Jones had an interview recently where among other things he said the beatles were lousy musicians , and specifically called out Ringo and McCartney

So I was thinking....were they? Is it possible they had great voices, and wrote great songs, and had great producers doing their records.....but the musicianship itself wasnt their strong suit?

I never thought of it that way but maybe its possible.

McCartney could sure write songs, and he had a rubber voice that could handle alot of ranges. But I dont know enough musically to say he was a great bassist. Same for Lennon, and Harrison although with less vocal range than mccartney

I am sure there are bands that never made it or only made it minimally who had great guitarists/drummers but not the vocals or the song writing abilities. So to get the entire package can be hard.

I never heard "experts" glow over the instrument playing abilities like they do with Clapton, or Hendrix, or Bonham or Baker.

so maybe it wasnt a shocking opinion by someone more knowledgeable than me.

Because of their great success together and individually I never thought of this....as their other aspects sort of blinded me. But it could be a fact.