Jump to content

Mccartney album review


Lew Bundles

Recommended Posts

I would like to hear from Eric on this one.

Maybe he's worried he lost his touch for new material too.

(just pokin' ya with a stick)((no offense))

Oh, did I mention I think the new CD is GARBAGE?

Did any of you run to anyone else and say, "Ya GOTTA hear this new song by Paul?"

I didn't think so.

A Usually Paul Digging,

Zucco

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

What Paul McCartney needs is to go into the studio with someone who is not intimidated by his legend. Someone who isn't afraid to tell Sir Paul when the material he is peddling is sub-par. The perfect candidate would be Rick Rubin.

Rubin has worked miracles with other 800-pound gorillas like Johnny Cash and Neil Diamond, artists whose success, reputation and cache would normally allow them to pretty much get away with murder and, worse, mediocre or lame material.

Paul McCartney and Rick Rubin in the same studio...

"That would be something; that really would be something..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rich I think your idea of McCartney teaming with a producer who's not afraid to be honest, is definitely something Paul should look into. Whether it will ever happen, that's another question.

In the meantime I'm still standing by my original review, and I do think "Memory" is a fine album.

Marv

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gents...Listen to a Mccartney album and then put on any Seeger,Steve Miller,Eagles, etc...There are no new types of songs anywhere by those boring stiffs...Overrated is too kind of a word...If you dont find ANY Mccartney album more musically interesting than those boring,banal run of the mill pedestrian type songs, I really doubt if you are fairly judging Mccartney and not catering to some pre- conceived thought...LYRICALLY, who cares...They are only songs and the lyrics mean nothing...The most time tested composer,Beethoven,Bach,Mozart, etc. didnt compose lyrics...THEY DONT MATTER...Who gives a flying...what Bono has to say...HOW TO DISMANTLE AN ATOMIC BOMB...How important does he think his thoughts are?...ONE,TWO,THREE,CATORCE...HELLO HELLO...Does it really make adifference if MARLEY says that he shot the sheriff, but he didnt shoot the deputy...Such a thought provoking,life lesson, isnt it Lee?...JAMMIN' everybody?...Remember, if lyrics mean anything,"relevant" as the critics love to portray, then why is it, that the largest viewing audience of all time(Live Aid 1), no one had a complaint that Mccartney sang "Let It Be" which lyrically is the exact opposite of what the day was all about..."Helping" as opposing to "Letting It Be"...Get over the relevancy baloney and just listen to the songs...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lew:

I did listen to the songs on the new cd. With the exception of the Jet/Juniors Farm rewrite "Only Mama Knows" and "End Of The End", there is nothing remotely interesting about the new cd and certainly nothing I would ever listen to again.

"Gratitude" is one of the worst pieces of tripe McCartney has ever written. It almost makes "Freedom" sound profound.

And btw I believe you're forced into your argument that lyrics don't matter, especially when you vehemently defend one of the people who is responsible for some of the most banal, sophomoric lyrics ever recorded.

You can bow at the altar of McCartney if you'd like and bask in his past glory, but based on his output of the last 20 or so years, it's ill-deserved and I, for one, will give it a pass.

Just my opinion and, just like you, Lew, it's the only one that counts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow! I didn't realize Paul sparked such vehemently negative reactions. He puts out a new album every two or three years, and it has a couple of really, really good songs, a few passable ones, and a couple of klunkers, and he's villified. Whose album DOESN'T have a couple of really, really good songs, a few passables, and a couple of klunkers (besides Raspberries)?

Yes, I do take into account Paul's past glory. He was a Beatle. John Lennon was his songwriting partner. The bar is set amazingly high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like this:

When I was a kid, my dad would play catch with me for hours. He'd catch-and-throw until the sun went down, giving me an assortment of pop-ups, ground balls, and "wild" throws. He'd play catcher so I could pretend I was pitching. For a kid, that's HUGE.

As you grow up, the games of catch dwindle down to nothing, because you get on with your life, and dad gets older.

Last fall, I bought my dad a vintage 1940s glove (he's a lefty) and gave it to him with a beat-up ball I got at spring training. He slipped it on, and he couldn't help himself... outside we went to play catch. He's 74 now, so we tossed for maybe 5 or 10 minutes. But that quick game of catch was every bit as satisfying as the 60- and 90-minute sessions we had when I was 8 or 9 years old. Maybe more so.

Same with McCartney. One or two great new songs still give me a thrill.... I'm a fan, yes, but I appreciate where he was and what he's done, and I don't have these expectations that every new release is Sgt. Pepper. Scorn him all you want, and be disappointed, and refuse to buy his records; it's not a big deal, really. (It's just a little less money that'll go into Heather's pot.)

If Paul is having fun and playing songs that come from his heart (and I think he is --- he's certainly not doing it because he wants more money or fame!), that's good enough for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While Macca has written some silly lyrics he also has written plenty of really great ones...'For No One'...'Things We Said Today'...The slice of life perspectives of 'Penney Lane' and 'Another Day'...plenty of Macca's songs lyricwise match up well with any pop song. BTW I love Edward Bear and Macca.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as Paul having a producer who isn't intimitadated by him, I thought he had that with Nigel Godrich on "Chaos..." I read that McCartney was initially peeved when he told him to redo a part of a song, or rewrite another piece. Then he realized that Nigel's suggestions were valid. Don't know why he went David Kahne again. Maybe he didn't want the challenge this time around.

Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Bernie should erect a wrestling ring at WAB, hire a referee, bring in Vince McMahon, and let Lew and Lee go at it in a Steel Cage Match.

"In this corner, hailing from Temiskaming Shores, Canada, wearing the brown tights, cowboy hat, and dreadlocks: Lee 'The Sheriff' Marshall!! [cheers, boos, screams]

"And in the far corner, wearing the raspberry-colored tights, earrings, and mask, from parts unknown: The Bundle Maniac!!! [maniac, maniac, maniac!]... [more cheers, boos, screams]...

"As your referee, I'm here to see that you have a fair fight, men. So hand over the foreign objects. Lew, is that an iPod with Bob Marley songs on it? And Lee, give me that sheriff's badge. It's got sharp edges..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had a long and often lovely relationship with the music of Paul McC. I just don't happen to think that he hits as many home runs as he used to and that some of his past 'hits' don't still do it for me the way they did back in the day. That's true of other artist/composers as well...for me. I didn't attack Paul. I didn't attack his fans. I am guilty of suggesting that some, and I repeat SOME, of his tunes are a little less than testosterone injected. I've explained my take of a wide variety of his entire body of work and agree that he is one of a handful of the top of the top performers in the entire world.

And I get subjected to Lew 'the Bob Marley authority' in two different threads spewing his limited 'take' on that which I just happen to be very well versed in?

I have suggested several times that he knows almost nothing about that which he spews...that he is limited in terms of the scope of the subject matter...that he is virtually a one trick pony with tunnel vision when it comes to his assessment of Marley...his music, his lyrics, his career, and the impact he still has on the world...particularly the third world...but certainly not exclusively. [after all Bob set concert attendance records all over Europe in the 70s] Yet on bundles rambles issuing the same old/same old ad infinitum. It's as if I've personally done something wrong. Not kneeling at the feet of Paul's new album is a sin?

But hey...let's attack U2, Edward Bear and Neil Diamond too. That'll drive home the point. Ridiculous.

I looked for an ignore button. Can't find it. I'll just do it 'manually'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neil Diamond is a giant...Huh, Rich from Pa...That SONG SUNG BLUE is a real slayer...

Solitary Man, Kentucky Woman, I'm A Believer, Girl, You'll Be A Woman Soon, Brooklyn Roads, Holly Holy, Cracklin' Rosie, I Am...I Said, Longfellow Serenade, If You Know What I Mean...

That covers the late Sixties to early Seventies.

You're absolutely right, Lew. When it comes to successful records, the guy's a lightweight.

Get real!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To expand on LC's idea, I think it should be tag-team for WAB. In one corner, the bearded-to-be-fearded duo of Lee and Mitch. In the other corner (wearing tights and a cape), the tongue lashing duo of Lew (I'm too sexy for my cape) Bundles and Tommy (I have friends) Tunes. Let's get ready to rumble!

Kirk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lee I love the new McCartney cd but I can certainly appreciate some of your points re his music. However you're losing me with the "SOME, of his tunes are a little less than testosterone injected." What does this mean? One could say the same thing about many older artists, including Eric when comparing his music with the 'berries, to his last release, "Winter Dreams." Let's face it with "WD", Eric released music that at that point in his life, was probably music that he felt he could relate to, and that his older audience could relate to. Same could be said for McCartney: he's writing what he wants to and what he feels moves him.

Marv

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess Marv that what it is...is...Paul writes some of his songs with women 100% in mind. You know...songs FOR the female. Hard to really describe what I feel I guess. It's like those particular tunes seem to be targeted to the intended audience and they don't strike me as Paul delivering a song to a woman on *MY* behalf. Does that make sense? He's just not my Cyrano. FOR ME...in THAT regard over the long haul Brian Wilson kicks Paul's ever-lovin' arse.

I think this goes back to the greatest recording artist thread. There is virtually NO ONE who's every song hits MY target. The one who does it most consistantly...well...we've already gone there and now it's just going around in circles with virtually NO point being made except that folks are gettin' insulted.

This is one of the most useless exchanges I've been involved in in years. Its.........childish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt Lee.

There'll never be universal acclaim about any artist, and that's alright. I've been chastised for singing the virtues and praises of Springsteen, but you know what? I stand by my convictions and NO ONE can convince me that Bruce's music in the last few years, including 2006's "the Seeger Sessions", was not as relevant or as important as "Born To Run" or any other of the songs of his famous past.

Marv

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I was really surprised by how great Bruce's tribute to Pete was. I have a good collection of Springsteen material. Still partial to The Wild, The Innocent and the E Street Shuffle though. There's just something about many an artist's pre formula days...like Elton's Tumbleweed Connection using another recently discussed example. [and RAM too]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The just-released live concert dvd from Dublin is by far THE MOST EXCITING and RIVETING music played by ANY band that I've ever seen. Challenging, uplifting, inspiring, emotional, even these words don't do justice to describe the wonderful sounds played by the 21 piece band.

Marv

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, what Paul McC needs isn't a producer to rein in his, shall we say, less than stellar songs....he needs an accountant (or team of accountants) to remind him that he's got more money than God (because I suspect his well-documented love of money is driving the frequency of his recordings), and maybe a shrink to remind him that he's an ex-Beatle and one of the most beloved and recognizable musicians on the planet. At that point, maybe he'll sit back, relax a bit, and possibly conclude that if he waits until he's really written 10-12 songs that are worthy of his legacy, not 2 or 3...and this might take 5-6 years, not 2-3, then and only then should he release a new album.

I realize he's an artist and he has to create....but to me, what he's done the past couple of decades is equivalent to a great painter who occasionally runs out of inspiration, so he rents himself out painting houses and billboards on the side, between his real works of art.

And even a 5-6 year interval doesn't do it for some artists....Dylan took 5 years between "Love & Theft" and "Modern Times", and wound up blatantly swiping 3 old blues songs (admittedly, adding some of his own verses) and claiming to have written them himself for his latest album.

To me, I'd prefer less recordings and higher quality from Macca....just my 2 cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...