Check this out...you'll die...

[alphajerk]

bob marley is the master of love songs that never come off as velveeta. even barry white cant claim that. dave, i'd say working with miles is about a million times more significant than paul...

[Lee Flier]

[quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]bob marley is the master of love songs that never come off as velveeta.[/b][/quote] For real! I'll second that! --Lee

[Dave Bryce]

[quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b]dave, i'd say working with miles is about a million times more significant than paul...[/b][/quote] Yeah - except I just toured with Miles. He didn't give me one of his songs, or play on one of my records...that would have been waaaay cool... :cool: dB

[Mr Darling]

I'll be the first to admit - I am a fuc**ing cynic. It's true - it's something I had to learn to control and get used to (I'm really not that bad at person) but typing on a computer, in the middle of the night bring the cynic part of me back.... Don't get me wrong, I do think the the Beatels had a great influence on the music industry - but I still think Paul is a regular dud like all of us. When he goes to the studio - he has the same worries as the rest of us (or probably more - since we all are looking at him all the time) : is this good enough, will the record company/ A&R/ Fans / Alfa will like it, or would they hate me. He too as his ups and down. And even he has other artist he admires. So yes, I still think he is the same as you and me... :D As for working with him (or with many other - including alot of guys on this forum or writing for EQ) of course I would love it, and to be honest - who ever it will be , will probably wont notice me there at all (as I will be hiding under the mixing desk). So why don't I think this story is cool - because it didn't happen to you. If Lindsy would have posted this message, I would be all raving and reassuring and cool... But you are telling a story about someone else - and everyday, many people get their break (In Lindsy case, it seems like she was on her way up anyways) Dido that got her break from Eminem after 2 years of non selling made it to nr 1 - did any of you thought that was cool (actually I did - and I hate Eminem) Sorry again about my cheap cynic remarks, and also all the misspellings; :D Danny

[m2]

[ 02-13-2002: Message edited by: macle96@yahoo.com ]

[Mr Darling]

[quote]Originally posted by macle96@yahoo.com: [b] I don't think he's just a regular dud, I think he's quite a special dud. Just this dud's opinion. [ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: macle96@yahoo.com ][/b][/quote] OK, let me phraze it this way : "Paul is a very spcial dud , but then we are all very spcial " The only way you'll achive anything in life, or at least some happines is if you take to this. :D [i] It seems like now, I lost my life a little [/i] :D

[max]

although i will now publicly admit to enjoying some of the wings' output (eg 'band on the run'), i also think, paul mccartney represents the shallow songwriter perfectly lee wrote: 'It baffles me that some people only seem able to write good stuff when they're in pain and when things are good, they can't, but that seems very common. I think maybe as I said earlier, a lot of people are afraid to fully experience joy and passion, they experience it as kind of an escapist thing and it gets blunted. And comes out as REALLY corny songs.' problem is a lot of songs are written for wrong reasons, primarily for cash, but also, for ego, or for contractual obligations personally, i have only ever written songs when i felt i couldn't do otherwise, and when it comes to love, there are only two situations when it were so: when i was chasing the girl, in order to attract her, and when we broke up, to deal with it unfortunately, or fortunately, when the relationship is going well, i feel no need to express, because i'm enjoing life as is (i've noticed in those times my writing becomes political) there are only two songs i have written, because i was so in love, that i felt i was going to burst (out of 25 or so in my repertoire), which does make them very special indeed as for 'silly love songs', or having paul maccartney guest on my record, mmmm, sorry, no, thanx, it's exactly the sort of commercial pop crap (a la aaron carter) that satan would be proud of i wish this girl all the best, but i do not wish to be in her shoes, because she's going to need all her strength to deal with the business, instead of just making art cheers max newcastle, oz

[Tedster]

Actually, so I hear, Paul is quite a regular dud, since he started taking Metamucil...

[miroslav]

[quote]Originally posted by popmusic: [b]20 years from now, Britney will be forgotten.[/b][/quote] I don't know man...according to a recent poll of Internet Search Engine Companies...she is the #2 searched item in the web (down from #1 last year). The word "tattoo" is #1 this year. Now...I can honestly say I never did a "Britney Spears" search...so who that hell is keeping her up there?

[alphajerk]

[quote]Originally posted by miroslav: [b]Now...I can honestly say I never did a "Britney Spears" search...so who that hell is keeping her up there?[/b][/quote] because people are looking for NAKED brittany pics ;) max, you said it so well... i wouldnt want to work with paul either. sappy muthafucker. like a pancake loaded with butter and maple syrup. this girl is just too young. who the fuck cares if she CAN sing... i saw a fat chick once belt it out karaoke once who would break janis joplins balls with her voice.... think she will ever get a record deal?

[RobT]

[quote]Originally posted by alphajerk: [b] i saw a fat chick once belt it out karaoke once who would break janis joplins balls with her voice.... think she will ever get a record deal?[/b][/quote] Shades of Martha Walsh. Man there are a million stories out there like that. Seems like record companies market a look first and talent second. Can you name any 'pop' acts that seem like they have paid ANY dues at ALL? RobT

[Lee Flier]

Uhhh... Danny, ya know, being from L.A. I got to meet quite a few of my musical heroes. And yes, I would classify most of them as "regular dudes" in the sense that they are human like the rest of us and worry about a lot of the same things. However, that still doesn't mean I don't consider many of them special. And yes, we are all special in some ways, but I don't have a problem saying that someone else is more talented than I am, more insightful, or just better at something. That's the simple reality: some people are smarter/stronger/kinder/more talented/whatever than others. And I think they should be acknowledged for that instead of trying to negate their accomplishments by saying "we're ALL special" or "we're all just the same". We ain't, and I think that's a GOOD thing. Ever read Kurt Vonnegut's story "Harrison Bergeron"? Check it out sometime. I think the majority of Paul McCartney's post-Beatle output sucks, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't enjoy meeting him and/or working with him. If he gave me a song and I thought it sucked, I would tell him so, in so many words, and I wouldn't do it. I'd hope he'd respect me for that. But I'm sure I'd have a lot to learn from him anyway. That doesn't mean I don't also learn an awful lot from other musicians I work with who aren't famous. But I think people like Paul McCartney have a unique perspective that is not to be missed if you have the opportunity. When I was 18 I got to meet the Rolling Stones and watch them rehearse, and it was something I'll never forget, and an invaluable learning experience. I'm glad I haven't gotten so cynical that I can't still look back on that and appreciate it. :) --Lee

[Dave Bryce]

[quote]Originally posted by Mr Darling: [b]So why don't I think this story is cool - because it didn't happen to you. If Lindsy would have posted this message, I would be all raving and reassuring and cool... But you are telling a story about someone else - and everyday, many people get their break[/b][/quote] Yeah, you're right. This sort of thing happens every day. Not just the Paul thing - there's lots of 15-year-olds with record deals with major labels. :rolleyes: When I heard this story (and the song), it made me feel wonderful - as is usually the case when I hear about really nice things happening to good people. I also considered this to be an exceptional story which I assumed my fellow musicians/engineers/producers would enjoy - it has been my experience that other people also like hearing stories of good fortune, especially when they hit close to home. In addition, I'd like to note that I enjoy hearing about such things, regardless of who tells it to me, or where I read it. I've never heard it postulated before that only the actual people to whom good things happen were supposed to tell people about it. Going by some of the posts in this thread, apparently there were other people who were glad that I posted this - sorry that you weren't one of them. Do have a pleasant day - it sounds as if you could use one. dB [ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: Dave Bryce ]

[Chip McDonald]

[quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier: [b]We ain't, and I think that's a GOOD thing. Ever read Kurt Vonnegut's story "Harrison Bergeron"? Check it out sometime. [/b][/quote] That's a cool book, and the movie was well done if I remember correctly. Unfortunately it kind of resonates too well with today...

[timrocker]

Looking over this entire thread, I see a couple of currents underneath. Heart-warming optimism, faith in our musical heroes, renewal of a long-standing fandom, with the introduction of new info. And then there's cynicism. Dismissiveness. Bitterness. Envy. Cynicism becomes automatic very rapidly, and soon it becomes self-fulfilling. If cynicism turns out to be justified by "reality" nine times out of ten, then it's going to be that tenth time that is most operative. And I'm going to take a leap from there. Hang on. Paul McCartney is a raging success in music because... He's an optimist! A romantic. A warm hearted soul. Among other things. I buy cheese fairly often, and feel that it's money well spent. (metaphor) Well, metaphor and fact. Cynicism? It's as free and common as air. Maybe cheaper than that. Paul McCartney, I hope you're reading this: Thank you for every note!

[Lee Flier]

[quote]Originally posted by timrocker: [b] Paul McCartney is a raging success in music because... He's an optimist! A romantic. A warm hearted soul. Among other things. [/b][/quote] DAMN, Tim. Are you single, and when are you moving to Atlanta? :D --Lee

[Lee Flier]

[quote]Originally posted by Chip McDonald: [b] That's a cool book, and the movie was well done if I remember correctly. Unfortunately it kind of resonates too well with today...[/b][/quote] Yeah I really dug the movie. And yeah, it IS all too relevant to today, unfortunately... --Lee

[Tedster]

[quote]Originally posted by timrocker: [QB] Paul McCartney is a raging success in music because... He's an optimist! A romantic. A warm hearted soul. Among other things. [QB][/quote] Then how do you account for Rage Against the Machine? :D Hey..my "Limburger" tag is not making fun of McCartney. It's just a joke, in answer to something Khan said I can't remember now. I like McCartney...he is a superlative as far as I'm concerned...yeah, I'd call him one of my "musical heroes".

[Lee Flier]

Rage Against the Machine are actually optimists/romantics, maybe even too much so. Actually most very angry people are romantics; their anger arises from the fact that they believe the world could be a much better place if only people wouldn't be such assholes... or something to that effect. A real CYNIC is somebody who doesn't care enough to believe that love, anger, fighting for what you believe in, respecting others, etc. is really worth anything. I would not put RATM in that category. A cynic is somebody who says, "It doesn't matter, we're all the same, nobody deserves any special recognition or respect so I might as well just sit around on my ass, I'll still be just as special as Paul McCartney." LOL... --Lee

[miroslav]

[quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier: [b]...I think the majority of Paul McCartney's post-Beatle output sucks...[/b][/quote] Ahhh...that might be a bit strong...but then it's your opinion Lee. I'll agree that there were many forgettable songs, but without going through Paul's entire post-Beatle discography at this time, I can recall more than just a few good tunes. Lets face it...even though most of the Beatle songs say Lennon & McCartney...they've all admitted that most of that stuff WAS written be either John or Paul...they didn't sit side by side at the piano composing EVERYTHING together. Yeah…I'm sure all the guys helped each other out in "polishing" the songs...but still McCartney was McCartney….before during and after the Beatles. His talents were refined during his Beatle days...but they didn't vanish just because he left the Beatles. Problem was...after leaving the Beatles, Paul had to prove himself AGAIN...even though he had just finished with the biggest band of that time! People just could get over the "when-are-you-guys-getting back-together-again" question, and so I believe much of his post-Beatle stuff went unnoticed because of that damn "question". Even after Lennon died people STILL kept asking, now finally, with the death of George, it will not be asked anymore...I think. Anyway...I'm not a Paul "worshiper", but as funny as it sounds...I think the guy is EXTREMELY under rated for his post-Beatle work.

[Lee Flier]

Well yeah, no doubt Paul has done some very cool stuff post-Beatles. Actually, the music community here in my fair city of Atlanta did a really cool tribute CD of Paul's post-Beatle stuff. [url=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000056ULL/qid=1008787798/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_14_1/102-0787567-2196953]Love In Song[/url] is really a great record, check it out... lots of my friends and my current bandmates are on it. :D I guess I just get so pissed off at Paul's real turkeys (and there've been quite a few) that I sometimes forget the good stuff! --Lee

[Philip OKeefe]

[quote]Originally posted by popmusic: [b] If I knew that, I'd write those kinds of songs! :D Many of the "happy to be in love" songs I like actually have an undercurrent of melancholy or something else going on besides just the happy thing... For some reason, that makes a love song more palatable to me. Maybe it's because life is more like that -- you don't always feel just one feeling, but there's usually a combination of things going on at any one time.[/b] Good point... [b]I mean, I guess you could call Brian Wilson's "Wouldn't It Be Nice" a love song, but it's more about expressing a desire than expressing euphoria.[/b] Yup - briliant love song, but as you said, expressing a desire (longing to be older so as to be together all the time) more than it is gushing about the target of the singer's love. And by expressing that desire so strongly, the [i]implication[/i] that comes through is that the guy must obviously really care about the girl. Or is it just an expression of overexaggerated teenage perception of "love"? You never get a complete answer, and both perceptions are probably equally valid. Another point to consider regarding this song (and many others): When Brian wrote it, he was married to Wendy already. THEY were past the ages where "say goodnight and stay together" was an issue. Yet Brian took an emotion / feeling which many people have experienced FROM HIS OWN PAST or from placing himself, as a writer, mentally / emotionally into someone else's "shoes" (or head or heart - whatever). That can be a powerful songwriting tool - sorta like an actor - you get into someone else's head and write from that perspective. And the more "universal" the experience and feelings are, and the more adept you are at voicing them, IMO, the more universal the appeal of the lyric. [b]"God Only Knows" could be considered a love song, but again there's something else going on below the surface.[/b] Yup again. In this case, the undercurrent is a forboding / fear of loss - It's a beautiful song, expressing incredible admiration for someone, but with the undercurrent of "what if I was to ever lose you?" thrown in as a foil to the sappiness. [b]McCartney's "Here, There, and Everywhere" -- a perfect love song in my book -- has a sadness to it, maybe not lyrically, but melodically... Especially on the "look in her eyes" part.[/b] Incredible song. Harmonies in it are so cool. Sappy? Yes. But probably the best use of block vocal harmonies ever recorded. Not to mention it's a great example of the melodic genius of Macca. Phil O'Keefe Sound Sanctuary Recording Riverside CA http://www.ssrstudio.com pokeefe777@ssrstudio.com [/quote] [ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: pokeefe777@msn.com ] [ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: pokeefe777@msn.com ]

[zele]

[quote]Originally posted by sactog: [b]"baaand on the run.. .>>{n-nee n-nee neerr ner nerrrr" } :D [/b][/quote] Perfect printed notation ---great transfer of one of Wings hooks --could not had "said" it better C Jo Go

[Roto]

I think Paul has done lots of good work since the Beatles, but not as good as George or John. I gotta say that his current single "Freedom", is probably the worst song I've ever heard from him. Sounds like he wrote it in 2 minutes on a cocktail napkin and whoever was responsible for releasing this tripe to the public should be flogged.

[DougP]

[quote]Originally posted by pokeefe777@msn.com: [b] I mean, I guess you could call Brian Wilson's "Wouldn't It Be Nice" a love song, but it's more about expressing a desire than expressing euphoria. Yup - briliant love song, but as you said, expressing a desire (longing to be older so as to be together all the time) more than it is gushing about the target of the singer's love. And by expressing that desire so strongly, the implication that comes through is that the guy must obviously really care about the girl. Or is it just an expression of overexaggerated teenage perception of "love"? You never get a complete answer, and both perceptions are probably equally valid. Another point to consider regarding this song (and many others): When Brian wrote it, he was married to Wendy already. THEY were past the ages where "say goodnight and stay together" was an issue. Yet Brian took an emotion / feeling which many people have experienced FROM HIS OWN PAST or from placing himself, as a writer, mentally / emotionally into someone else's "shoes" (or head or heart - whatever). That can be a powerful songwriting tool - sorta like an actor - you get into someone else's head and write from that perspective. And the more "universal" the experience and feelings are, and the more adept you are at voicing them, IMO, the more universal the appeal of the lyric. [/b][/quote] Don't forget that Tony Asher wrote the lyrics to "Wouldn't It Be Nice" (all the lyrics on 'Pet Sounds' for that matter, including the ones Mike Love claims he wrote, although not the one that were already Public Domain - "Sloop John B"). Of course (as with all the lyrics Asher wrote for 'Pet Sounds'), the lyrics were written based on ideas and feelings that Brian Wilson was expressing at the time during discussions with Asher. However, the feelings expressed in "Wouldn't It Be Nice" WERE NOT those of his past, but his CURRENT feelings for his wife Marilyn's sister, Diane (at least according to certain Beach Boys / Wilson bios - Wendy is his daughter BTW). Obviously, the song stands on its own without knowing that piece of trivia about it, but I think that knowing that little factoid makes the song even more interesting. I think that Tony Asher deserves a lot of credit for turning an unusual situation (at least I *hope* it's unusual for a guy to have an affair with his wife's sister!) into, as you say, a "universal" one.

[max]

i would dare suggest that the truly great love songs all have an interesting background an as for sir paul, undoubtedly, he is a great pop composer, but if you took john lennon's songs and george martin's production out of the beatles' equation, i think you'd be left with a very paltry/poultry burt bacarach imitation (a la 'a chair is still a chair') cheers max newcastle, oz ps i don't think i'm expressing cynicism, or am unromantic, i'm just opposed to crass commercialism (now that's cynical) pps i also am not a fan of sycophantic ravings

[Hippie]

I am a cynic also. I am always looking at the angle of where the money is to be made, marketing ploys, etc. I don't buy into much hype. I guess TV, & pop culture has made me think that not many things are what they seem. But now the Beatles, in my cynical view, really fuckin' did it, no bullshit, (okay, 'minimal' bullshit). They got their success the old fashioned way, they earned it. I mean, here we are 32 years after they split still talking about their music, and many more years of viability to come. I admit their amount of success is a bit out of control, for sure, but I will hold my belief that when someone has a gripe with The Beatles or their music it can only mean a couple of things. 1. There is those types that believe anything 'pop' cannot be cool, -too bad because the Beatles were the exception to that rule. Those people have missed out. 2. They just don't understand music, and cannot grasp what they did musically, even if it is not their 'cup of tea'. They have missed out again. 3. There are those that 'say' they don't like the Beatles to give the impression of acute individuality. -A sophmoric attempt at coolness. This works up until you are about 25, -get off that 'sinking ship' of thought. did I say I liked the Beatles? :D Matt

[alphajerk]

[quote]Originally posted by Hippie: [b]3. There are those that 'say' they don't like the Beatles to give the impression of acute individuality. -A sophmoric attempt at coolness. This works up until you are about 25, -get off that 'sinking ship' of thought.[/b][/quote] thats odd, i thought the beatles were cooler when i was a kid... then i did drugs. then the only stuff i thought they did that was cool was their last few albums [which i still like]. BUT there is much cooler stuff out there. JIMI was/is SO MUCH cooler than the beatles ever were or ever could be. i STILL think pauls a dork [its not really slamming him either, he is a goofball] then again, bassists are always dorks.

[Tedster]

[quote]Originally posted by Lee Flier: [b]Rage Against the Machine are actually optimists/romantics, maybe even too much so. Actually most very angry people are romantics; their anger arises from the fact that they believe the world could be a much better place if only people wouldn't be such assholes... or something to that effect. [/b][/quote] Yeah, ec-fucking-zactly! But, I was making a joke...there are a lot of brooding dark bands out there that are successful...you know what I'm getting at...

[Tedster]

Oh yeah...IMHO...what went wrong post Beatles is that they no longer had each other to act as a buffer for each other's eccentricities...although it seems Lennon had kinda outgrown his "lying naked and screaming into a tape machine with Yoko" stuff by the time the Beatles broke up. But, I could see Lennon having a poke at Paul for bringing simpy stuff to the table, and as a result Paul put it out post-Beatles, when he didn't have the others to say "That's a right load of crap!" Oh, they did indulge each other once in awhile...like Lennon's "Revolution 9" and McCartney's "Honey Pie" on the White Album... There was a VH1 "fantasy movie"...kinda perhaps based on an undocumented visit by McCartney to Lennon in New York in 1976. Now, we'll never be sure, but the movie has the character Lennon verbally assaulting McCartney over what a load of rubbish "Silly Love Songs" was. I could picture that happening. And it worked vice versa too. Lennon was fond of faux Lewis Carrollian gibberish, like his two published Poetic Collections. I could picture Paul saying "What's the New Mary Jane is a pile of garbage...we can't put that out". And then they have a good time with "You Know My Name"...go figure.