Who is a better singer, John Lennon or Paul McCartney?

I personally think that Paul is the better singer. John is a good singer too but not as good as Paul. Anyways what's your take on this?

I liked Paul better, but both were pretty talented.

Luckily I happened to be listening to The Beatles right now so can do an immediate analysis.

I can't deny that Paul simply had a slightly better range. He hits the higher notes with an ease that John seems to -almost imperceptibly- have to reach for. It's tough to explain but John has the merest twinge of roughness, like he's almost straining his jaw and not opening his mouth to sing the note out, it's not an unappealing sound/tone to his voice but it makes me think Paul is the better singer competence-wise.

I think John's voice was more interesting, but Paul was a better singer. His delivery was less strained and he has more range and overall gave more polished performances. But then again, most of the time John's less polished delivery worked great for the kind of songs he wrote.

I would have said Paul, but... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv3ic6OOXnsMasonLovak

That song doesn't dispell the notion that Paul is a better singer technically, but I think that song shows that John was better at putting emotion in his vocals. Paul's vocals almost come across as being more "controlled" (for the most part), which makes sense because he was the more "controlled" personality.

I think they both suck equally.

I liked Paul better, but both were pretty talented.

sonicare

I like John better, but I will admit that Paul was pretty much more talented at everything except for writing lyrics. A better guitarist, singer, a better melody writer, etc. But there's just something about John's voice, personality, lyrics, etc. that just resonates with me more.

One cannot possibly choose between the beetles....

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I liked Paul better, but both were pretty talented.

GreySeal9

I like John better, but I will admit that Paul was pretty much more talented at everything except for writing lyrics. A better guitarist, singer, a better melody writer, etc. But there's just something about John's voice, personality, lyrics, etc. that just resonates with me more.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

I liked Paul better, but both were pretty talented.

surrealnumber5

I like John better, but I will admit that Paul was pretty much more talented at everything except for writing lyrics. A better guitarist, singer, a better melody writer, etc. But there's just something about John's voice, personality, lyrics, etc. that just resonates with me more.

I'm pretty sure all the Beatles were leftists.

But to fully answer your question, I seperate politics from music for the most part.

I'd say John just because of the emotion he puts into his singing, even though I generally like the songs Paul sings more as complete packages.

Paul had the looks, John had the Yoko.

By default Paul wins.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AA9maAERDAs

I liked John's voice better..

But I saw Paul McCartney on Friday at Yankee Stadium and it was the greatest concert I've ever seen in my entire life. He's 68 and he can still sing, not sure if John's voice would have held like Pauls did

Paul had the looks, John had the Yoko.

By default Paul wins.

-Sun_Tzu-

John had the looks before Yoko's essence rubbed off on him and he started not showering ate hippie food and started looking flat out weird.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

Paul had the looks, John had the Yoko.

By default Paul wins.

VendettaRed07

John had the looks before Yoko's essence rubbed off on him and he started not showering ate hippie food and started looking flat out weird.

This is grounds for a quarantine.

John for me - he's a little more soulful than McPaul

I love both. But the best singer in the Beatles was George I reckon

I love both. But the best singer in the Beatles was George I reckon

DmadFearmonger

I'd have to disagree with that.

I think he's a weaker singer than both John and Paul. His voice sounds nice, but it's a lot thinner than John's or Paul's.

I love both. But the best singer in the Beatles was George I reckon

DmadFearmonger

Paul was better.

actually neither are great singers. They are more known for their lyrics and meanings.

George Harrison was better than both of them.

John Lennon was an untalented dick. :)percech

Disagree here. His songwriting ability was profound, and he had a great voice.

I didn't like his "hippie" image circa 1969, though.

Paul M

Yeah. John Lennon was a interesting artist but not a great singer.