Poor Paul McCartney

[IQ89]

It must be tough for Paul. No longer having the ability to write a song worth listening to.

Just heard a few songs from his new album. Poor guy is still playing the same four chords, the same four chords he's been rearranging for the last 30 years. Too bad he didn't learn how to read music, and maybe take a bunch of music theory and other related classes after the Beatles broke up. He'd probably be writing some really beautiful instrumental stuff right now. But no, he's stuck doing the exact same sh** he was doing in the late 1970's. Oh well. Can't feel too sorry for him though.

[HesseJam]

He was the most overrated Beatle at their time.

[jokerthief]

[ QUOTE ]
He was the most overrated Beatle at their time.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's only because nobody thought much of Ringo.

[IQ89]

[ QUOTE ]
He was the most overrated Beatle at their time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Quick, there's still time to delete your post.

[mmbt0ne]

I was thinking about this recently, and decided that Paul McCartney pretty much has the best life in the world. He's plenty rich. Not Bill Gates rich obviously, but he has more money than he'll ever need. On top of that, he's not weird looking like Bill and some of the other computer rich. He's never enslaved his population to gain money. He's pretty much adored the world over. A part of the greatest band ever. Oh yeah, and he's a freaking KNIGHT, so everyone in his country has to call him Sir. That would be pretty sweet.

[ChipWrecked]

[ QUOTE ]
I was thinking about this recently, and decided that Paul McCartney pretty much has the best life in the world. He's plenty rich. Not Bill Gates rich obviously, but he has more money than he'll ever need. On top of that, he's not weird looking like Bill and some of the other computer rich. He's never enslaved his population to gain money. He's pretty much adored the world over. A part of the greatest band ever. Oh yeah, and he's a freaking KNIGHT, so everyone in his country has to call him Sir. That would be pretty sweet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Plus, he gets lots of amputee sex.

[Vavavoom]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was thinking about this recently, and decided that Paul McCartney pretty much has the best life in the world. He's plenty rich. Not Bill Gates rich obviously, but he has more money than he'll ever need. On top of that, he's not weird looking like Bill and some of the other computer rich. He's never enslaved his population to gain money. He's pretty much adored the world over. A part of the greatest band ever. Oh yeah, and he's a freaking KNIGHT, so everyone in his country has to call him Sir. That would be pretty sweet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Plus, he gets lots of amputee sex.

[/ QUOTE ]

Low blow......but oh so sweet.....

What wings would this be....?

[ChipWrecked]

'Wings Over Penthouse Forum'.

[captZEEbo1]

hey, he's got some good post-beatles songs, back off, he's old.

[ QUOTE ]
But no, he's stuck doing the exact same sh** he was doing in the late 1970's. Oh well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you aware that he was in a group before Wings?

[tek]

Agreed. In addition to weak music, he's a greedy whore. His Beatles money wasn't enough, so he formed Wings. Money from that group wasn't enough so he's toured for over 25 years.

Not to mention that his first wife was a daughter of George Eastman (Kodak film), so he's got a shitload of her inheritance...

[Hamish McBagpipe]

He's also, unfortunately, one of those older men who seems to have the hormonal imbalance that slowly turns him into a woman.

[Broken Glass Can]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh yeah, and he's a freaking KNIGHT, so everyone in his country has to call him Sir.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does he get to wear a coat of armor?

ps - You can be called "sir" too, just go to your local Denny's. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[astroglide]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you aware that he was in a group before Wings?

[/ QUOTE ]

he says "after the beatles broke up" in his post, douche.

why is everybody so excited to make the mccartney/band before wings "joke"? it's not remotely funny.

[Vavavoom]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


ps - You can be called "sir" too, just go to your local Denny's. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

nh

[Indiana]

Paul is a brilliant songwriter, not nececessarily a great musician. Same for Lennon.

Indy

[kenberman]

I'm sure Paul McCartney feels bad for you too

[smokingrobot]

george was the man.

[Pirc Defense]

[ QUOTE ]
Paul is a brilliant songwriter, not nececessarily a great musician. Same for Lennon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on what you mean by "great musician." He certainly isn't as capable of playing the piano as Van Cliburn winners, but then that's not what his goal is. Neither can he play guitar as technically good/fast as, say, Malsteem (sp), but then who likes that crap, anyway?

For a pop musician he's among the best there ever was. He could play the piano very, very well (Martha My Dear is not an easy piece to play), he is arguably the best bass guitarist ever, and he is a studio-quality drummer (he played drums on a few of the Beatles tunes) and on some of his post-Beatles albums, he played every instrument. And did I mention the beautiful voice? And he wrote his own stuff, tons of it. Such a package does not exist today and, outside of Lennon, probably never has.

I don't understand the sudden upwelling of "Beatles and everything related sux" threads. I think that these types of threads, some 40-odd years after they broke up, is proof enough of their legacy.

There also must be some reason that music mags like Mojo have some Beatle-related material in about 98% of their issues.

If for some odd reason you don't like the Beatles, understand that you are in the vast minority and kindly go about your business.

[istewart]

[ QUOTE ]
Paul is a brilliant songwriter, not nececessarily a great musician. Same for Lennon.

Indy

[/ QUOTE ]

For a 60s rock bassist he was actually very good. His drumming was not bad either /images/graemlins/wink.gif Lennon I agree with but Paul was very good at what he did.

[IQ89]

[ QUOTE ]
he (Paul McCartney) is arguably the best bass guitarist ever

[/ QUOTE ]

Jaco Pastorius must be spinning in his grave right now.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand the sudden upwelling of "Beatles and everything related sux" threads.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't a "Beatles Suck" thread.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are you aware that he was in a group before Wings?

[/ QUOTE ]

he says "after the beatles broke up" in his post, douche.

why is everybody so excited to make the mccartney/band before wings "joke"? it's not remotely funny.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because, douche, people who are familiar with his music with the Beatles generally don't make such comments. And, I repeat, douche.

[IQ89]

[ QUOTE ]
people who are familiar with his music with the Beatles generally don't make such comments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just for the record, I think The Beatles are thee best band ever, period. Next would be Led Zeppelin, who where influenced by the beatles. How? Before the beatles, it was uncommon for performers to also be the writers of the songs they performed. You had a writer and then you had some other guy who arranged the song before the performer ever heard it. Jimmy Page was VERY inspired by how the beatles changed all that. Kinda like, "Hey, if they can do it maybe I can too." The rest is history.

My criticism of Sir Paul is basically the same as John Lennon's criticism of Elvis Presley after Elvis got out of the army. He felt that Elvis had lost "it" (except he didn't phrase it that politely). In my opinion, McCartney hasn't written a song worth listening to since Wings. If you or any body else can name a song he's written within the last 25 years that could be considered listenable (let alone heralded as undeniably great) please mention the title.

[astroglide]

[ QUOTE ]
It must be tough for Paul. No longer having the ability to write a song worth listening to.

Just heard a few songs from his new album. Poor guy is still playing the same four chords, the same four chords he's been rearranging for the last 30 years. Too bad he didn't learn how to read music, and maybe take a bunch of music theory and other related classes after the Beatles broke up. He'd probably be writing some really beautiful instrumental stuff right now. But no, he's stuck doing the exact same sh** he was doing in the late 1970's. Oh well. Can't feel too sorry for him though.

[/ QUOTE ]

it is plainly obvious that he is crestfallen over the fact that the beatles were great, and his post-beatles output is not. you are a [censored] moron.

[jokerthief]

[ QUOTE ]

it is plainly obvious that he is crestfallen over the fact that the beatles were great, and his post-beatles output is not. you are a [censored] moron.

[/ QUOTE ]

No he is a troll. That's why I am ignoring this user.

[astroglide]

which user? i'm ignoring niss now too, iq89 seems cool.

[jokerthief]

niss

What do you want him to play? Ska? Death metal?

[jokerthief]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Paul is a brilliant songwriter, not nececessarily a great musician. Same for Lennon.

Indy

[/ QUOTE ]

For a 60s rock bassist he was actually very good. His drumming was not bad either /images/graemlins/wink.gif Lennon I agree with but Paul was very good at what he did.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Lennon is very underrated as a guitarist. He came up with some very inovative chord progressions during a time where musicians were doing typical D A G simple stuff mostly. He also was inovative with his rhythms.

*edit--He also was one of the best vocalist ever.

[imported_The Vibesman]

[ QUOTE ]
Just for the record, I think The Beatles are thee best band ever, period. Next would be Led Zeppelin, who where influenced by the beatles. How? Before the beatles, it was uncommon for performers to also be the writers of the songs they performed. You had a writer and then you had some other guy who arranged the song before the performer ever heard it. Jimmy Page was VERY inspired by how the beatles changed all that. Kinda like, "Hey, if they can do it maybe I can too." The rest is history.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just for the record, it was Buddy Holly who changed all that. He was the first white artist to write his own tunes, he also produced and co-produced his own sessions, as well as using the same 4-piece band he toured with in the studio instead of an orchestra. Although blues musicians had actually been doing this for years (as well as almost everything else in rock and roll), Holly was the first white mainstream artist to do it. It was so uncommon that Holly actually had to use pseudonyms on many of the credits to avoid problems with songwriters unions. I have 45's with the name "Hardin" on the label as songwriter (Buddy's middle name) and the description: Vocal Group With Orchestra, when it's obviously just two guitars, bass, and drums on the record. As well as all this, he also produced other acts and wrote over 10 hit records, despite dying at the age of 22.

The Beatles were, in fact, so influenced by Holly's music that McCartney said their very name was a take-off on Holly's band's name, "The Crickets."

Oh, and about the thread topic, uhh, yeah, I feel really sorry for Paul McCartney. How terrible his life must be.

[LetYouDown]

[ QUOTE ]
I think Lennon is very underrated as a guitarist. He came up with some very inovative chord progressions during a time where musicians were doing typical D A G simple stuff mostly. He also was inovative with his rhythms.

[/ QUOTE ]
Lennon is one of the best rhythm guitarists ever. He was fantastic. Playing tunes at 300 BPM does not a good guitarist make.

[IQ89]

[ QUOTE ]
Just for the record, it was Buddy Holly who changed all that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I forgot that, I've seen 'The Buddy Holly Story' about 15 times, but it still just slipped my mind. Besides, I said that before the Beatles it was uncommon, not that it had never been done before. I should have said the Beatles helped to change all that, which they did. Thanks for the reminder though.

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]

Not to mention that his first wife was a daughter of George Eastman (Kodak film), so he's got a shitload of her inheritance...

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. This is a commonly repeated urban legend. At least get your facts right when you trash some one.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
Wrong. This is a commonly repeated urban legend. At least get your facts right when you trash some one.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is OOT. I can repeat unfounded urban legends here /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wrong. This is a commonly repeated urban legend. At least get your facts right when you trash some one.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is OOT. I can repeat unfounded urban legends here /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Then I am free to mention your propensity to wear women's underwear while you play poker or is that still supposed to be a secret? /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
Agreed. In addition to weak music, he's a greedy whore. His Beatles money wasn't enough, so he formed Wings. Money from that group wasn't enough so he's toured for over 25 years.

Not to mention that his first wife was a daughter of George Eastman (Kodak film), so he's got a shitload of her inheritance...

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the ending of the Beatles required him to roll over and die or anything. After all, music had been his whole life. What was he supposed to do, sign up for premature cryonics?

And his stuff wasn't all bad, by a long shot. Not a big Wings fan myself, I admit. And he was third place among the Beatles, to me.

[zephed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
people who are familiar with his music with the Beatles generally don't make such comments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just for the record, I think The Beatles are thee best band ever, period. Next would be Led Zeppelin, who where influenced by the beatles. How? Before the beatles, it was uncommon for performers to also be the writers of the songs they performed. You had a writer and then you had some other guy who arranged the song before the performer ever heard it. Jimmy Page was VERY inspired by how the beatles changed all that. Kinda like, "Hey, if they can do it maybe I can too." The rest is history.


.


My criticism of Sir Paul is basically the same as John Lennon's criticism of Elvis Presley after Elvis got out of the army. He felt that Elvis had lost "it" (except he didn't phrase it that politely). In my opinion, McCartney hasn't written a song worth listening to since Wings. If you or any body else can name a song he's written within the last 25 years that could be considered listenable (let alone heralded as undeniably great) please mention the title.

[/ QUOTE ]
What in the [censored] are you talking about? Lots of artists wrote and played their own material way before the Beatles.

[tek]

That's ok. It distracts the table and keeps my head warm. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[IQ89]

[ QUOTE ]
What in the [censored] are you talking about? Lots of artists wrote and played their own material way before the Beatles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jimmy Page Interview 12/99 (http://www.led-zeppelin.com/news-pageint12-99.html)

"Then you had the Beatles..., It wasn't so much, for me, their music, but the fact that they wrote their own songs and all of a sudden they opened the door for any band that could write songs."

[bwana devil]

i thought this post was going to be about the commerical i saw him on tonight. was it for a credit card or something? he is a mutlimillionaire x infinity and he dimes himself out as some corporate whore? wtf?

at least once youre rich you can pretend to have principles.

bwana