Indeed, but that's the point. For an album, the band were happy to include material that arguably weakened the album. I think McCartney carried that thinking ("don't be too precious") into his solo career, even when albums became the more important vehicle for one's music.
On that, I would disagree. It should never be forgotten that, in The Beatles, there was always other songwriters and musicians to rely on for the rest of the content. He goes from a set ratio of three tracks (rocker/auntie-fave/pop) to having an extra slot for another pop song… until 1966. "Paperback Writer" onwards finds Paul stretching his creative skills at the exact time John goes another direction, and they are able to balance that split to get stronger albums overall — something Paul himself acknowledges when he tours, because Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, The Beatles and Let It Be offer more than one cut per show. He even makes sure to touch on singles in that period too: "Paperback Writer," "Penny Lane," Magical Mystery Tour EP, "Hello Goodbye," "Lady Madonna" and "Hey Jude." Yellow Submarine was never more than a side project for The Beatles as a group. And when he gets to the last album, Abbey Road, we find Paul taking over the challenge of a larger composition with the medley are John returns to singles and George steps up to fill Paul's role. That's not something he had once solo in 1971. Ram onwards has found Paul needing to write most, if not all, the songs for the album and singles, and he's not slowing down to do that. He's taking less than a year between each album from Ram to Band on the Run, and it's only because he needs to get the new band up and together that he pauses in 1974. Venus And Mars to Back To The Egg also finds less than a year between albums – especially when you add in touring and the unreleased projects in between. He pauses again in 1980, but note that Tug Of War through Broad Street are done in a two year period, with promotion time after for Broad Street once it's edited and ready for release. Press to Play is really the first time when he seems disappointed by the results — which, in turn, means bringing in another set of eyes for the songs and taking some more time to write them… but not more. Given that run, it's impossible for him to pick and choose the best cuts for each only. He never has someone else to pick up the slack or offer the other side of the album (the experimental or esoteric, the pop to rock ratio, etc.). What ends up happening is you have a lot more middling tracks — which is bad compared to some contemporaries… until you also recognize that his contemporaries aren't writing that many albums in the same period and the same ratio of songs, all with the same number of hits.
Yes, I got the joke. That was my wry response to the lack of info............ hence the emoji. As a followup, I will say that I expect the second disc [or is it the third...?] to include the following songs: Looking for You (McCartney, Richard Starkey) Oobu Joobu Part 1, featuring the song I Love This House from 1984 with David Gilmour Broomstick with Steve Miller Oobu Joobu Part 2, featuring the song Atlantic Ocean from 1987 Oobu Joobu Part 3, featuring the song Squid, an instrumental from 1987 Oobu Joobu Part 4, featuring Paul's solo version of Don't Break the Promise Love Come Tumbling Down from 1987 Oobu Joobu Part 5, featuring the original version of Beautiful Night from 1986 Same Love recorded in 1988 Oobu Joobu Part 6, featuring the song Love Mix from 1987
No, but it is included in the "Bruce McMouse" film and the superb Wings Over Europe CD exclusive to the "Big Barn Box"!
MW So true....the pandemic has dampened the mood for many but the prospects of releases in 2020 from the Fabs and Solo Fabs is highly encouraging (except for my wallet)!
I don't disagree, but I think we're veering into a subtly different topic. Here, you're talking about the workload - the simple numbers of only having to provide half an album's worth of material in the 1960s. That topic is being discussed elsewhere. If I recall, the topic my post was contributing to, was a discussion as to why McCartney would include relatively weaker material such as Really Love You and Used to be Bad instead of stronger material. In this scenario, we're not talking about an absence of sufficient strong material, we're talking about the decision making process that goes on with the material he does have. My point was that McCartney isn't looking to release the strongest album - he's happy to include material that is perhaps a little weaker but that he really enjoyed making. Hence, we have material like What's That You're Doing, Get It, Hey Hey and the above two tracks, all of which have something in common: they're the result of collaborations with others. Now, whether McCartney chose to include those songs because he felt the presence of material that would interest fans of those other artists (and hence, result in increased sales), or whether he chose to include them as a "thank you" to those artists (who would, in some cases, benefit from some royalties) or whether he genuinely thought the tracks were up to snuff, only he knows. But my money is on a more "who cares?" attitude. One in which McCartney chooses to throw songs in because he had fun making them with his mates, so "why not put them on his albums?" instead of making hard-headed decisions based purely on merit.
I find the encouraging thing on the "classic rock" front being the major announcement of the new Dylan studio album.....that was encouraging to see that given a solid release date!
There may have been misinterpretation about the central core of your post, but I think the question of what is sufficient strong material is subjective. For Paul, I think the answer to why the albums are sequenced the way they are does rely heavily on his time with The Beatles, when the shift from a collection of singles to the album as a unified concept occurs. His work on Abbey Road, for example, demonstrates a focus on the overall flow of the album regardless of the individual songs — and, it should be pointed out, Back to the Egg is a perfect examples of an album that does have strong individual songs but doesn't work as a flow because there are no transitional pieces from one mood to another. Again: that's subjective about the pieces. For example, I would toss out "If You Wanna" far quicker than "Used To Be Bad" – it's a weaker melody with weak lyrics. At least with "Used To Be Bad" there's a sense of enjoyment in the performance. But, more importantly, think of the album as a whole. When it comes to "What's That You're Doing," what other piece did Paul have to replace it on the album with? If you're sequencing side one of Tug Of War, what uptempo piece does he have ready that can fit between "Somebody Who Cares" and "Here Today"? "I'll Give You A Ring" and "Keep Under Cover" don't really work. "Average Person" still needed work. Same with "Get It" — what other cut was around to finish the LP? Would Tug Of War be the same if the album was sequenced as: Tug Of War / Take It Away / Somebody Who Cares / Rainclouds / Here Today / Ballroom Dancing / The Pound Is Sinking / Wanderlust / Sweetest Little Show / Dress Me Up A Robber / Ebony And Ivory? Would "Hey Hey" be better off replaced by "It's Not On"? I'm not a fan of "Broomstick" and I think "Looking For You" is as bad as "Really Love You"… so what b-side from those actual sessions does Paul think good enough to include for release that's connected to Flaming Pie that could fit in as replacements for the two tracks you've identified and have the same overall flow of the LP? And I don't buy the idea that he's thinking of his friends. "My Old Friend" may have come at the end of the Tug Of War sessions, but it sounds incredible and could have easily been given a session or two to include it. "Ballad of the Skeleton" was not included nor was "Vo!ce" — and it was five years before "We Got Married" was good enough to release. I really do think Paul takes clips of the songs, puts them in various sequences, and picks the one that sounds the best to his ears based on his feelings for the album. For me, that's what makes albums like Memory Almost Full, New and especially Egypt Station so problematic compared to albums like Pipes Of Peace, Press to Play or Flaming Pie: unlike the earlier albums, there are no singles really to put the lesser material out on and, as a result, we have albums that sequence flatly – if you put them on, there's far less awareness of the change in tempo, or ways in which certain songs can play off each other. Even parts of Driving Rain have this problem – it really goes to the right co-producer for the album versus the right producer for the song. That, or it's the lack of Linda, who may have had an instinct for the LP that we don't really recognize. As fans, we can note how we feel some b-sides may sequence better in the album than the chosen tracks (Off the Ground is a fine example of that) but we have to think that Paul has his own idea of flow… even through something like Pure McCartney. Pure McCartney's double-disc version doesn't have anywhere the same kind of musical value that the four disc version has, and it's not for lack of key tracks but rather the four disc set really has a much better flow from track to track. And Paul is very much concerned about that. Look at his answer when asked if he'd ever play an entire album in sequence like many of his contemporaries: he would want to find a place in the middle for other tracks that sound like they belong.
The good news is also that if this box has supposedly been ready to go for a couple years, it could be all completed and sitting in boxes long before all this virus stuff happened?
