Bass: Paul v. George | Page 3 | Fab forum

A Fiendish Thingy said:

Paulrus said:

GniknuS said:

 

---

That just made me burst out laughing, and I have to agree. Can't we just agree that they're both good players?

 

---

 

Yes please

paulsbass said:

 MrBig said:

---

Haha, no. If you disagree with me about him being underrated, you're
 

disagreeing with John Lennon. I know you probably don't care about that

since you're such a Paul McCartney fan, but let that ring in your head

for a while. And it's a matter of opinion, so you have no right to call

me wrong.

 

About Back in the USSR, With all those guitar parts I think george could have a little bit of the limelight instead of Paul hogging it all. Not biased at all. If anything, I'm praising him more than you. I think he should get more praise on terms of bass playing and on terms of overall songwriting but you just state the facts (some of which aren't necessarily true might I mention) of him rather than expressing your opinion. There are times where you can argue with facts and not argue with facts (and sometimes even both) but I really think this isn't open for discussion. I would like to hear exactly why you favored Paul but you completely ruined it by trying to change my opinion and make me think that Paul is the god of everything. On top of that, you even think that you're calm about this whole situation when I said "I think Paul is the more light noted one, and George is better on rhythm" but you completely changed my mind and now I think I dislike Paul even more because you tryed so hard to force your opinion down my throat.

 

 

I have no problem disagreeing with JL, since he was talking in the early 80s (and Paul had been voted "best bass player" several times then by important music magazins, so he hadn't been that underrated). And again, no, this is not a matter of opinion. IF many important musicians and critics and fans acknowledge Macca abilities, he's not underrated. Of course if you think, that PM should be called the best bass player of all time by anyone, I guess you could call him underrated. But that would be stupid. But that didn't seem to be your problem since you ranked George Harrison over him.

It's ok when you think George also should get some praise for BITUSSR, but you said he "probably" played the solo, which is very probably wrong. Even in this post you say Paul is "hogging" all the praise. Yeah, that's bias. But maybe just your English is clumsy and makes you sound like it.

Macca is officially the most successful songwriter of all time, so I guess he does get enough praise on terms of overall songwriting. Jeez… And you'Re right, this is indeed not open for discussion, but you tried it and started a thread calling George a better bass player than Paul.

And if you want to hear why I favour Paul please read the thread more carefully.

Remember what your opinion is:

George better bass player than Paul.

Ringo better singer than P, G, and J.

John better guitarist than P and G.

Paul better drummer than R.

The one about Ringo being the best singer is the most absurd, but the other ones are bizarre as well.

There'S nothing wrong with saying: "Wow, it would've been interesting if they played that way", but saying they would be a "better band" that way is just insane.

It was YOU who wanted to force your great opinion about GH down everybody else's throat, and you had nothing to support your claims.

http://clipsandcomment.com/wp-…..tfudl7.jpg

And, I really didn't think of it as a fact. I still believe those things but since this little incident happened I don't think I want to talk to you ever again.

Joe said:

Would it be possible to have a debate without it descending to name-calling and personal attacks? The Paul v Anyone discussions bore the life out of me, but go ahead if you want – but please keep it civil and constructive. Ta.