What's the difference between "Wings" and "Paul McCartney & Wings"?

Got it the first time.

 

McCartney didn't need ' Wings ' ( whatever that was ) to fly.

 

If you really want to cause a ruckus, suggest that there's no difference between Alice Cooper the band and Alice Cooper solo.

 

Not much---it's still Macca.

 

Roughly 15 letters and spaces.

 

The fact is, and the point I was trying to make above, is that Paul himself casually swaps the name around and uses "Wings" songs as solo material ("Jet" for example, on Pure McCartney - think about that album title for a moment) and ("Another Day" on Wings Greatest - think about that album title too!). Sure, they sounded different to McCartney circa 1970, but they would have done with or without Lawrence Juber or Henry McCulloch. They were just session men, who were also needed on stage.

True, they were occasionally allowed to sing and record the odd song. Paul decided that, and let them do it. It was his gig. They did what he said.

 

Seems like a really goofy thing to argue about
since you were managing a Toyota dealership.

 

I don't think the name change mattered at all.

I think the 1971-72 "Wings" stuff sold less well than desired because it wasn't that good. Would "Wild Life" have been a bigger seller if it was from PM&W? Doubt it.

And would "RRS", "BOTR" and those big hit singles have been less successful as "Wings"? Doubt it.

I think the name was a scapegoating thing...

 

But this means that if Wings never existed and Macca was totally solo in the 70s, you assume his albums would've been substantially different.

I think they would've been somewhat different, as I think Denny Laine had some influence there.

But this was still Macca's baby and they were gonna do what he told him to do, so I think solo Macca in the 70s would've sounded 90% like Wings...

 

Someone needed to post it!

 

The report button is your friend!

 

I file all under "M."

 

That's because Denny Laine was the one who quit Wings.

Denny Laine quits Wings

 

Goes under "B" for me. (Beatles)

I've gone back to filing things via "extended families," where I do that in a fairly subjective way based on the relative importance of artists for me. With the Beatles, I not only file solo Harrison/Lennon/McCartney/Starr as well as Wings etc. under Beatles, I also file Yoko, Sean, Julian, Dhani, etc. under Beatles.

Something like Traveling Wilburys, on the other hand, is filed under Bob Dylan for me rather than the Beatles (or Tom Petty, or ELO, or Roy Orbison). Again, I do this in a very subjective way based on how much I care about various artists, and sometimes based on what I see as the dominant "voice"/figure in a collaboration. There are also cases where I file something under multiple families.

 

Mrs. Vanderbilt?

 

Rather unfair there - Linda was Jo Stafford, Helen Forrest, June Christy et al., vocally, compared with Yoko.

 

Some people didn't know who the Wings were when Wild Life came out, hence the switch. After that it was back and forth.

 

Paul himself says there’s a distinction in sound from a solo song and a Wings song. He wrote songs with Wings in mind. He could have very well taken his solo career in a different direction had their been no Wings. He went in the direction he did due to his creation of Wings and what he wanted Wings to be. That had an influence on the music. If he went purely solo with no Wings, we would not have gotten the albums we did because he wrote them as Wings albums. Even now when he writes he’ll sometimes say that a song has a Wings feel to it or a Beatles feel to it. That can’t be underestimated.

 

I'd be interested to hear from people who were established music fans circa 1971-72. I was only 4 and 5 years old in that period and didn't know Beatles, McCartney or any of that, so I can't go with personal anecdotal impressions of whether or not people knew Macca = Wings.

From what I've heard in the past... people knew Macca = Wings, and the name wasn't the issue.

As I mentioned earlier, I don't see that "Wild Life" would've sold much better as "PM&W" just because it wasn't a good album.

And then Wings put out 3 singles in 1972, 2 of which weren't very good. Only "Hi Hi Hi" was a strong song - and unsurprisingly, it sold just fine in the US, as it got to #10...

 

Oh, I'll underestimate it!

Again, I agree that the dynamic was somewhat different in Wings due to Denny Laine's presence, but I still think those albums would've been 90% the same if they were solo.

The Paul-sung songs, that is. Obviously the handful of songs sung by Denny Laine or others would've been different or not on the album at all...

 

It didn't stick out to me as a Paul LP when I first saw it. By Red Rose Speedway he had some hits as Paul McCartney and Wings, so people were more aware it was Paul's band. His pic is also quite big on Red Rose Speedway. Wild Life was his only LP without an obvious single, which didn't help.