Paul McCartney Live

This isn't exactly my dream setlist, but it's the sort of setlist which I think would be a good compromise between the various extremes.

It includes a lot of Beatles songs while still giving a fairly balanced look at Paul's overall career, without any major chronological gaps.

The more esoteric choices are mostly songs that I think would go over reasonably well with those in the audience who don't recognize them.

1. Junior's Farm
2. Take It Away
3. She's A Woman
4. Lovely Rita
5. No More Lonely Nights
6. My Brave Face
7. The World Tonight
8. Paperback Writer

(Paul on piano)
9. Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da
10. Maybe I'm Amazed
11. Warm And Beautiful
12. Anyway
13. Wanderlust
14. The Long And Winding Road

(Acoustic set)
15. Junk
16. Too Much Rain
17. Heart Of The Country
18. Picasso's Last Words (Drink To Me)
19. Yesterday

20. Come And Get It
21. One After 909
22. Listen To What The Man Said
23. Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey
24. I'm Down
25. Day Tripper

(Paul back on piano)
26. Martha My Dear
27. Let It Be
28. Hey Jude
29. Live And Let Die

(First encore)
30. Honey Hush
31. Spin It On
32. Oh! Darling

(Second encore)
33. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (segue into...)
34. All You Need Is Love
35. Band On The Run
36. Nineteen Hundred And Eighty Five

 

I like it

 

I think it might be interesting if Paul essentially opened for himself as "The Fireman", but I'd hate to see that material as part of a "Paul McCartney" show - ESPECIALLY if he tried to do a Peter Gabriel! God, that would be a disaster - it's just not Paul. But playing more experimental stuff as the intro to the "real" show could work...

 

I think its just a case of semantics....my mom always used that phrase "being silly" it's a very mild chastisement but I understand others may not take it that way. I don't dislike Wings. But compared to his work with the Beatles and most of his solo work I just think Wings, for the most part, was second-rate McCartney. I'm NOT a big fan of Denny Laine or his musical talents, so that may colour my opinion somewhat. If Paul had never been in The Beatles, and Wings was his legacy...I would think he had a good career, nothing more, nothing less. A few terrific albums, some really good singles....and one amazing World Tour. It's no surprise that Wings best album, Band On The Run , is essentially a solo album.

I can appreciate others feeling differently about them, but when you compare Paul's body of work...Beatles, Wings and solo....I think most people would agree that Wings was the lesser of the three. As far as the R&B discussion concerning Souvenir goes....I mean, what can I say. In comparison, Coming Up has soul . Like that last remark, much of what I say is really lighthearted in nature....sometimes my poor choice of words betrays my actual thoughts and feelings. Take care...Ron

 

Maccafan, I'll send you $1.25 if you start using punctuation other than exclamation points...

 

Me again . Macca fan, Paul was still shying away from his Beatle's past in 1976. We were thrilled he did ANY Beatles songs, which he purposely avoided in the past. No one complained because four Beatles songs were better than none. Wings was also, pardon the pun, flying at its highest in 1976. Coming off a string of top-selling albums and a slew of Top Ten hits. It would have been strange if he didn't embrace this material. Surprisingly, he completely ignored his own solo material, except for Maybe I'm Amazed.

Basically, the set list revolved around Band On The Run, Venus & Mars and Speed Of Sound. Let's see... four Beatles tracks, one solo, two 60's covers (Go Now and Richard Cory), one song from Red Rose Speedway, two older singles from 1972/3, one previously unreleased song (Soily)...everything else from the above-mentioned albums. Nothing from Ram or Wild Life, and no b-sides or oldies. Ron

 

Yeah... It's well known that McCartney was shying away from Beatles material at that point, but some people may not realize that he was also avoiding songs recorded by the earlier Wings lineups!

He made a few exceptions for major hit singles recorded by the Seiwell/McCullough lineup ("Live and Let Die," "Hi Hi Hi," "My Love"), but for the most part he drew from the two albums recorded with the English/McCulloch lineup, Band on the Run by the three-piece Wings, and the truly solo McCartney. (Admittedly, Geoff Britton played instead of Joe English on some Venus & Mars tracks.)

I don't think it's a coincidence that he followed the same basic pattern when he took Wings' next lineup on the road in 1979. He dropped the Seiwell/McCullough material entirely and played very little from the English/McCulloch period. For lesser known album tracks, he once again turned to Band on the Run and McCartney ("No Words," "Hot As Sun," "Every Night").

 

Re: 'Marry a Carrot's Setlist' - overall, I think the songs he chose were quite good. There are some tunes that I would've picked differently from various albums, for example, instead of "Spin it on", which never did much for me, I'd opt for "Getting Closer" instead. ("Baby's Request" is truly an overlooked gem on that album, but I dont think it would make much of an impact on an audience in a large arena, its a song thats better appreciated when listened to on a good hi fi system at home).

It seems that most of the people who have a tendency to knock Paul, feel that some of his music is a bit on the 'soft' side, so if thats the case, I would configure a Setlist thats geared more toward uptempo numbers, thus some tunes that I think would go over well:

"Girls School", "Big Barn Bed", "Mrs. Vandebilt", "Ive Had Enough","Give Ireland Back to the Irish", "Helen Wheels", "Daytime Nightttime Suffering", "The Mess", and.., perhaps "Oh Woman, Oh Why", or "Smile "Away" (if his vocal cord could handle the nightly strain of performing them).

 

I agree, "silly" is very mild; I just thought it was getting repetitive on both sides -- and see, now we're back to talking setlists! I take full credit for that...

Back to semantics: Personally, I don't separate "solo" from "Wings" because I consider them the same thing. I think Wings was the product of Macca's desire to re-create the camraderie of the Beatles, but without all those annoying opinions and personalities. Wings was a backup band at best; you can't have a true "band" when one member can fire any of the other members at will. Anything Paul did after 1969 was "solo" if you ask me.

Hey, Ron, you know I respect you, but if you think "Coming Up" has more soul than "Souvenir" ... well, that's just silly!

 

Haha, best laugh of the day so far....i KNEW that would get ya. Ron

 

Guys I'm not offended by anything that has been posted, remember I enjoy the conversation, it's the reason I started this thread. I full well know that some people loose it when anyone says they prefer Pauls Wings/solo material over the Beatles. The misconceptions about Pauls Wings/solo material have been around so long that it's ingrained in many people. I'm just one who never baught into the misconceptions about his post Beatles work!

Oatsdad, keep your money, I use exclamation points because that is the appropriate punctuation to express how I feel about what I'm posting!

There is nothing unrealistic about the songs I posted earlier, take The Mess for example, Paul thought it was good enough to perform for his international tv special, so it's more than good enough for a tour!

If you think most of Wings music is subpar well that's your opinion, but I wholeheartedly disagree, I'd rather hear a funky rocker like Coming Up instead of a nice safe little song like Penny Lane.

Some like Uncle Albert, I think it's terrible, especially for a rock concert! It would fit in real good at a childrens program or something, but for a rock and roll concert, forget it!

I don't care what the reason was that he did the 76 tours setlist, the fact is that it was the best tour of his life, and it produced one of the best live albums of all time! No one was even thinking the Beatles by the time Paul hit the stage and rocked them hard with excellent songs like Rockshow, Jet, Call Me Back Again, Letting Go, Magneto And Titanium Man, Hi Hi Hi, and Soily, man those were the days, all Paul and rocking!!

The man needs to embrace all of his legacy, not just one small part of it! The Beatles were great there's no denying that, but for many and I do mean many, ( remember a whole generation came up listening to Wings) Wings were great as well!

No one is going to tell me that songs like...
Juniors Farm
Stranglehold
Girlschool
The Mess
Coming Up
Once Upon a long Ago
Style Style
Cafe On The Left Bank
Daytime Nightime Suffering
Getting Closer
Not Such A Bad Boy
So Glad To See You Here
Best Friend
Smile Away
Big Barn Bed

Which are just as good as many of the Beatle songs, Just to name a few, wouldn't be killer performed live! It wouldn't matter if they were popular or not, by the time Paul finished rocking the crowds, people would be scrambling to find these songs, they would also be amazed that this man could perform so many great post Beatle songs!

The album from such a tour would be one of his best since 76!

Guys the more I think about it the more I'm convinced that this is exactly what Paul McCartney should do!

 

Do you have a first name? Calling you Maccafan seems odd to me . It's not really relevant, but how old are you? I have a feeling your much younger than I. Why does that matter? Well, were you there in 1976? Did you see Paul in concert that tour? It was a great tour, no doubt, but you are wrong that people weren't disappointed that he did so few Beatles songs. Also, I think his 2002 and 2005 tours were better, much better. Better songs and in my opinion, a clearly superior band... musically and vocally. He's not doing second-rate material like Spirits Of Ancient Egypt and Richard Cory (WHY did they do this one?). And even back then he stopped performing Junior's Farm, after the Australian '75 tour...which left fans scratching their heads.

For the last time, I never thought that Wings music was subpar...I said this in context to his Beatles material. For one thing, John, George and Ringo were better musicians and singers than any members of Wings. So even slight Macca songs like Another Girl or What You're Doing are enhanced by the other Beatles' contributions. This is almost never true for Wings songs. Unfortunately, even some of Wings best material is clearly McCartney with a backing band. For a second, imagine the Beatles doing Big Barn Bed...don't you think it would be better than Wings version? Ron

 

Brainwashed first let me say that I have really enjoyed conversing with you, but I'm afraid that I just disagree with you on many points!

I am 51 years old and yes I was at one of the 76 shows, in fact I attented the June 10th show at the Seattle Kingdome the night that Wings Over America was recorded! I can share with you beyond a shadow of a doubt, Wings played their own music and they rocked the house and left everyone totally and completely satisfied!!

I must admit that I wanted them to rock out with Juniors Farm, another reason why Paul should be performing it now, I know many people who want him to include it in his show.

I disagree that John, George, and Ringo were better than anyone Paul had in Wings! Jimmy McCollough, Laurence Juber, and Robbie McCintosh blow George harrison away on lead guitar, and Joe English, Denny Seiwell, and Abe Laboriel Jr. would do the same to Ringo!

Please understand I mean no disrespect to George or Ringo, they were absolutely essential for the Beatles, but otherwise there's just no comparison!

Even in context to the Beatles songs, there are Wings songs that are just as good if not better!

I know it's just your opinion, but no way has any tour been better than the tour of 76, most of his other tours have just been way too repetitive!

The hard rocking Venus&Mars/Rockshow is one of the best concert opening moments ever! You can call them second rate if you like, but when Wings performed those songs, no one was thinking second rate, they were too busy rocking!

I don't think the Beatles could do a song like Big Barn Bed, it's just not their style, and Ringo is not that kind of a drummer, it's strictly a Wings song, as it should be.

It's just way past time for Paul to perform these songs!

 

One person's second-rate material is another person's welcome respite from the "Hey Jude" singalong. Which is why I was glad to see Paul dig out Beatles and solo rarities such as "I'll Get You" and "Too Many People" on the last tour.

 

.

 

Hey, I've been very vocal about Paul's 'singalong' version of Hey Jude. I dropped it from the list myself. I have no doubt Paul will do further tinkering next tour, assuming there is one. I seriously wouldn't mind adding Junior's Farm that's for sure. I'm glad I have a '75 live rendition of it. Ron

 

I'll take you at your word. But what was with all the talk about "a whole generation of people growing up with Wings"?? You surely alluded that you were amongst them. I simply can't argue anymore, even in a lighthearted way. I didn't think so before, but I think you're baiting me now. If you honestly think any member of Wings was a better musician, songwriter or sings better than Paul's fellow Beatles, then sir, I think you're just saying things to insight. It's not surprising that not a single ex-Wing has had a successful solo career or even a hit record... although Laurence Juber has released some wonderful acoustic albums.

People can agree or disagree about which tour is best....that's very subjective. I can't deny Paul can be repetetive, but he shakes up the song list enough to keep me excited each time I see him perform. And in my opinion, his current touring band is his best...even better than 'Lumpy Trousers' and Wings. Ron

 

As I noted in the parallel thread on this topic, I grew up with Wings. I was born in '68, how could I not have? "Silly Love Songs" and "With a Little Luck" ring a bell with me in a way objectively better Beatles songs don't, simply because I was there when they were hits.

 

That makes perfect sense to me John. If you grew up with Wings, it makes sense you have an affinity with them and with their music. To be honest, I thought Maccafan was your age, or younger. To me, it's simply beyond belief that anyone who experienced the Beatles first-hand, would think Wings produced music as good, or its members were "better" musicians and singers, than the Beatles. I'm not talking about the Beatles cultural impact on society....simply as a band and the music they created. Ron

 

Well, sir, I can't let that one pass. SFF/Penny Lane is the greatest two-sided single record ever made, IMO. No, it's not funky, but to even menton it in the same breath with something like Coming Up seems absurd to me, even though I like Coming Up very much. But everyone is entitled to an honest opinion, if that's what it really is.

Same basic comment: that's absurd, IMO. These musicians were strictly hired hands, and contributed very little creatively to the band. In fact it's a stretch to even think of Wings as a band. They just played what McCartney told them to play, basically, and whenever they objected - poof! Gone.

Peace, though. No offense intended. It's just my opinion (not that I'm alone in holding it.)

 

But constant usage makes it less effective! It's like you're shouting all the time! It actually becomes sort of tough to read!

 

These arguments about who is a better musician depend on the question of chops vs. creativity/personality/chemistry that have been argued around here before. In terms of technique, many of the guys Paul has worked with probably are more polished or technically adept or versatile musicians than George or Ringo. You tend to hire supporting musicians for their technique. George made comments like "the Beatles weren't that great really" after he worked with other people. But I think most of us would agree other musicians didn't produce quite the same magic playing with Paul or George that the Beatles did.

 

Well I've heard these arguments before, too. The musos with chops may be quicker studies at a recording date when the clock is running, but when I listen to Abbey Road, I'm pretty much convinced that the session musicians could never play any better than that. A lot of these session people coming up studied the Beatles records to hear how Ringo did it, or how Paul played, etc. That was part of their musical education. To analogize, the way I look at it that the Beatles paved the road and then these session guys drive on the road later in their hot rods or whatever.

 

I have spent my whole life listening to the Beatles and their solo work, and, with the exception of a core of untouchable songs that Paul wote from roughly '64 - '67 ("And I Love Her," "Yesterday," "Eleanor Rigby," "For No One," "Penny Lane," "She's Leaving Home," and "The Fool on the Hill") I'd rate the best of the solo and Wings work from McCartney to Speed of Sound as highly as anything that Paul did in the Beatles. The best three or four songs from each solo/Wings album from 1970 to 1976 are as good or better than anything on the White Album or Abbey Road, imho.

 

I totally second John on this, and would extend the 1976 to the present.

I was born in 1971, so even Wings songs are not VERY memorable to me. However, I remember "Let Em In" very well. All I know is that whenever I come across a music fan who was around in the 60s, they say that the excitement surrounding Beatles releases was something you had to witness to understand. I can understand why - when you consider that "Penny Lane" or "Hey Jude" were contemporary songs. It staggers the mind. I only know those songs as history. Luckily for me, I'll always remember the day Michael Jackson's "Thriller" video debuted on MTV. I have my small joys. And going to buy Press To Play on the day of release? Awesome!