Generalizing any aspect of a songwriter’s output is straying into dangerous territory. That’s particularly true of the music of Lennon and McCartney. They were arguably the most versatile writers of pop song of their generation, and probably even now. As soon as they wrote a hit, it was back to the drawing board to come up with something completely different.
Get a free copy of “Use Your Words! Developing a Lyrics-First Songwriting Process” when you purchase “The Essential Secrets of Songwriting 10-eBook Bundle”
It’s a fun and harmless pastime to try to pinpoint some of the main differences between the melody-writing styles of these two masters of songwriting. What makes a McCartney melody sound different from a Lennon one?
The only way to answer this question with any measure of accuracy is, in fact, to generalize, so here we go:
1. McCartney tended to use a larger tone set than Lennon.
McCartney’s melodies, on average, use a larger spread between the lowest and highest notes. McCartney’s “Penny Lane” is a typical example of how McCartney would explore the upper and lower ranges, and do it fairly early in a song.
Other McCartney tunes that explored the fuller range of the voice: “Here, There and Everywhere”, “Got To Get You Into My Life”, “I’m Looking Through You”, etc.
Some Lennon songs would use a wide range (“Instant Karma”), but he’d typically take his time exploring that range. It was more typical of Lennon to use a smaller range for each section: a smallish range for the verse, then move upward for a pre-chorus (if the song had one), then even higher for the chorus, and “Instant Karma” shows this clearly.
2. Lennon’s melodies were usually riff-based repeated ideas; McCartney preferred longer-form tunes.
“Penny Lane” and “Instant Karma” demonstrate this trait. “Penny Lane” does have a nice hooky bit at the start of the chorus, but the main feature we become aware of right away is the long descending — almost scale-like — melody that starts the song.
Other McCartney songs show longer melodic ideas, as opposed to a shorter riff: “Hey Jude”, “I Will”, “Live and Let Die”, etc.
“Instant Karma” shows Lennon’s preference for taking a short vocal riff and repeating it over a changing chord progression. Other Lennon songs that demonstrate this preference: “Dear Prudence”, “I’m Only Sleeping”, “Good Morning Good Morning”, etc.
3. Lennon’s melodies tend to spend time sitting in and around the tonic note.
The tonic note tends to feature prominently in a Lennon melody; Lennon would start melodies on the tonic note more, and use it more, than McCartney would: “Across the Universe”, and “Dear Prudence”. And even if he didn’t start exactly on the tonic note, it would often feature that note as being structurally important, like in the chorus of “The Continuing Story of Bungalow Bill” and “Come Together.”
As mentioned earlier, McCartney would explore a fuller range of notes, even in his harder rockers (“Helter Skelter”). And even the songs that started on the tonic (“You Won’t See Me”, “Blackbird”, “The End”) would quickly move away from that note so that other notes rivalled the tonic in importance.
4. McCartney melodies had a fluid sense of vocal rhythm; Lennon preferred more driving rhythms/pulse.
This observation applies more accurately to the moderate and faster tempo songs. The faster tempo Lennon melodies tended to lock in to rhythmic ideas that were more intense, more energetic and more repetitious, like “Everybody’s Got Something To Hide Except Me and My Monkey”, “All You Need Is Love” and others.
McCartney would come closer to allow the natural pulse of the words dictate the specific rhythms of the vocal melody. If you say the words to “Golden Slumbers” without trying to sing it, you’ll see what I mean. There’s a natural flow to the rhythm of the words that gets translated directly into the vocal line.
You’ll hear that characteristic also in the rhythmic choices made in “Penny Lane” and “Getting Better.” In “Got To Get You Into My Life”, you can hear how the very quick rhythms of the start of each line of the verses adds a sense of breathless excitement to the text.
5. McCartney melodies borrowed stylistic ideas from many genres; Lennon paid more homage to rock & roll.
Don’t get me wrong, McCartney loved rock & roll, and can write a real rocker any time he wants. But his melodic and instrumental approach was also highly influenced by other genres: music hall (“Martha My Dear”, “Honey Pie”), Parisian ballad (“Michelle”), classical (“She’s Leaving Home”, “Eleanor Rigby”), ragtime “Rocky Raccoon”, and others.
Lennon was more a student of rock & roll, and even though he allowed treatments of his songs that pulled them into other genres (“Strawberry Fields Forever” as psychedelic pop, for example), I think it’s fair to say that he loved good ol’ rock & roll, and loved playing through a song with just raw emotion and a simple instrumentation. Probably “Don’t Let Me Down” demonstrates this the best.
Differences in Approach to Writing Lyrics
In their early writing, Lennon and McCartney both knew what the job of a songwriter was, and so “Do You Want to Know a Secret”, “I Want to Hold Your Hand”, “No Reply” and even “The Word” are pretty straightforward and easy to understand.
As their careers continued from Rubber Soul onward, that’s where we start to see a difference in how they both would tackle a lyric.
Lennon was a writer of a kind of impressionism: you have to take in the entire lyric, and your job as the listener is to get an impression — from the lyric in its entirety — of what is being addressed.
So if you go line-by-line through “Come Together”, you get what Lennon himself described as “gobbledygook.” But if you take the entire lyric and consider it all together, you get a sense of meaning — an impression.
So if you’re looking for exact “meaning” in the traditional sense, you won’t find it in any specific line of “I Am the Walrus”, “Strawberry Fields Forever”, or “Tomorrow Never Knows.” Even many of the lines in “Baby, You’re a Rich Man”, the verses of which were composed by Lennon, are hard to define in any traditional way.
McCartney rarely did it that way. If the lyric wasn’t straightforward, like we get in “Getting Better”, for example, he’d give you short, clear vignettes, all meant to blend together to give you his own kind of impression. But it was an impression made up of fairly clear images, not in Lennon’s more abstract style.
The best example of a McCartney lyric that shows this kind of difference is “Penny Lane.” It’s a series of short, almost unrelated vignettes that all blend together to tell you what life on Penny Lane was like.
On a curious related note, the music and lyric of “With a Little Help From My Friends” was composed mostly by McCartney, and the way the melody and words interact sound like it was written by McCartney. But the one line that Lennon wrote “What do you see when you turn out the light?/ I can’t tell you but I know it’s mine” has little to do with any other line. But in true Lennon style, he’s offering an impression, nothing else.
Summary
The differences that exist between the writing styles of Lennon and McCartney are a great topic for any serious songwriter to study. The Beatles owe their success in part to the extent to which these two songwriters differed in their musical approach.
The only thing that might have made them an even better group (if that were possible) would be to have included more Harrison songs, particularly on the later albums. Harrison’s own songwriting prowess leapt forward enormously in the final years of The Beatles. His four contributions to the White Album were four of the best songs on that record, as were his two songs on Abbey Road.
Because Lennon and McCartney were so prolific and so competitive, comparing and contrasting their styles is an activity that every songwriter should take time to do.
I’d be very interested in your own thoughts on this, and so please do leave a comment below.
Written by Gary Ewer. Follow on Twitter.
Thousands of songwriters have been using “The Essential Secrets of Songwriting” 10-eBook Bundle to polish their songwriting skills and raise their level of excellence. Right now, get a free copy of “Use Your Words! Developing a Lyrics-First Songwriting Process” when you buy the Bundle.
I came across this post having had a very similar thought about Lennon’s and McCartney’s writing styles and wanting to read more about it online – and you put it better than I ever could have done! I’m definitely guilty of playing the “which Beatle wrote this one?” game while listening to their music 😀
Harrison….not close
Macca from 65 to beyond carried the beatkes
Very interesting, but don’t you think that one of the key factors contributing to the remarkable success of the iconic McCartney and Lennon duo lies in their contrasting mindsets. Paul McCartney’s songwriting often gravitates towards a positive and uplifting tone, while John Lennon’s compositions tend to delve into deeper and sometimes darker emotions. The decision of these two musicians to collaborate may have served as a harmonious blend, finding a balance between their divergent perspectives and ultimately enriching their creative output.
Hi Lynn – Sorry I’ve been so long approving your comment… I was out of the country for a while and am just back.
Yes, what you point out is exactly so. But I’d also add that theirs was a true partnership at the beginning of their careers, but very quickly became a collaboration in name only. Most of the time their songs were written by one or the other. Occasionally, one might add a lyrical line, or help with a word, or add their influence at the production-stage, but certainly by Revolver, they were working more-or-less separately. That being the case, it makes it, in my opinion, a great duo to study closely.
Thanks Lynn for your very good thoughts on this.
-Gary
I’m confused as to why you didn’t discuss other Lennon songs, as opposed to referencing the same ones throughout the article. “If I Fell” was phenomenal and McCartney ad it’s ti being jealous of it, describing it as “dripping with chords.” Then there are the others, too many to list, that challenge at least a bit of your premise. McCartney was more symphonic in his approach but Lennon was able to explore a far wider tonal range than you give him credit for.
Hi Terri:
You may be right. The problem with doing articles like this, as I think I mentioned in the post, is that one has to generalize, and I do believe my generalizations are not far off the mark. I’ll also say that my observation that Lennon’s melodies tended to be driven by repetitious riffs is not a criticism, merely an observation. Lennon’s “Good Night” has often been mistakenly attributed to McCartney, and it’s an absolutely gorgeous example of what you’re talking about.
So in a way, I think your comment is fair. In fact, it would probably be possible to write an article to outline the Lennon songs that actually were large-ranging and quite melodious. But for the sake of the blog I had to generalize. And in the main, I think I wasn’t incorrect in the observations that I made.
Thanks very much, Terri, for your very good comment.
-Gary
McCartney is a great melody maker. Lennon was wonderful lyricist. Harrison was equally great at both early on but needed Lennon-McCartney’s presence for consistency. It is interesting that Harrison was the last Beatle to ever have a number one hit, Got my Mind Set on You (solo, 1988).
McCartney strength was not always in lyrics and Lennon tended to be a lazy lyricist between 1972-1975. Harrison had his moments but was too inconsistent in writing and producing up until he passed.
Ringo Starr’s best efforts relied on Lennon, McCartney and Harrison.
both are masters-equal but different
Yes, I completely agree!
G
In my humble opinion,Paul McCartney,musically and especially his genius writing melody was rarely equaled by any of the remaining Beatles,particularly John Lennon.Genius at it’s zenith,musically, is melody. Neither John Lennon or George Harrison rarely reached the melodic consistency of McCartney…..
Great post. The only thing i couldn’t see (forgive me if i missed it) was the lyrical content.
Lennon was hugely autobiographical for the most part and McCartney often sang as an observer of other lives.
Hi Gary, what’s more important than the differences is actually the similarities between them. Both Lennon and McCartney used a lot of melodic sequences and repeating rhythm patterns in their melodies. Take a listen to the following songs and listen for the repetition of a motif within the melody:
Eleanor Rigby – verse melody contains three descending sequences in each of these lines:
“Picks up the rice in the church where a wedding has been”
“Wearing the face that she keeps in a jar by the door
Norwegian Wood – melody contains almost exact descending sequences in last two lines of each verse:
“Isn’t it good
Norwegian wood?”
You Never Give Me Your Money – verse melody contains ascending sequence:
“You never give me your money”
“You only give me your funny paper”
Got To Get You Into My Life – verse contains ascending sequence as well:
“I was alone, I took a ride”
“Another road where maybe I”
Tons of Beatles songs (and other classic songwriters, Hank Williams, Joni Mitchell, etc.) also have them. Listen closely in songs like:
Across The Universe: descending sequences in verse and chorus
Nowhere Man: descending sequences in verses
Get Back: ascending sequences in verses
Penny Lane: descending sequences in verses
I think this topic deserves more attention in a future post
Hello:
This blog post was about the differences between McCartney’s and Lennon’s compositional style. It may be an interesting study to look at their similarities, but that would have been off-topic for this post.
You mention that both Lennon and McCartney used melodic sequences, but the truth is that essentially all songwriters use sequences; it’s an important part of musical construction in practically any genre. I mentioned Lennon’s penchant for using short, repetitive melodic fragments versus McCartney’s tendency to write longer phrases, because that’s an important difference to note. I didn’t meant to imply that McCartney doesn’t use repeating rhythmic patterns in his songs.
-Gary
I have to agree with Gary. All songs over the years have these rhythm structures structures.
Now, in the past 25 years the trend in popular music has been towards primarily a chanting rhythm and not much melody, if any. For a person who is used to that, the amount of melody in Lennon’s and McCartney’s songs might seem identically complex in melody.
https://www.reverbnation.com/glenngalen
Very good analysis. As a teenager in a Beatles Era garage band, I remember having this feeling that some of the Beatles’ songs felt “old fashioned”, but still cool. That was the McCartney stuff, with the “old-fashioned”, and unusual (to me) chord progressions.
I find Lennon to “avant Garde”. But when he “seasoned” McCartney’s stuff, great things happened. I was never a fan of Wings and post Beatles McCartney. And certainly not of Post Beatles Lennon.
In fact seeing John Prine at age 17 when he was still a mail carrier and was playing Sunday nights in the small back room of a bar in Chicago opened my eyes to really good lyrics and sent me on a different path.
I think your songwriting series is one of the most useful and knowledgeable that I have seen. I enjoy your posts.
My website link has the lyrics and music of me performing one of my songs I did in my studio..
Thanks Glenn, I’m pleased that you enjoyed this post. I just gave your excellent song “Amazing!” a listen, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Lovely chord choices.
-G
Pingback: The Daily Muse – April 7th, 2020 | All About Songwriting
Do you see this contrast of styles in the co-writing of “We Can Work It Out”? Two very different lyrical and melodic ideas blended together into one song. Verses sound classic McCartney, middle eight … appears to be all Lennon.
Yes, I’m pretty sure that was the split… McCartney’s verses and Lennon’s middle eight. I’ve seen Lennon’s comments where he mentions the positive nature of McCartney’s lyrics, and then the slightly more negative tone of the middle eight, which I think is an astute observation on Lennon’s part. I love this song for how the verse and bridge complement each other so well – the Lennon & McCartney partnership at its best.
-G
Very interesting to say the least,I have never looked upon the songs that way ,We learn something different every day and I have. Much appreciated
Thanks Charles, cheers!
-G