Another view of Jeff Lynne as a producer

OK, I love the Electric Light Orchestra as a band. I used to own their second album (the one with "Roll Over Beethoven") on a cassette, and I also like their later stuff.

But I cannot stand Jeff Lynne as a producer. In my view, he makes every artist he touches (George Harrison, Roy Orbison, whoever) sound like a second-rate downmarket version of ELO.

However, Alan McGee does not share my assessment of Lynne's production skills. In his article that states that ELO was as good as the Beatles, McGee notes the following:

Lynne was the producer of choice for post-Beatles' solo projects: George Harrison's Cloud Nine, Paul McCartney's Flaming Pie, and numerous Ringo Starr projects. He even ended up replacing George Martin as the Beatles producer for the final singles Free as a Bird and Real Love. If the Beatles can place this much trust in Lynne and believe in his music, why are they still in the ghetto marked Guilty Pleasures? Should we now accept that, yes, ELO were just as good as the Beatles during their own classic run in the 1970s?

With regard to McGee's main question, I would argue that Queen is actually more comparable to the Beatles than ELO is. Queen not only had the chart success, but also demonstrated a wide variety of music styles. I used to own "News of the World" on vinyl (yes, vinyl), and that song swerved from style to style in every track - just like the White Album, as a matter of fact.