Okay, this is really the angle I'm going for on this thread (but I threw in all of 'em out of respect for them)

When I think of my favorite Beatles songs, they are almost always Lennon compositions. Based on their solo efforts, I think Paul created the more "marketable" songs, while John really created the more "musically distinguished" pieces.
In brief - Both can pen a hell of a tune, but John's had more "staying power.'
Anyone follow me here?
Am I saying John was "better" than Paul, or a bigger part of the Beatles' success? No. I'm just saying that I think John was the more "serious musician" of the two.
This was kicking around my head for a few days and just had to let it out. With a Poll, 'course.
