That solo on Honey Pie was praised by McCartney (Harrison may have done so too). However, listen to it again. It trails off, doesn't really last that long, and is well out of time. The guitar sound is perfect but technically it's a disaster. Four bars, only the first two of which have any merit, plus a random splurge on the mono mix.

That said, it seems to fit ...]]> Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:48:43 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/page-2/#p51659 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/page-2/#p51659 He was certainly not as good as George and always seemed to play using power chords rather than proper barre chords from videos I've seen of him playing, and of course Donovan taught him how to fingerpick properly in Rishikesh, but I would still argue he was a good player in his own right. As for the Hey Bulldog solo, my bad, I always thought that was John!

Joe said
I really don't think John was a very good guitarist. As a songwriter he was one of the true greats, but his solo playing really wasn't all that special. Get Back's was OK (basic blues scales), but his work on The End was unremarkable. You Can't Do That was OK, as was the first solo on Long Tall Sally. Did he do any more?

I do wonder whether the kudos he received from his peers (Clapton etc) was more a reflection of how glad they were to be performing with him, rather than his technical prowess. Can't really ...]]> Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:58:20 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/page-2/#p51655 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/page-2/#p51655 No, you're right, he wasn't a great guitarist, but I'll make a couple of cases for him being maybe better than you give him credit for. He played the jazzy solo on Honey Pie, which George described as a very good solo that "sounded like Django Reinhardt." Also Hey Bulldog- I know there's been some contention over whether John or George played it but it sounds more Lennon-style to me, and that's a GREAT solo. As for his solos on The End, I don't think they're "unremarkable", they certainly give the section the grit it needs compared to George and ...]]> Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:53:50 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/page-2/#p51651 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/page-2/#p51651 I really don't think John was a very good guitarist. As a songwriter he was one of the true greats, but his solo playing really wasn't all that special. Get Back's was OK (basic blues scales), but his work on The End was unremarkable. You Can't Do That was OK, as was the first solo on Long Tall Sally. Did he do any more?

I do wonder whether the kudos he received from his peers (Clapton etc) was more a reflection of how glad they were to be performing with him, rather than his technical prowess. Can't really blame them - ...]]> Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:01:55 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/page-2/#p51642 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/page-2/#p51642

Happiness is a warm gun said
The Walrus said:

I have autism (well, AS, but AS is just autism without a speech delay). Whilst John showed some autistic traits (his poor responses to criticism, humour often inappropriately dark or sarcastic, lover of routine), as far as I know he didn't really have any of the major symptoms. He didn't seem to have any problems socialising, he didn't have any documented sensory issues of the right type, he didn't have meltdowns, and whilst he would be fascinated by topics, as far as I know he didn't have any fixations with ...]]> Tue, 03 Apr 2012 11:47:49 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p47200 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p47200 The Walrus said:

I have autism (well, AS, but AS is just autism without a speech delay). Whilst John showed some autistic traits (his poor responses to criticism, humour often inappropriately dark or sarcastic, lover of routine), as far as I know he didn't really have any of the major symptoms. He didn't seem to have any problems socialising, he didn't have any documented sensory issues of the right type, he didn't have meltdowns, and whilst he would be fascinated by topics, as far as I know he didn't have any fixations with particular objects beyond normal sentimentality, nor was ...]]> Thu, 24 Nov 2011 08:42:34 +0000 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42928 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42928 I mean, it's not like Hendrix just stopped playing. Maybe he's playing in heaven, but I don't really think it's fair to say Clapton is better just because he didn't die. I get what you're saying though, Clapton has had to keep coming up with ways of being creative, but something tells me Jimi would have been up to the challenge.
I don't think anyone's disputing that Clapton is a great guitar player, but he's just not on the level that others are, there's a Rolling Stone article where Eric and Jeff Beck are both ...]]> Mon, 05 Sep 2011 08:08:16 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42922 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42922 Well, if I weren't bone tired yet unable to sleep, I might be more rationale. But believe me, I disagree immensely. First off, Clapton was the first truly great "60's rock protege", not Hendrix. Clapton remains the only man inducted thrice into the Hall Of Fame, he has had a long and great career, with no serious deterioration of his guitar work or his voice (*cough*BobDylan*cough*). It's easy to be considered a god on something when you only did it for four years - try 40. Hendrix was great, but, as much as I hate buts, he had a 4 ...]]> Mon, 05 Sep 2011 04:13:10 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42920 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42920 Exactly. I think that the ideal guitarist has to be special at both lead AND rhythm to be one of the true greats, and Clapton has never seemed to put a lot of importance on rhythm.

]]> Mon, 05 Sep 2011 02:43:58 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42904 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42904 I'd have to agree with you on that, it's always puzzled me that Hendrix and Clapton are always talked about as sort of 1A and 1B when I don't think Eric is quite on that level. Or that he's seen as the guitarist from the Yardbirds when Beck and Page are both cooler players. That's how I like to judge guys, I'm not sure what criteria someone like Goldman would use, but I like styles and I think John had a cool style.

]]> Sun, 04 Sep 2011 06:08:23 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42902 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p42902 Goldman himself had no musical skills as far as I know, although I suspect he'd possibly have some piano skills, if anything. (And I'm basing this on nothing at all - other than the fact that he was "educated" and seemed to know something about music in general.) Me, I'm inclined to describe John as a "competent" (if inspired) guitarist, and not much more - but if Eric Clapton describes him as a "brilliant" rhythm guitarist, who am I to argue? (Aside from someone who has always considered Clapton himself to be pretty overrated, for what that's worth!)

]]> Sun, 04 Sep 2011 05:47:45 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p41873 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p41873 IIRC Clapton said he was a brilliant rhythm guitarist. I think he said that around the time of Rock And Roll Circus or the Toronto Rock & Roll Revival. It may have been someone else though - certainly it was a well-respected player (sorry, brain is mushy these days).

]]> Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:45:24 +0100 http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p41868 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/john-and-time/#p41868 Anyone who says John Lennon is an average guitar player is ignorant of guitar playing. Watch a live performance of I Feel Fine and see John play those licks while singing - average guitar players can't do that.

I know of no credible musician who has ever called John an average guitar player. He isn't Eric Clapton, but remember John never joined Clapton's band - Clapton joined John's band. That tells you something right there.

]]> Tue, 16 Aug 2011 10:39:56 +0100