Handle and Hermes like this.
  19. Thunderman

    Thunderman Forum Resident

    Location:
    New York
    Exactly right. Just listen to "Long Tall Sally" or "Oh, Darling" for proof.
     
  20. Thunderman

    Thunderman Forum Resident

    Location:
    New York
    John wins by a million miles. Just listen to:

    "Twist And Shout"
    "Nowhere Man"
    "Julia"

    Those three songs perfectly illustrate how John's voice could rock, give a pop song some depth, or break your heart.
     
  21. detroit muscle

    detroit muscle MIA

    Location:
    UK
  22. Twittering Machine

    Twittering Machine Forum Resident

    Location:
    UK
    Although it's John for me until the late 60s, and George improved later, I was listening to Devil In Her Heart recently and was knocked out by George's early singing on it and the fun little staccato she's.got.the.devil.in her.heart lines. But it's Paul that lasted as a singer, remaining generally excellent. But John's voice through to about 68 is probably the main reason I'm a fan of them.
     
  23. fishcane

    fishcane Dirt Farmer

    Location:
    Finger Lakes,NY
    John no contest

    Like Orbison’s voice, Johns came from some other world
     
  24. Chrome_Head

    Chrome_Head Planetary Resident

    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA.
    Well, "best" here will come down to subjective opinion and will be impossible to objectively measure.

    That said, John did it best for me.

    Are the two Ringo votes jokes?
     
    Jimmy B., cyril sneer and DK Pete like this.
  25. DK Pete

    DK Pete Forum Resident

    Location:
    Levittown. NY
    two ways to look at it; technically better and "atmospherically" better. Paul wins hands down for the first. Not only did he have a stronger, richer voice than John, he was more powerful in terms of range. Paul could go higher straight voiced whereas John would have to break into falsetto far sooner.

    But now we get to John. A voice with endearing qualities which transcend the strength of range, power or whichever descriptive term one chooses to go with. As BRODNATION, when Paul sang, it indeed sounds like he's putting on a show...or let's just call it, "performing". With vocals such as those in Oh Darling, I'm Down, Hey Jude, Yesterday or Got To get You Into My Life, I'll listen to him "perform" any day. But when John sings, he not only sings with this indefinable tone of emotion, he's singing directly *to* you. While his best, strongest years vocally were as a Beatle, the aforementioned qualities remained intact even in the 70's when his voice clearly had its' problems. The "problems" still didn't change the fact that it was JOHN singing to "you" as he'd been doing all along. Even when he sang songs to Yoko, it felt as if he was singing to the listener *about* his love for Yoko. One didn't get that feeling when he sang songs like Maybe I'm Amazed or My Love great "Linda love songs" though they were.

    ...my personal favorite should be obvious by now. John Lennon...my favorite vocalist of all time.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine