Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Thrillington, Mar 25, 2017.
RED ROSE SPEEDWAY
You are a bold one!
It might even ameliorate some potential ego problems: "Of course sales were down for these four titles -- we released four at the same time!" It might also help on reviews: one batch of middling reviews, instead of two or four. Not to anticipate... I mean, ahem (!), open-minded reviewers of course will naturally praise them all to the skies whenever and however they get released (if they get released)!
I'm not denying it nicely collects all the bonus tracks, but it does not fit the Archive Edition format.
And yes, it would be a number of years before it is likely to get the proper Archive Edition edition. [I would guess maybe when it turns 20..? 2033?] Hopefully when it does they will have added some stuff for those of us who already have the current edition [and are still among the living].
The other issue is that, by 2033, it is doubtful (though not impossible) that McCartney will still be among the living himself, in which case who knows how posthumous releases will be handled?
You think it's doubtful he'll last 5 and a bit years!?
I'm hoping he'll have finally got around to adding Monkberry Moon Delight to his, by then, 4 hour plus set list at that point!
I have all the de luxe box sets. I hope the series will continue, and I will buy them all. (Right now I am listening to the Flowers in the Dirt album from the box, and enjoying it as much as ever).
I get where you are coming from, but I'll offer an alternative.... Paul McCartney is one of the most renowned and respected musicians of the 20th century. Much like Dylan, I think all of his work is worthy of re-evaluation and preservation. Within McCartney's output, there are greater and lesser works. Often, both are found on the same album. McCartney's work is worthy of analysis over his entire career - from his Beatles work through his solo career. Why did he make an album like Wild Life? How did this fit into his overall career arc? The same is the case for all the albums. Why did Dylan make Self Portrait?
As far as commercial prospects, the McCartney crazies (such as myself) are going to buy London Town just as sure as they bought Band On The Run. I can't imagine the average fan forking over money for the deluxe boxes.
Check your math.
I originally entered 2023 by mistake but did edit it immediately!
I think I must have read it when it was 2023, then you'd edited it by the time I hit reply! (It did say it had been added "Just now" when I read it)
Four at once would be a pretty big hit to the wallet at once. I prefer 2 and 2. Also, all physical media, please. No more downloads.
No, I think a lot of the reappraisal predated the reissue - like "Ram", it started to get some hipster cred...
1882 needs an official release. Come on MPL let's get on the ball!
My favorite unreleased Paul tune that he never gave away.
That one is a real shame. It's a great song and better than a lot of what Paul was putting out at the time.
I think my favorite is "Cage".
For me, "1882" still has the Beatles vibe buried within it, both musically and lyrically. It likely was written (or at least started) at the very tail-end of the group, so it was before Paul deviated his style of writing ever so slightly (where, as he has admitted, he was trying purposefully to not write songs in the style of the Beatles). I guess that MPL would have to add this as a bonus track for any Wild Life Archive set.
Does this make any sense to anyone? I mean, a "song in the style of The Beatles" is, for the most part, a "song in the style of John Lennon and Paul McCartney." Part of "Beatlesque" is, by definition, "McCartneyesque." They wrote songs in a way they liked. So, in Paul's solo career, he writes songs in a way he doesn't like? Or maybe he writes songs in a way he only sort of likes?
If that's true, what's up with Ram?
Paul has admitted that he was hesitant to write overtly Beatle-style songs in the 1970s. He tried to approach songs differently and he was not comfortable with songs that sounded overtly like a song that the Beatles could have done. Sure, McCartneyesque is often synonymous with Beatlesque, but not always. As for Ram, much of it had its origins in the tail-end of the Beatles, so those songs do have a Beatles-like flavor. But many of his later output is very McCartneyesque but not Beatlesque --- or to me, they don't sound like the Beatles.
I recall when Paul was working with Elvis Costello around the Flowers In The Dirt period. And Elvis was encouraging Paul to not be afraid to write and play songs that had a more-Beatles-like structure, and to play bass-lines that were more Beatles-like, and to do harmonies that were more like Beatles harmonies. Elvis noticed that Paul avoided typical musical twists and musical motifs that Paul (and John) used in the Beatles, and which Paul purposefully avoided in much of his solo work.
So that's what I meant. It wasn't a perfectly worded post of mine, and I apologize for not being as clear as I probably should have been.
No problem. I find it interesting. I love Paul's solo career. He's my favorite musician and songwriter, after all, so I'm not sure if I can say I wish he'd have written more Beatle-style songs, as it would have meant less McCartneyesque songs. I think he's currently at a place where he does whatever he feels like, and he has certainly (clearly) embraced the Beatles. I just wish he'd play more Beatles songs at his live shows.
Wish he'd play no Beatles songs at his concerts
Go back to 1972 in the Macca time machine and your wish will come true. Plus you'll also get a live version of "Bip Bop"....
Yup. I knew exactly what you meant, as I remember those quotes from him about EC encouraging his Beatle-isms to resurface around FITD as well.
Separate names with a comma.