tkitna
I'll Be On My Way
Posts: 214
|
Post by tkitna on Oct 22, 2013 13:09:34 GMT
Do you think if Sir Paul would have gone out on tour and just played the songs on this album (and no Beatle tunes or past songs)that he would have sold out any venues? Depends on how large the venue was. If your talking about 60,000 seated arenas, then no. Not due to the album material, but mostly due to people wanting to see the same old Beatle and Wing songs rehashed.
|
|
|
Post by ROCKY on Oct 27, 2013 12:56:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bluemeaniepaul74 on Oct 27, 2013 16:27:11 GMT
Madonna can't be too far behind with that one...
|
|
|
Post by ROCKY on Oct 27, 2013 20:02:18 GMT
I think the secret word here is 'musician' bluemeanie. lol
|
|
|
Post by bluemeaniepaul74 on Oct 27, 2013 21:31:36 GMT
I think the secret word here is 'musician' bluemeanie. lol Yes that's true Rocky, what was I thinking?!
|
|
|
Post by ROCKY on Oct 28, 2013 3:51:40 GMT
There's still are a lot of the old rockers still recording that could get on Japan's list, Dylan comes to mind and the Rolling Stones. Wyman's 77!! Sorry to hear about Lou Reed today at 71. R I P Lou.
|
|
|
Post by bluemeaniepaul74 on Oct 28, 2013 15:10:12 GMT
Having listened to 'New' a few times now, I'd have to say I really enjoy it and can't understand the mindset of those who say he should hang up his Guitar! Hope he rocks till he drops!!!
|
|
|
Post by Amadeus on Oct 28, 2013 18:32:44 GMT
'When We Were New' sounds like he's trying (a bit) to sound like the Beatles. 'Your Mother Should Know' etc.... And you can't say that sounding like The Beatles is a bit obvious, what with being a big ingredient in said band, because Wings NEVER sounded like The Beatles!
Anyway, to the extent that I can listen to this album while simultaneously living in the past, it's not half bad.
|
|
|
Post by mrmustard on Oct 28, 2013 20:00:19 GMT
It's certainly a grower. I listened to it all the way through today and like it more each time I hear it. He's gone out of his way to record some songs that will sound great in stadiums. The best album since Flaming Pie sounds like a good assessment. My only criticism about this album is that it sounds like he's trying to emulate other contemporary music on a number of songs. I would prefer him being himself completely. Still it's a good album. 7/10 I think.
|
|
|
Post by Amadeus on Oct 29, 2013 2:26:16 GMT
Is he? What contemporary artists do you hear in the new album? I do plead ignorance because I am quite insulated from the top 40 waves of nonsense pooting around the airwaves.
|
|
|
Post by mrmustard on Oct 29, 2013 10:29:41 GMT
Is he? What contemporary artists do you hear in the new album? I do plead ignorance because I am quite insulated from the top 40 waves of nonsense pooting around the airwaves. I honestly couldn't tell you the names of anyone as I avoid the top 40 myself. When I accidentally do hear chart or current stuff on the radio or TV I can easily draw some comparisons. I'm sure current-ness of the album is largely down to the 4 producers as well as McCartney.
|
|
|
Post by alligator on Oct 31, 2013 0:21:53 GMT
I like Paul's NEW album it's better than MAF .
|
|
|
Post by mayojohnny on Nov 2, 2013 14:16:05 GMT
I bought the deluxe edition of 'NEW' about a week ago and it is the only album I have listened to since, besides listening to a few tracks from 'Ram' and 'Wings Over America' intermittently. I think it is often too easy for listeners of McCartney to feel like he is “trying” to do or be some certain thing…
This is an album by a solo artist in 2013. He cannot change his past; it just so happens that he has a very illustrious one. Nobody is expected to listen to the record without this in mind, but it does deserve independent review. No artist completely breaks away from their previous sound, unless they create a new album under a different genre (McCartney himself for example, as The Fireman).
My personal highlights from McCartney’s solo efforts are any songs with a strong melody. I use the word strong to describe upbeat, hook heavy, pop and rock records. I believe (open to argument) these are also his greatest song writing attributes, stretching right back to his contributions to Lennon/McCartney. I also believe (again open to being criticised) that the only reason he is being compared so heavily to Johnny Cash is because of the reduction in his vocal ability. I say this tentatively; Johnny Cash was a capable singer, I am not knocking him, but I believe that McCartney’s young voice was nothing like Johnny Cash’s signature sound. It is an unfortunate result of this that, to me, McCartney’s vocal is by far the weakest part of ‘NEW’. His voice is quite simply shot. He is only human.
As for the songs themselves, therefore, my highlights are ‘Queenie Eye’, ‘New’, I Can Bet’ and the bonus track ‘Turned Out’. Of all the songs, ‘Turned Out’ is extremely refreshing, with a very ‘Harrison’ sound in my opinion (open to argument, I say this because I have been listening to a lot of Harrison’s solo work before purchasing ‘NEW’). ‘Queenie Eye is a strange track with an impressive piano driven melody that is a kingpin of McCartney’s modern sound, and a beautiful choir like sound collage that backs up each bridge. ‘I Can Bet’ is the most catching sound on the album, with a hook driven chorus that stays in your head and really makes you want to listen again and again (I like this about short duration tracks). Almost exactly the same can be said about ‘New’ with its bouncy harpsichord-laden melody. This is classic, classic McCartney (see para 2, as I said, he cannot escape comparison to his back catalogue) but rightly deserves credit for sounding so fresh at the same time (credit here to his producers; Mark Ronson et al).
Paul McCartney has retained popularity (see ‘NEW’ UK album chart performance) perhaps because of the legacy of The Beatles, but primarily because of his undeniable work rate, bravery to experiment, and most of all because he is still writing killer, killer songs.
Thanks for reading, please criticise and argue with my opinion, that’s what we write these things for!
|
|
|
Post by mrmustard on Nov 2, 2013 15:27:28 GMT
Who compared him to Johnny Cash?
|
|
|
Post by mayojohnny on Nov 2, 2013 21:09:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by The End on Nov 3, 2013 0:15:35 GMT
I bought the deluxe edition of 'NEW' about a week ago and it is the only album I have listened to since, besides listening to a few tracks from 'Ram' and 'Wings Over America' intermittently. I think it is often too easy for listeners of McCartney to feel like he is “trying” to do or be some certain thing… This is an album by a solo artist in 2013. He cannot change his past; it just so happens that he has a very illustrious one. Nobody is expected to listen to the record without this in mind, but it does deserve independent review. No artist completely breaks away from their previous sound, unless they create a new album under a different genre (McCartney himself for example, as The Fireman). My personal highlights from McCartney’s solo efforts are any songs with a strong melody. I use the word strong to describe upbeat, hook heavy, pop and rock records. I believe (open to argument) these are also his greatest song writing attributes, stretching right back to his contributions to Lennon/McCartney. I also believe (again open to being criticised) that the only reason he is being compared so heavily to Johnny Cash is because of the reduction in his vocal ability. I say this tentatively; Johnny Cash was a capable singer, I am not knocking him, but I believe that McCartney’s young voice was nothing like Johnny Cash’s signature sound. It is an unfortunate result of this that, to me, McCartney’s vocal is by far the weakest part of ‘NEW’. His voice is quite simply shot. He is only human. As for the songs themselves, therefore, my highlights are ‘Queenie Eye’, ‘New’, I Can Bet’ and the bonus track ‘Turned Out’. Of all the songs, ‘Turned Out’ is extremely refreshing, with a very ‘Harrison’ sound in my opinion (open to argument, I say this because I have been listening to a lot of Harrison’s solo work before purchasing ‘NEW’). ‘Queenie Eye is a strange track with an impressive piano driven melody that is a kingpin of McCartney’s modern sound, and a beautiful choir like sound collage that backs up each bridge. ‘I Can Bet’ is the most catching sound on the album, with a hook driven chorus that stays in your head and really makes you want to listen again and again (I like this about short duration tracks). Almost exactly the same can be said about ‘New’ with its bouncy harpsichord-laden melody. This is classic, classic McCartney (see para 2, as I said, he cannot escape comparison to his back catalogue) but rightly deserves credit for sounding so fresh at the same time (credit here to his producers; Mark Ronson et al). Paul McCartney has retained popularity (see ‘NEW’ UK album chart performance) perhaps because of the legacy of The Beatles, but primarily because of his undeniable work rate, bravery to experiment, and most of all because he is still writing killer, killer songs. Thanks for reading, please criticise and argue with my opinion, that’s what we write these things for! Great review! I must admit I have been a very strong defender of Paul's recent vocal performances for events such as the Queen's jubilee and Olympics, so I was quite shocked to hear some of the vocals on NEW. And while I wouldn't go as far to say that his voice is shot, for me there is a noticeable change. And I think the honesty of a man who could easily use studio trickery to fix some imperfections makes some of these tracks more endearing, for it's more noticeable on some tracks than others - it must be quite humbling for one of the greatest ever rock vocalists.
|
|
rdnzl
I'll Be On My Way
Pastor Of Muppets
Posts: 251
|
Post by rdnzl on Nov 9, 2013 17:09:08 GMT
Overall, "New" sounds pretty good if I don't pay attention to it. Decent background music for doing chores. But something's lacking, and I'm sure it's the lyrics. "Memory Almost Full" was the last album he did that I loved. "New" sounds like mostly rejected tracks from "Memory Almost Full" sessions. Perhaps I should listen to it when I run some errands today. The thing about "New"...I wanted to love this. Most of Paul's albums make me want to play them over & over when they're new. But not this one. When it ended I quickly changed the CD to something else and said "Oh, well..."
But this isn't saying it's awful. It has some enjoyable (although not great) moments. Some people I know are calling it "very Beatlesque" and I truly do NOT hear anything on this that reminds me of The Beatles apart from Paul having been a member of that great band. And I don't expect it to be like The Beatles, so that's a good thing. I think that it's possible that Paul has written so many great & amazing songs (with & without JL) that the well has run dry. The lyrics are those of a 71 year old man thinking about being contemporary while his lyrics seem like grand dad telling us things about his past. Not necessarily a bad thing, but Paul used to write more about the here & now. Seems like he's lyrically stuck in his "Ever Present Past".
|
|
|
Post by ROCKY on Jan 17, 2014 20:03:09 GMT
Has anyone changed their opinion of Sir Paul's CD since they last listened to it, way back when? I ask because I just popped it on last night and for some reason I'm starting to like it! lol I laugh because this is the first record of his that has ever done that to me.
|
|
|
Post by pothos on Jan 18, 2014 12:35:58 GMT
I have not heard all of the new LP but I do like Queenie Eye.
The only time I have ever changed my mind on any record from annoyance to actually liking it is Abracadabra from the Steve Miller Band. Hated it when it was out in the early 1980's but love it now.
|
|
|
Post by ROCKY on Jan 18, 2014 23:31:31 GMT
Does anyone know if 'Early Days' was a jab at Mark's book 'Tune In'? Since the song was written probably about the same time Mark was doing his book.
|
|