Paul McCartney vs John Entwistle

better bassist

  • Paul McCartney

    Votes: 62 48.1%

  • John Entwistle

    Votes: 67 51.9%
  • Total voters
    129
Status
Not open for further replies.
#22
Unemploid said:
which is the better bassist? which style is more commonly used?
Click to expand...
Which is the better painter, Rembrandt or Picasso? You can't compare such completely different styles! What do you mean by "better"? Entwistle was certainly busier, but he wasn't just playing "bass" so much as filling in rhythm and lead lines - he made a 3-piece band sound like a 5- or 6-piece! On the other hand, McCartney played extremely tasteful and melodic basslines that weren't fancy, but were usually the ideal counterpoint to the music - which makes him an excellent bassist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lancimouspitt and PsyDocHill
#27
domdec314 said:
I hope you don't mean to insinuate that Paul is still alive.
Click to expand...
Comparing each subject by the single attribute of breathing vs not breathing and basing my conclusions solely on the outcome I argue that it's not insinuation, speculation nor hypothesis but is fact.
Paul is alive and Ox is not.
 
#28
Lee Moses said:
giphy.gif
Click to expand...
b.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gluvhand, mikeyjm2 and socialleper
#29
Unemploid said:
which is the better bassist? which style is more commonly used?
Click to expand...
Those are two very different questions.
Paul McCartney is a great song writer and over all musician, but is a somewhat middling bass player. His playing typifies the "back of the bus" position the bass is often put in. He may be solid, but he is also what I would call uninspired.
John Entwistle could do the "stick to the roots" routine, but when given the opportunity could tear it up too. Since I'm not a Boomer, I've always been pretty "meh" about both the Beatles and The Who, but after coming to TB I saw some of John's soloing and was blown away. I didn't know he could do that. On the other side of that, I don't know what John's contribution to their writing was and in terms of legacy, I'd put money on more people remembering songs written by Paul than by The Who.

SO I think John was a better bass player in terms of playing capabilities, however Paul's style of playing and writing is far more typical. If the admins of TB did a word cloud of the threads I'd also put money on "Paul McCartney," or some varient of that, being much bigger than words related to John Entwistle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: felixxx
#32
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lancimouspitt
#33
to be honest, I'm not sure Paul could hang on bass in the Who, ditto for John hanging in the Beatles. I mean, I think that either one could cut it talent-wise, but I think they'd not be using their styles and insights to their fullest potentials.
 
#39
OK, a serious answer:

Both are legends, who did a lot for the instrument in rock music. Neither is better or worse than the other in any measurable way. They belong on the big list of Ultimate Rock Bass Players, along with Geddy and Chris and John Paul Jones and all those other guys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mr15x3 and PsyDocHill
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back