Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[2 of 3]

Ok...Let's just say The Beatles never broke up...but they did decide to do solo albums and get together to do a Beatle album every other year or so.  What solo songs do you think they'd use as Beatle songs? Do you think John would rather release Imagine as a Beatle song or a solo song? Would My Sweet Lord have ever been a Beatle song?...or was it personal enough to stay a solo song? Do you think ego's would make them save what they thought was their "good stuff" as a solo tune....or vise versa ? And I have no idea why I think Paul wouldn't care either way....just pound out as many tunes as possible 

[chris]

I've had this conversation a few times before. some think if they had continued to record together, they may not have had the same songs...I do. I mean, why wouldn't they?

I think they were all aware of the beatles legacy. and they may have saved the best songs for the band. or at least recorded the best songs they had at that time. if each solo hit from each member would have been recorded with the beatles as a band...the legacy would have continued...and even maybe strengthened.

although...and I may be be the minority here...maybe... history looks at the band in such a superior way...because they split before they started doing bad albums. maybe they split up at exactly the right time.   

[Mervap]

I think we would have seen a democratization in the division of songwriting duties...I'd think JL would have been writing more personal stuff he'd have wanted to keep for the Plastic Ono Band, so he'd have maybe had less for the Beatles. Same thing with GH, so I imagine any Beatles album after 1970 would have sounded much like Macca's and Ringo's did.

[kylenz]

although...and I may be be the minority here...maybe... history looks at the band in such a superior way...because they split before they started doing bad albums. maybe they split up at exactly the right time.   

I totally agree.. and even though 1970/71 was a bumper period for all the solo Beatles, 1972-74 (speaking generally, Band on the Run is an exception of course) produced some of their weakest stuff.. thinking of Dark Horse, Mind Games, Walls and Bridges, and (though it is my favourite Macca album but many view it as among his worst) Red Rose Speedway. In Beatle terms, the output of material would start dwindling to the point of mediocrity. By '76/77, you're better off just listening to Wings! 

[Mervap]

Bump

[kylenz]

I'm thinking, in the mid-late 70s they would have had a lull.. BUT by 1980 they would've kicked back into gear again! John's 'Double Fantasy' & 'Milk and Honey' material with George's 'All Those Years Ago', Paul's 'Tug Of War' stuff, Ringo with 'Stop And Smell The Roses'..

[Greg]

Yep. I think the best thing they could have done is break up.  ...on the other hand it was the worst.

The Beatles will always remain those four young men without a bad album to their name.  That's special.

What a dilemma for us fans; do we really wish they would have stayed together?