Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Bemagnus, Sep 11, 2019.
But maybe later.
Maybe you’ll be amazed.
IMO McCartney is the link between the earlier, experimental solo Beatles albums and the later more conventional solo Beatles albums.
Hot As Sun/Glasses - I don’t usually think of this as one of Paul’s medley songs, but it is. A great instrumental from the fifties segues into a Steve Reich-inspired piece played on wine glasses segues into a small snippet from a Sinatra-esque song. Very avant-garde, very cool.
Also - my 1988 cassette tape left out the "/" and lead me to believe the song was actually called "Hot As Sun Glasses", which made no sense, unless you left your Ray-Bans on the dashboard in the car or something.
Is it possible to clarify what you are saying here? I read it a few times and I interpret this as you are claiming the 5 songs in discussion has aged "far better" than *most* other artists' works from this era? I mean, we are talking 1970, a pretty fertile era of rock and roll.
Just curious if you could include some examples? You got Bridge Over Troubled Waters, Stage Fright, Moondance, Ladies of the Canyon, After The Gold Rush, Deja Vu, Cosmos Factory...
I like McCartney LP for sure. I am not ready to place it above it's playing weight vs the rest of the great RnR output of 1970. It has a place in the conversation for sure. It's important in a few ways, artistically and historically. It's not at the very top of 1970 output, however.
The albums you mentioned are all classics and-in most cases-have aged very well.Think I have them all in my collection It was a fertile music-time indeed. I have never claimed the McCartney albums or the songs discussed here to be better than those you mentioned . But there are also lot s of music from the era that-popular and acclaimed at the time -has not aged well. McCartney was a popular album at the time but in most cases didn’t t get all that praise from the critics.
In hindsight the songs discussed here and the album itself has aged well and also been highly influential. I have seen artists like Costello and Neil Young praise it.the way of making the album also makes it a rather unique exercise.
That was my whole point -not placing it over the level of the albums you mentioned. I like them all. Something I can t say about lot s if other music I was enjoying at the time
Every Night - 4/5
Real nice song but not a classic in my eyes. It has more effect for being kind of the first proper song
Hot as Sun/Glasses 3/5
Nice little feel good instrumental and really like the eerie glasses part.
Hot as Sun and Glasses are both 3.5/5
I never try to judge individual tracks on McCartney as it's more about the overall feel, what Alan Smith in his NME review described as a "warm pleasure" as I recall. Mind you, Alan's wife did work in the Apple PR department (the easiest job in the world in terms of gaining coverage?)
Agree about the overall feel-thats how I normally reach out to McCartney
However Im surorised how much I enjoy each individual track breaking them down as we do here
Next one is Junk
Another true masterpiece. As we all know written already 1968 and a contender for the White album
A brilliant compisition were Pauls melodic genius shines in a spectacular fashion. Also very good lyrics. Of course also a very good recording were Pauls arrangement is another winner. His wordless vocal parts is very close to classical music in it s tonality. Don t think anyone but Paul could come up with a song like this and even less so-make such a stellar recording and arrangement doin everything himself
Genius at work
A cover version of Junk paired with Tom Waits broken bicycles. Performed by swedish opera singer An-Sofie Otter and Elvis Costello. I think Benny Andersson from ABBA plays accordeon as well
Junk is an incredible song. So emotional and delicate. Just beautiful. 5/5.
Delicate is the right word to describe Junk
Whoa we really are moving.
Hot As Sun/Glasses is cool. 4/5
Junk is gorgeous. 5/5
Feel with Junk that it could have been absolute Beatles classic, going by the Esher demo, but that it had lost something by the time of McCartney. His voice just didn't have the sublime beauty it had in the Beatles era. It's still lovely of course but not quite as wondrous as it might have been.
I must disagree here. I think the soloversion has even better vocals than the Beatles version. Both brilliant though. Can t really hear much difference in Pauls voice 1968 compared to 1970 really
' Junk ' is beautiful.
I don't think it would have been as good as a Beatles track. I like the take on ' Anthology ' with Lennon's laughing at the lyrics ( I guess).
Junk is excellent. The Muzak instrumental version wasn’t necessary but this song is great. Points towards what he’d be doing on RAM.
5/5. A key text illustrating Paul's sensibilities. This song has thematic ties to Penny Lane. Paul's own Village Green Preservation Society.
Id never thought of the thematic similarities to
Village green but with the slightly nostalgic feel I can see it though
I'm listening to the CD now. It has always been my favourite of Paul's, and by the time of my 58th year, I think my favourite Beatle solo album too - at least the one that I return to most frequently. 'Junk' is certainly, imo, one of the most gorgeous pop songs ever written, and I include it among that upper-upper echelon of Paul's lifetime best. 'McCartney' has a scrapbook sort of feel to it - reminding me in a way of 'The Beatles' double album, working best as a sequential-whole with a handful of scattered diamonds in the rough. I hear pure musical genius in every note here - this all could have worked in the context of Beatles, even in lieu of any involvement by the others - just change the album cover and you're there. I know the term "timeless" gets tossed around a lot, but with 'Junk' I feel the reckoning is scant, rather than the other way around.
Junk is timeless and the album that host this gem is a very unique listening experience
Junk - 5/5
Separate names with a comma.