For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
RollingFreak
Just listened to the White Album tonight. @#$%&, its amazing that he wasn't even 27 when that album came out. He's my age and by The White Album he seems like he should be like 40! Thats nuts that at 26 he's writing that many incredible god damn songs. Seriously, what a talent they were. The fact that any of them are still going today is nuts. Would have been so easy for them to lose their heads at such a young age.
Quote
stonehearted
@RollingFreak,
Sure, I see what you mean. One day, when I was 23, I get on a subway train for college classes, and I'm thinking, 'At 23 Paul McCartney was writing Yesterday, and here I am writing dumb little music/film reviews for the college newspaper.'
Honey Pie and Martha My Dear, Paul wrote stuff like that because musically he had old-fashioned sensibilities -- his father was a Big Band type of musician.
I believe When I'm 64 was one of his earliest songwriting efforts -- didn't he write that while still in Liverpool back in the late 50s?
Quote
DandelionPowderman
As Tears Go By, Lady Jane, Play With Fire, Paint It, Black, I Am Waiting, Back Street Girl, Ruby Tuesday and She’s A Rainbow are not part of their "golden era" when it comes to songwriting?
Quote
DandelionPowderman
As Tears Go By, Lady Jane, Play With Fire, Paint It, Black, I Am Waiting, Back Street Girl, Ruby Tuesday and She’s A Rainbow are not part of their "golden era" when it comes to songwriting?
Quote
Ross
I can’t seem to get the song “Doninoes” out of my head. Egypt Station has some really nice moments.
Quote
Hairball
I remember when I turned 27 and thought of all the greats that passed away at that age - Jimi Hendrix, Brian Jones, Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin - and all they accomplished in a relatively short time period.
Quote
RollingFreak
Yeah, it makes perfect sense that his album went to #1. He's always still gonna be a Beatle AND his audience is the one that buys albums. Its impressive, but I'd have been shocked that wasn't the case. Also, and he does it every album, but he goes so gung ho with the press. He will go EVERYWHERE. Its truly astounding. Cause he certainly doesn't have to, but I guess he really wants to. And I assume he is really proud of the albums he makes which is nice. When I saw a video of him doing an Autocorrect Interview I was like "jesus, they really had him do every bit of press they could find didn't they?" Whenever he comes out with an album its nice that for a week or two Paul McCartney is always THE buzz of the town. So heartwarming. I don't think there's really anyone else that its like that for. Every 5 years or so the person that is probably everyone's top person in pop culture to meet is the most visible person ever.
Quote
stonehearted
Not really "wow" when you put things in perspective.
The #1 US, #3 UK, etc., represents (mostly) physical sales -- that means aging Baby Boomer fans who still buy physical product, along with middle-aged 50ish consumers, are all buying it the same week. Chart figures will plummet from the second week on...
His previous album "New" also made #3 UK as well as #3 US -- but failed to receive any sales threshold certifications, meaning it didn't sell all that well in any international market.
His old-standards cover album "Kisses on the Bottom" from 2012 was his last release to receive a sales threshold certification -- just silver, after a #3 showing in the UK chart.
His last gold record was 2007's "Memory Almost Full" -- #5 US and #3 UK.
Having a #1 or #3 album just doesn't mean what it used to.
Quote
James Kirk
"...it’s amazing that a 76 year old man who had his first #1 album 55 years ago is currently sitting on top of the album charts in 2018. In an era where music (by young or old artists) simply does not sell his opening weeks numbers are impressive. Don’t be shocked if like Blue + Lonesome, Egypt Station has some staying power...Either way, hats off to an almost 80 year old Paul McCartney for having the #1 album".
Quote
James Kirk
Whoa, a little negative...Either way you look at it, it’s amazing that a 76 year old man who had his first #1 album 55 years ago is currently sitting on top of the album charts in 2018. In an era where music (by young or old artists) simply does not sell his opening weeks numbers are impressive. Don’t be shocked if like Blue + Lonesome, Egypt Station has some staying power...Either way, hats off to an almost 80 year old Paul McCartney for having the #1 album.
Quote
HairballQuote
James Kirk
"...it’s amazing that a 76 year old man who had his first #1 album 55 years ago is currently sitting on top of the album charts in 2018. In an era where music (by young or old artists) simply does not sell his opening weeks numbers are impressive. Don’t be shocked if like Blue + Lonesome, Egypt Station has some staying power...Either way, hats off to an almost 80 year old Paul McCartney for having the #1 album".
Indeed, and while having a number #1 album might not mean the same as it used to, it's better than a poke in the eye or a kick in the teeth.
Hats off to Sir Paul!
He's using a variation of the fundamentally dishonest "Gish Gallop" debate technique to overwhelm you with questions.Quote
James Kirk
Buddy you seem a little angry. Just chill out. I don’t have the attention span to answer every one of your points, but your overall goal seems to be that you want to take a crap on the fact that McCartney has the #1 album.
Maybe Egypt Station will add to his legacy in the fact that the most commercially successful artist of all time is having #1 albums at almost 80 years old. It makes McCartney’s 27th #1 album in America counting Beatles releases. Is that something to be negative about in your mind? Seems to add a little something to his legacy to me, but what do I know?...Just relax. Everything is going to be ok.
Quote
stonehearted
He could easily create a 3-hour concert out of just of those albums.
So, if all these "new" releases are so worthwhile, would you pay $XXX just to hear him perform material from those 2001 to 2018 albums?
Why not? If you hold them in such high praise, then why not a 3-hour concert of just his latest releases?
Would you walk away from such an experience totally satisfied?
Or would you rather he play only Beatles classics and standout Wings hits?
If you had $XXX to spend as the audience of a legend, which would it be?
I thought so.