• The Gear Page Apparel & Merch Shop is Open!

    Based on member demand, The Gear Page is pleased to announce that our Apparel Merch Shop is now open. The shop’s link is in the blue Navigation bar (on the right side), “Shop,” with t-shirts, hats, neck buffs, and stickers to start. Here’s the direct link: www.thegearpageshop.com

    You’ll find exclusive high-quality apparel and merchandise; all items are ethical, sustainably produced, and we will be continuously sourcing and adding new choices. 

    We can ship internationally. All shipping is at cost.


Paul McCartney after the Beatles...... his songs didn't resemble anything he did

Dr. Tweedbucket

Deluxe model available !!!11
Messages
47,994
..... in the Beatles, except for Maybe I'm Amazed. :dunno


In Wings, I wonder if he purposely tried to change his style? :confused:
 

3 Mile Stone

Member
Messages
5,935
Well, I wouldn't say nothing he did. I thought all of his first solo albums were Beatlesque and RAM was pretty quirky too. "My Dog he got Three Legs" is right up there with "Why Don't We do it in the Road". I consider the first two solo albums in the same vien.

Wings was meant to be a band, so by nature not the Beatles. That would seem to be his intention. After that I agree, not up to par or like the Beatles, but then again, he isn't the Beatles so why would we expect him to be? Some good stuff, some junk too.
 

cameron

Member
Messages
4,178
Well, "Maybe I'm Amazed" isn't strictly speaking post Beatles. He was still in the Beatles at the time. That's really a Beatles song that never got the George Martin treatment. McCartney just released the demo version that he made himself.
 

sinasl1

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
8,793
I think that's one of the amazing things about him- he basically totally reinvented himself. He sort of continues to- There was some great songs on "Chaos and Creation"... Jenny Wren is right up there with his best work I think.
 

Powderfinger

Platinum Supporting Member
Messages
11,381
You know, I was listening to some McCartney recently and I was struck by how, well, demented some of those early solo songs are. "Venus and Mars," "Band on the Run," "Jet" "Uncle Albert" "Magneto and Titanium Man" etc. The lyrics are very, very odd and sometimes so is the music.
 

janosfia

Member
Messages
4,026
IMHO, McCartney had the "best" post Beatles career of the 4. He had some wonderful songs, but also had some clunkers.
 

alschnier

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
362
I agree that both, "mccartney" & "ram", as well as "chaos & creation" have plenty of familiar moments. most of the other stuff was a departure ('maybe I'm amazed', 'band on the run', 'live & let die' maybe being relative, or evolved beatles-esque compositions somehow. most of the wings stuff was pretty poppy, but in a straight fm top 40 rock kind of vein (not that there's anything wrong w. that).

personally, I'm a big fan of Ram. reminds me of some of his demos from the white album.
 

Scott Miller

Member
Messages
7,366
There are certainly plenty of what Robbie Robertson called "Paul McCartney pinkey-dew songs." Not that there's anything wrong with that.
 

loudboy

Member
Messages
27,316
I think the biggest differnce was in the production - Wings was a BAND, whereas by the end, The Beatles existed solely in the studio.

The Beatles were very experimental and their arrangements/instrumentation were very quirky. Wings used much more standard instrumentation, and sounded lke a band.
 

yellowecho

Member
Messages
3,279
IMHO, McCartney had the "best" post Beatles career of the 4. He had some wonderful songs, but also had some clunkers.
I respectfully disagree..
IMO, John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band, Imagine, All Things Must Pass,and Wonderwall Music surpass anything Paul has done by a large margin.. not to mention that Harrison's catalog as a whole is very strong.

But then again, I typically favor John and George songs in the Beatles discography as well... so I'm pretty biased.
 

stevieboy

Clouds yell at me
Gold Supporting Member
Messages
37,845
I'm not sure that the Beatles records, as they came out, resembled what they did before all that often. That was one of the great strengths of the band, and why their albums were so remarkable when they were released. People didn't know what to expect. But after they were out for awhile, it all seemed like Beatles' music.

I watched a recent McCartney concert on TV not too long ago--thinking about it now, I don't think in that format, in retrospect, the Beatles era songs he did stood out as being that different from his later stuff.
 

Gas-man

Unrepentant Massaganist
Messages
18,611
I prefer McCartney's baked-out-of-your-gourd-so-SMILE! 70's music over Lennon's much more dark material personally.

Wings is very summer music.

Reminds me of going to the beach in 1976.
 

billy budapest

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
486
Anybody that sees ANY merit whatsoever in the last three or four McCartney solo albums is just looking through rose-colored glasses and completely kidding themselves.

Yesterday, on random shuffle, my iTunes delivered a sterling offering from "Chaos and Creation" called "Certain Softness." I defy anyone to listen to this particular number and deem it to be anything other than utterly wretched. But, if you're listening honestly, it's not any worse than anything else on that CD or "Driving Rain" or, with a couple of exceptions, "Memory Almost Full."

This stuff is SO embarrassing and cringe-worthy, but clearly nobody in Fab's inner circle dares to suggest that perhaps the stuff's not up to snuff.
 

Structo

Member
Messages
9,556
Lennon and McCartney were a great song writing team with John most frequently writing the lyrics.

The Beatles were a sum of their individualism.

I was just watching some of the Roof Concert on Youtube.

Man I miss those guys.

I still get a little bit of that feeling like I did back in the 60's when I hear their music.

Pure magic!
 

devinb

Member
Messages
2,030
I'm kind of with Billy...my wife and close friends think I'm way too hard on Paul, and Ringo to a lesser extent (in that I also have much lower expectations)...I'm not saying the guy has to fade away, but I think he could still tour on early solo material, and Beatles songs he wrote...I don't see a point in releasing what can't hold a candle to what he used to do.

John had my favorite solo career by far, though still a fair share of misses...
 

devinb

Member
Messages
2,030
Lennon and McCartney were a great song writing team with John most frequently writing the lyrics.

The Beatles were a sum of their individualism.

I was just watching some of the Roof Concert on Youtube.

Man I miss those guys.

I still get a little bit of that feeling like I did back in the 60's when I hear their music.

Pure magic!
From what I've read, as far as songwriting, about the only thing shared was royalties...

I do think that the competitive nature of John and Paul pushed both to edit themselves far more than they did outside of The Beatles, but there's also the fact that The Beatles could live in the studio, spending weeks and months toying with ideas that may get dumped altogether...I don't think as solo artists they were so focused...
 

Thinsocks

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
2,442
I don't know, both McCartney and Ram have some very Beatles-esque moments. In fact, "Teddy Boy" and "Junk" where first unveiled during Beatles sessions. "Lovely Linda" could have been off of the White Album and "That Would Be Something" could have been a "Let It Be" track (Same thing with "Maybe I'm Amazed"). "Dear Boy" and "Heart of the Country" off of Ram are also heavily in the Beatles vein.

Meet the Beatles doesn't sound much like anything on Abbey Road, so it's no suprise that a lot of the Beatles solo stuff doesn't sound very much like anything the Beatles did.
 
Last edited:

Shiny McShine

Member
Messages
9,490
Paul McCartney after the Beatles...... his songs didn't resemble anything he did

..... in the Beatles, except for Maybe I'm Amazed. :dunno


In Wings, I wonder if he purposely tried to change his style? :confused:
I would agree. This is just one more example of how in rare instances, two or more people get together and something totally new emerges that didn't exist before. It's another example of the mystery that is the Beatles and how four guys with their individual talents exceeded anything that would have been possible on their own.
 

Jon Silberman

10Q Jerry & Dickey
Silver Supporting Member
Messages
41,883
I believe that if Paul had never played in the Beatles at all and we only had his post-Beatles catalog (including those songs he wrote during that time period and earlier that were recorded by others) he would still be considered great.

People in general sometimes have a problem doing is recognizing and acknowledging greatness in artists whose work we don't ourselves like. McCartney's music is not perfect and not 100% great but displays many aspects of greatness.

I love his last album (music more than lyrics but even so). He still has it.

P.S. If you want to understand how Paul's post-Beatles music would have sounded in the Beatles, I believe the most effective response would be to cut and paste pieces of his songs with pieces of John's post-Beatles tunes into new works. After all, Revolver and on, isn't that how they did it in the Beatles?
 




Trending Topics

Top