What is it about Band On The Run by McCartney-that makes it his best 70s work ? Or album

BOTR was the perfect mixture of commercial and quirky Paul. Everything just came together on this one. I actually think Red Rose Speedway was the start of him working towards this. It wasn't a well-reviewed album but it was his most commercial offering of the seventies so far.

BOTR's two main singles were very commercial, but still quite complex too. Helen Wheels was a little more routine, but it wasn't on the UK album so I don't tend to include it.


After this every album (Back To The Egg aside) for the rest of the decade had at least one worldwide smash on it. He'd found his hit making mojo again. Not that he ever really lost it, of course.

 

I'm of the opinion that every time Paul is under a bit of stress, he absorbs himself into the album he's working on. I get the impression listening to his records that making records is his therapy. Band on the Run is a great example, as is Electric Arguments, an album he also recorded with a songwriting partner. It's quintessential Paul.

 

As the OP suggests, Paul does seem to do his best work when times are hard. His first solo album (coping with the breakup of the Beatles) and Tug of War (the loss of John, and his reviews had been getting steadily worse for years) are other examples of this. But that doesn't really answer the question.
What sets BOTR apart? First of all, I think it's the only Wings album that doesn't have at least one piece of unlistenable dreck to slog through. I'd rate every song with at least three stars. That alone isn't enough to make it a great album as opposed to just a good one, but it does put it above most of the competition to start with. Also, most of the songs aren't just good, they're also original. His self-professed penchant for giving up on a song if he can't write it in five minutes has led to more than his share of cliches in his catalog, but I don't feel there are any here. (The melody of "Mamunia" is fairly derivative, I suppose, but the lyrics are evocative enough to forgive that.) They also all fit together pretty well in a way even some of his best solo songs really don't on their parent-albums. (I love "Maybe I'm Amazed," but it's always sounded tacked-on to McCartney in my opinion.) Finally, there's a polish here that his previous post-Beatles albums didn't have. Except for Red Rose Speedway they all sounded homemade (the first one, of course, really was). Paradoxically given the conditions under which it was recorded, BOTR doesn't.

 

For a very specific reason as explained by Geoff Emerick in his book. He said while recording 'Jet' he noticed a steady degradation in sound each time the tape was rewound and played again for each overdub. He said he consulted with his assistant engineer who glanced at the tape machine and casually mentioned that the tape was shedding and that there was a growing pile of metallic dust coming off the tape (tape manufacturers were experimenting with changes to their formulas/processes - often not very successfully which is why this became a big problem and is why tapes from this era often need to be baked to be playable for new masterings/remixes etc.

Anyway Emerick said he was furious as it was the assistant engineer's job to stay on top of things like that. He said he debated in his own mind whether to tell Paul about this technical catastrophe in the making which would have halted the session, but decided against it since the session was going so well musically and mood-wise. So instead he kept Paul in the dark - while boosting the treble slightly in Paul's headphones with each subsequent playback to compensate for the disintegrating tape. He was relieved when IIRC Paul veto'd Denny's suggestion of overdubbing one more guitar part before ending the session since Emerick said at this point the tape was becoming transparent from all the shedding. He stayed behind after the band left and copied the contents of the disintegrating tape onto a fresh reel.

I wonder if he ever told Paul...and if not, did Paul ever read his book...

 

"Loose Concept" was my exact words. Read the lyrics. Pretty simple stuff.

 

Four words: Let Me Roll It

 

When did he record in Jamaica?

 

I think a lot of it comes down to "right place, right time." In my opinion, Paul's writing seems to either a) get better with age. b) be really popular when he releases it, then ages horribly. Or c) It's a masterful work that transcends trends.

I think most artists have periods that are more intriguing and or popular than others, but some have long, fruitful careers that produces multiple gems. With such volume, it might seem like finding diamonds in the rough. For artists like McCartney or Frank Zappa, with any album I pick up, I think of it as finding a diamond along with some other gems, because it usually is.

 

Don't know why but it is so. Love it.

 

In the alternate universe, Paul and Linda go to record in Jamaica in 1973 after the other members of Wings refuse to re-record a dance version of Mary Had A Little Lamb. Paul & Linda go alone, but they get sidetracked into opening up a huge marijuana farm. Paul concentrates on the proper cultivation of the spiritual herb, and he never records another album. Occasionally, though, Paul & Linda do perform under the Suzie & The Red Stripes moniker on Friday nights at a local bar ...

 

I've never really understood why "Band on the Run" escapes the flak given to other McCarney/Wings albums. It seems the main complaint from more casual fans is that McCartney is too silly/has too many lightweight or fluffy songs. And yet this album, with at least three songs (a whopping 33%) that fit perfectly in the fluffy category - Mrs. Vandebilt, Mamunia and Picasso's Last Words - escapes criticism.

Also, the title track is very well done and works great as a musical track, but is quite incoherent lyrically - another Paul characteristic that I personally don't mind, but which is always trotted out as a criticism of McCartney's other albums.

Nor do I think that the rocking singles Helen Wheels (which isn't really on "Band on the Run" but hey) and Jet (another incomprehenisble Paul lyric) are particularly good in comparison with Wings' other rock singles of the 70s - Hi Hi Hi, Live and Let Die, Junior's Farm, Girl's School. But that's obviously subjective.

That leaves the universally-hailed-as-great Nineteen Hundred and Eighty-five, the sweet but somewhat slight Bluebird, the live staple Let Me Roll It and the never-spoken-about No Words. Hardly the makings of a "great album", IMO.

Personally, I'd rate it maybe fifth or sixth in Paul's solo catalogue.

 

if you think that MV, M, and PLW are fluff..then....my friend..you are in the wrong thread.....and that's ok....

 

wow..great info....it really sounds like it..doesn't it?.......of course..nowadays..they could do something to enhance it up?

 

Diagree on No Words...
That is brilliant. Completely underrated tune.

 

Must be the extra EMI reverb.

 

This is the album where Paul said...without actually saying it, "We're a band".

"We're not the Beatles but we're a band."

And it's solid throughout.

These lyrics help as well...giving a sense that Paul still had it in him (a sense of the counterculture/ a depth/a sense of gravitas):

"Stuck inside these four walls
Sent inside forever
Never seeing no one nice again,
Like you, mama
You, mama...
You...

If I ever get out of here
Thought of giving it all away
To a registered charity.
All I need is a pint a day
If I ever get out of here
(if we ever get out of here)"

 

I understand; what I'm saying is I don't hear a concept throughout the album at all...unless you mean musically, in which he brings back the "ho hey ho" in Picasso from Mrs. Vanderbuilt.

 

It's very well sequenced and very easy to listen to (which can't be said of its main rivals, POB and ATMP, partly because of the harrowing subject matter of the first and the Spectorian over-production of the latter).

 

Along the same lines as post #66, at the time it came out this album was seen as Paul being serious again, with the most satisfying and solid group of songs since his prior band. It had a more unified, band-sound production to it, whereas McCartney, Ram, Red Rose Speedway - as good to great as they were - sounded like solo efforts. Wings Wildlife was Paul dabbling with his first ever post-Beatles group with material that was only fair-to-middlin' (with a couple of exceptions) so Band On the Run came along and took the world by surprise with it's great compositions and cohesive production quality that had been lacking on the afore-mentioned albums. It still sounds great today.

 

What is it about Band On The Run by McCartney-that makes it his best 70s work ?

Controversial take, but I'm going to say it's the songs.

 

Wow...you're being even harsher than me...I do feel it's an excellent album; but I base that totally on side one which *is* a consistently strong album side Side two is not much better (or worse)than any of his other albums that have gotten mixed reviews in the 70's. I'm with you on the "rocking singles" assessment. The four songs you mentioned are four of my all time favorite solo McCartney tracks, overall (and you want to talk about overlooked??? Girls Schooll gets the award on that!!). I still say that any of the "rocking" songs on BOTR would have have rocked harder had Henry and Denny S. played on them (supposedly there are session tapes as such...if so, it's a crime that Paul didn't include them in the so-called "archive" re-issue..but being Paul, I can understand why).

FWIW, my rankings on BOTR:
-BOTR-A
-Jet-A
-Bluebird-B+ (compared say, to Blackbird which is an A+, IMO)
-Mrs. Vanderbilt-B
-Let Me Roll It-A
-Mamunia-B-
-No Words-C (could have been SO much better..I feel they got very lazy on this one).
-Picasso's Last Words-B (overrated in my view...and the return of the "ho hey ho" from MV is a nice "twist" but it really doesn't add anything...unlike the brilliant, cohesive sequential shifts in You Never Give Me Your Money (or even the title track of this album), this sounds like a section that was just put in there for the sake of it. It doesn't add to the song in any way.
-Nineteen Hundred and Eighty Five-A-For me, the only truly outstanding song on side two.

 

Obviously I know Live & Let Die was done for the Bond movie, & Hi Hi Hi was a hit single. But Live & Let Die was done during the Red Rose sessions.

My point was, he's Paul McCartney he can & could do pretty much as he pleases. He had enough top shelf, fresh material to make Red Rose Speedway just as strong as BOTR, in terms of quality songs, in fact imo better than BOTR.

Now as far as the style, Sonic's, grooves all that other stuff, that's a different discussion. Mccartney by no means picked his 10-11 best fresh songs for RRS, not even close. RRS has perhaps 5-6 good songs on it. But he had another 20 sitting there, mostly good ones. Some he never even bothered to record. Like 1882. He did record the Mess, but it's raw & unfinished.

We can quibble over which 5 songs would've been best to substitute in, on the RRS album. But Live & Let Die is a must. Tell the James Bond people they can have a 3-4 month exclusive on their soundtrack. He'll delay the release of RRS for 90 days after the movie soundtrack comes out.. not using Live & Let Die on RRS is equivalent to not using Help in 1965. Too good a cut not to use.

Hypothetically if RRS had been say something like this

1. Live & Let Die
2. Get on right thing
3. One More Kiss
4. Big Barn Bed
5. Single Pigeon
6. Hi Hi Hi
7. Cmoon
8. Little Lamb dragonfly
9. I lie around
10 My Love..

Something along those lines stands up to BOTR song for song. You can quibble substitute Dragonfly & or Single Pigeon for 1882 or whatever , he had 10 really good tracks easy. It needed 2-3 harder rockin tracks, & crappy songs like Indian on the moon & Power Cut needed to be dumped..

But none of that happened, for some crazy reason, he must've driven the label nuts, with his track selections. Band on the run is consistent, it rocks, but still has 3 nice ballads, & all 10 songs are very good to great. B ut certainly RRS could have had all those same qualities with 4-5 track substitutions.

I'd love to hear the Denny Denny Henry lineup rehearsals of the BOTR songs, curious as heck to compare that. Somebody said they're better. I forget if it was Seiwell or Laine, somebody said they were better.

 

I think Band On The Run is a complete package. From the concept of freedom and escape, to the album art to the music itself, it's all there.
This is a great album. I'd put it up there with the great albums of the 70's (not greatest, mind you, just up there) and one of the best albums of the solo Beatles.
I tend to think Band On The Run is taken for granted in the McCartney catalogue; we all know how good it is, and so does everyone else. For me, I dont care how overplayed the hits are, when Jet or the title track unexpectedly get airplay, the songs just take me to a different place. They are classic for a reason.
Someday I'd like to learn when Paul actually had these songs. It's a miracle some of them weren't siphoned off onto Red Rose Speedway to strengthen that album. I'm glad he didn't because we'd all now be coming up with tracklists to try and improve that 2nd 1973 album.
I'm in the USA, I like having Helen Wheels on side two. It's nice to meet up again with "Sailor Sam from Birmingham" after he was last seen breaking out of the prison on side one.
Wonderful stuff.
BTW, Denny's Time To Hide from Speed of Sound which lyrically touches on life as a fugitive would have been a nice addition to Band On the Run.

 

other than the totally putrid "mamunia" "band on the run" is far and away mccartney's strongest album, nothing else in the catalog even comes close.

 

I would put Ram up there.

Not everyone is a big Paul McCartney fan, of course.

Which is fine.