Is Carlos Santana really all that? - Page 4

CarneVaca · #46 12-09-2002, 10:07 AM

Paul McCartney should have retired gracefully years ago. The man hasn't created an interesting piece of music since perhaps a couple of tunes on Tug of War. His Concert for New York appearance was embarrassing. That "Freedom" song was a stinky piece of drivel with words that couldn't have been more vacuous and meaningless. It was an insult to the spirit it meant to honor. And while I'm at it, let me add that I can't stand his arrogant wife.

McCartney was once a great songwriter, and he's undeniably a wonderful musician. But he was always too commercially minded, his music was always a few notches below his partner John's and his ego was always bigger than one of those supertankers that keep crashing into beautiful pristine shorelines. Sometimes, I wonder if John wasn't right when he said, "The only thing you done was Yesterday," or something like that.

Here's an example of McCartney's overblown ego and arrogance: All rock artists have agreements with all kinds of demands from venues for their shows, but here's one for MaCartney, which is among the most demanding I've seen:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/mccartney1.html

Later, it is discovered that Ivory soap has animal fat content (You really have to click the link to understand the soap reference.)

McCartney, Rod Stewart, Elton John, Clapton and some of these other guys that have been around forever cranking out album after album remind me of the pathetic phase of the Rat Pack: When Dino and the Chairman, and even Elvis, made caricatures of themselves by turning into lounge singers. This is simply the 21st century iteration of the formerly-relevant-artist-turned-pathetic-joke. Also precariously getting close to this characterization is U2, which is especially grievous.

Hey, old farts, get the hell out of the way and retire. Make room for some of these brilliant new bands that don't get any airplay because you and your corporate backing keep cluttering up the airwaves.

Aaaah.... I feel much better now.

wondergirl9847 · #47 12-09-2002, 01:02 PM

Don't hold back next time, okay?

I won't even get started on PC, because ya'll know I don't like the Bugs...but it's wierd to me how celebs "change" when they are THIS HUGE...I mean, J-Lo sings "I'm still Jenny from the block" even tho I got lots of money, an entourage, a big-as* house, a NOT SEXY fiance who gave me a ring that even a BLIND person can SEE!!, yada, yada, yada...they become "Untouchable". They say "We love the fans!" but do they go out of their way to be nice and hospitable to them, usually no.

Anywho....then I get to thinking, these celebs are treated like GODS AMONG MEN due to their managers, security, assistants, etc...look at how Anna Nicole's assistant is around her, she even got her face tattooed on her arm!!

I know we put celebs we love on a pedestal too, it's our fault as well. I just wish they could be personable and get their head out of their butt because the fans are the people supporting their career, NOT managers, assistants, etc....

I'll hold back next time too, Carne.

madformac · #48 12-09-2002, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Paul McCartney should have retired gracefully years ago. The man hasn't created an interesting piece of music since perhaps a couple of tunes on Tug of War. His Concert for New York appearance was embarrassing. That "Freedom" song was a stinky piece of drivel with words that couldn't have been more vacuous and meaningless. It was an insult to the spirit it meant to honor. And while I'm at it, let me add that I can't stand his arrogant wife.

Everything I wanted to say but didn't!

I don't like Paul McCartney, or his wife or his ego. I do like some of his older material, although Beatle-wise I think Lennon was the genius in the group and George was my favourite anyway. Just my opinion.

The Ivory soap thing is very much as I stated earlier, he dosen't conform to his own views.

He is one of a number of high profile artists, lead by Madonna and J-Lo that seem to want to ask for the most unreasonable requests for a performance. I think they may see it as a competition "I'm more important, blah, blah, blah" , I just think they are all up their own a*ses so far they have lost touch with reality.

I have to give Eric Clapton some slack because he has semi-retired now and I see him developing into a BB King figure, happily playing blues numbers into his eighties. He doesn't seem to be as egocentric as most of them. He certainly was when he was younger, very much a cocky young punk, but I think his new wife and child have brought him some balance. He has expressed his concern at the way the music industry has changed and is much less interested in it generally it seems.

No doubt people will accuse Fleetwood Mac of just funding their pensions with the latest album and tour. The difference to me is that they, well, Lindsey, is pushing the band into new areas and doing it for personal satisfaction foremost as well as for financial gain, which I really believe is secondary. I hope Buckingham gets all the credit and praise he has deserved for so long.

wondergirl9847 · #49 12-09-2002, 02:47 PM

I love ya more and more every post! LMAO!!

I really do hope that LB gets his due for this album, so that the whole Tusk fiasco can be laid to rest!! I don't want them saying "Great, another Tusk, wierd, off-the-chain kind of album that tries to break through boundaries and no one appreciates it."

I mean COME ON, who doesn't want to be well off in life...raise your hand...anyone? No one? Okay, I rest my case. I do believe that music is the FM members' first love and the $$ is just a perk! LB is SO out of the spotlight that some people go "Lindsey Buckingham, who's she?" Grrrr!!!! If he was all about the $$, he would have retired already himself. He's got some more stuff to say.

sulamith · #50 12-09-2002, 03:44 PM

My goodness! What happened to my little rant thread about Santana? haha!!

AND while we're ripping McCartney a new one.....

........his daughter designs the ugliest clothes ever to grace the exfoliated, polished, and bleached backsides of Hollywood! She only has recognition because of her name.

I guess dad taught his baby girl well!

Another thing about Mcartney....
I heard on the radio this morning that he is "opening up an old wound with Yoko Ono" by putting his name first on songwriting credits, and that Yoko said Paul always promised John he would credit the songs Lennon/McCartney, and supposedly Paul has been doing it as McCartney/Lennon. Yoko is pissed, Paul basically told her to jump if she feels froggy. Paul claims he wrote "Yesyerday" by himself, so he is going to credit himself first.

Anybody know any more about it?

CarneVaca · #51 12-09-2002, 04:20 PM

Indeed, Paul wrote "Yesterday." In fact, most of the Lennon/McCartney songs were written individually, contrary to popular notions. Usually, he who sings lead wrote the song, though this is not 100 percent accurate. Whether he should be changing the songwriting credit at this late stage, especially when his partner is not around, smacks of disloyalty and pettiness.

I agree with MadforMac: John Lennon was the true genious. It becomes especially obvious how musically talented he was when you look at his solo stuff: It is disarmingly simple when it should be and complex when it needs to be. John had a keen sense of marrying the emotion to the music in just the right way.

Everyone thought Lennon was the difficult one, and indeed he was a difficult, complicated person, but McCartney is not the nice guy he wants us to believe he is.

chiliD · #52 12-09-2002, 07:39 PM

As is the big debate at some Beatle boards...McCartney put his name first on the Beatle tunes included on the "Wings Over America" live album (released in 1976, while Lennon was alive), John never said squat. Lennon didn't give a **** whose name was first, it was all the business people back in 196whatever when the deal was first signed. If you look, all the "Lennon/McCartney" songs on their first album "Please, Please Me" were "McCartney/Lennon"...so f-ing what...they both get credit. Whose name is first is petty & irrelevant. If Paul wants his name first on the songs that are mainly his, so f-ing what. I say, let him credit them accordingly. Lennon was always just as annoyed at McCartney's name being credited on "Give Peace A Chance" as McCartney has been with John's being on "Yesterday" (John has more of a point since "Give Peace A Chance" wasn't even a "Beatle song")...it's a trade off...WE (the die hard Beatle fans) know who wrote what, it makes no difference to me whose name is first. Nowadays, the contributions that Harrison & Starr gave to the "Lennon/McCartney" songs would be enough for a co-write credit, but they've never really PUBLICLY said anything to that fact. How many songs & titles have been credited to being utterings by Ringo (the Yogi Berra of the Beatles) without Ringo getting any monetary reward for such (i.e. "A HArd Day's Night", etc).

estranged4life · #53 12-09-2002, 07:54 PM

"How many songs & titles have been credited to being utterings by Ringo (the Yogi Berra of the Beatles) without Ringo getting any monetary reward for such (i.e. "A HArd Day's Night", etc)."

...LMAO!!! Ringo equated to the good ol' Yankee Yogi Berra, Oh well, Better to be Yogi than his son Dale (A washout as a major leaguer)...LOL!!!...Good one chiliD...Brian J.

Cristian · #54 12-09-2002, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Paul McCartney should have retired gracefully years ago. The man hasn't created an interesting piece of music since perhaps a couple of tunes on Tug of War.

Carne, I must disagree with you on this one. Using the very same philosophy that you always use in other discussion topics in this very same Forum, it's really simple: "if you don't like it, then don't buy it". But that must not necesarlly mean that sir Paul should retire now. There are thousands of people who don't believe so, and his last tour through the USA, Mexico and Japan has proven that he can still play good music, and sound great. And it still makes people happy. My girlfriend (a huge Paul fan herself) always tells me that there is no problem, since Paul is happy doing his music (we can always discuss if his music is what it used to be anymore, or he's sticking to his old classics because of the lack of material he has around later) and fans are happy, since those concerts were a class act and deserved at least some attention. So to many people is a very meaningful thing that Paul is still around. If it doesn't mean anything to you parcticularly, you can always choose not to buy the current album or if he appears in the radio, you can always change the station.

As for the second part of the quote, I strongly disagree. Sure, Driving Rain was overall mediocred, but he's written enough enjoyable tunes after Tug Of War to complete a full "Greatest Hits" album. Indisputable well crafted pop tunes like:

Through Our Love (Pipes Of Peace)
No More Lonely Nights (Give My Regards To Broad Street)
No Values (Give My Regards To Broad Street)
Not Such A Bad Boy (Give My Regards To Broad Street)
Only Love Remains (Press To Play)
Press (Press To Play)
Tough On A Tightrope (Press To Play CD)
Once Upon A Long Ago (Single)
Back On My Feet (w/ Elvis Costello, B-side of Once Upon)
My Brave Face (Flowers In The Dirt)
Put It There (Flowers In The Dirt)
This One (Flowers In The Dirt)
Hope Of Deliverance (Off The Ground)
Off The Ground (Off The Ground)
Golden Earth Girl (Off The Ground)
C'Mon People (Off The Ground)
The Song We Were Singing (Flaming Pie)
Somedays (Flaming Pie)
Calico Skies (Flaming Pie)
Little Willow (Flaming Pie)
Beautiful Night (Flaming Pie)
Try Not To Cry (Run Devil Run)
Heather (Driving Rain)
.........

just to name a few.

Song of the moment - The Ledge

Cristian · #55 12-09-2002, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by chiliD
WE (the die hard Beatle fans) know who wrote what, it makes no difference to me whose name is first.

However, I find it stupid that such a deal that they had for so long has to be broken now... Why not sticking to the original songwriting credits, even if they are not always accurate. Sure, John didn't care, but it is a sign of... I don't know how to call it... respect? Less confusion? Whatever. I am a die hard Beatles fan, and I can always recognize (except for a couple of cases like "Every Little Thing") who wrote the song, or when they did a collaboration... so I like more the Lennon/McCartney songwriting credits and I feel that those things should not be touched. Period.

Quote:

Nowadays, the contributions that Harrison & Starr gave to the "Lennon/McCartney" songs would be enough for a co-write credit, but they've never really PUBLICLY said anything to that fact. How many songs & titles have been credited to being utterings by Ringo (the Yogi Berra of the Beatles) without Ringo getting any monetary reward for such (i.e. "A HArd Day's Night", etc).

To name but a couple of cases, if one's looking through that point of view, "We Can Work It Out" should be a McCartney/Harrison tune (since George suggested how the middle-eight should be played), and "Tomorrow Never Knows" should also feature Ringo's name since he suggested the title...

Song of the moment - The Ledge

CarneVaca · #56 12-09-2002, 09:57 PM

Both Cristian and Chili make good points. Chili, I agree with your "so what" argument. It shouldn't matter. But then again if it didn't, why should McCartney change the credits. And this is where I agree with Cristian, it smacks of pettiness to do it later.

As for your other point, Cristian, I agree with the rationale of don't like it, don't buy it. I haven't bought a Paul McCartney record in more than a dozen years. One exception: I bought the unplugged record and sold it later. I won't discourage anyone from buying Paul's music, just as I wouldn't discourage anyone buying Britney Spears records. If you like it, enjoy it. My point was that in my opinion he was once great, but now he is merely pathetic. And has been so for a while.

Look I'm a big Lennon fan. Just as I am a big Lindsey fan. McCartney just doesn't do it for me.

chiliD · #57 12-10-2002, 11:22 AM

Carne,

I, too, am a big Lennon fan, but I've ALWAYS (well, since I first heard them when I was 6 years old...40+ years I think can be counted as an "always"

) a BEATLES fan...all four equally. But the equality didn't carry through their post-Beatles careers. They all came out smokin' with their first few rounds of post-Beatles albums. Then, in the late '70s, Paul went south...after "Venus And Mars, he took a big slide downhill. "Speed Of Sound"...UGH! (except for "Beware My Love"), "London Town", another UGH! Wings' swan song "Back To The Egg" signalled a promising upswing. Then came "McCartney II"...sometimes home demos should remain publicly unheard. "Tug Of War" was again promising, but "Pipes Of Peace" stopped that trend right away. The "Give My Regards To Broadstreet" album & movie were quirky yet yucky. (except for "No More Lonely Nights"). I DO think that Paul's been on a steady upswing since "Press To Play", though. Between that album and then the EP of "Once Upon A Long Ago", followed by the Choba A CCCP" album, then "Flowers In The Dirt", "Off The Ground", "Flaming Pie", "Driving Rain", (I haven't heard "Run Devil Run", so I didn't list it)...he's just been getting better and releasing, to me anyway, his best post-Beatles material EVER.

madformac · #58 12-10-2002, 12:22 PM

The main issue I have with Sir Paul, apart from the ego thing, is his live voice rather than his work on the albums.

The only live thing I have heard lately that I thought he sung well was Blackbird at the Queen's jubillee concert. I thought his singing on Freedom live was truly awful. I have to say that his piano, guitar and bass work are still at a high level. It's just his voice. The concert for NYC made me cringe with embarassment as did Roger Daltrey's performance (don't get me started there).

I do agree with Cristian's "if you don't like it don't buy it" approach totally, I'm just giving my feelings on the way I feel about McCartney.

I'm not having a go at his writing or musical abilities which are without question, it's just his ego problems and that live voice.

On the positive side I did mention to ChiliD many months ago that McCartney's songs will stand the test of time far longer than Lennon's. John Lennon was a musical genius but McCartney's songs are more "mainstream" if you like, they certainly get more airtime on UK radio. John's work pushed the boundaries more than Paul's I feel, who had a more balanced approach to his writing.

estranged4life · #59 12-10-2002, 12:28 PM

have you heard any of the "Imagine" sessions demos that are about? Highly recommended stuff on those cd's (Including stuff not on the Lennon Anthology set...)...Brian "Almost named after a Beatle" J.

madformac · #60 12-10-2002, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by estranged4life
have you heard any of the "Imagine" sessions demos that are about? Highly recommended stuff on those cd's (Including stuff not on the Lennon Anthology set...)...Brian "Almost named after a Beatle" J.

No, I've not heard them yet.

They will be floating around on bootleg discs at record fairs but I haven't had the time to get to any record fairs for a while. I'll keep a lookout though....