Paul's upcoming album review they say its HOT!
-
Well, here's something from another forum, from someone apparently in the know (with caveats, though): MPL june schedule for Late 2013 : McCartney New Album Release date : mid october 2013 New Single : Mid Sept First airing on radio : 1st week of sept TV appearances in sept and Oct US dates in oct Japanese and Australian dates in Nov European dates in dec ps : Half of a new FIREMAN album has already been recorded, for a 2014/ 2015 release Venus & Mars & ATSOS deluxe editions seem to be postponed for Spring 2014. This is just a schedule made at the end of june, not an official statment For the album, the songs are said to be very good, very eclectic and the voice is said to be ok .........
-
yankeefan7:
PDS:
Isn't this thread about the new album ? There is a thread for discussing songs you'd like to hear at the live shows.....
There was a post about McCartney previewing some songs off the new album in upcoming concerts. One of the replies said they doubted it because McCartney had painted himself into a corner and would rather perform a 3rd rate Beatle song than a solo song. This is how the thread went a little off topic but still remained mostly on topic - lol
Sorry that was me i think ! I would love to discuss the new album, but what is there to discuss ?? I asked many many posts ago if the bloke who reckons he heard it at a preview listen etc has given anymore info, i guess not !? This makes me think it was all tosh, if it was that " HOT " he would have spouted out alot more info etc weeks ago. I'm sure it will come out in the autumn, but why the big cover up of any info ? It's not like leaking the odd track title or 30 second snippet of song will harm sales ( well not here in the UK, as 98% of the public dont know or care he has a new album out ).
-
Macca Mad:
yankeefan7:
PDS:
Isn't this thread about the new album ? There is a thread for discussing songs you'd like to hear at the live shows.....
There was a post about McCartney previewing some songs off the new album in upcoming concerts. One of the replies said they doubted it because McCartney had painted himself into a corner and would rather perform a 3rd rate Beatle song than a solo song. This is how the thread went a little off topic but still remained mostly on topic - lol
Sorry that was me i think ! I would love to discuss the new album, but what is there to discuss ?? I asked many many posts ago if the bloke who reckons he heard it at a preview listen etc has given anymore info, i guess not !? This makes me think it was all tosh, if it was that " HOT " he would have spouted out alot more info etc weeks ago. I'm sure it will come out in the autumn, but why the big cover up of any info ? It's not like leaking the odd track title or 30 second snippet of song will harm sales ( well not here in the UK, as 98% of the public dont know or care he has a new album out ).
No problem and I think it was a good point. It would make perfect sense to do a couple of new songs in concert before the release. You are absolutely right, there is nothing to discuss about new album because there is no word about anything regarding the record.
-
https://www.eastvillageradio.com/content/content.php?id=6502
Another Bend in Paul McCartney's Winding Road; Thoughts on Macca's NYC Listening Session Last Night Thu, 18 Jul 2013 10:39:45 It should be no surprise to anyone that Paul McCartney?s been very busy in recent years; his work ethic is well known. But for anyone wondering what he?s been up to lately, it?s likely we?ll be seeing the fruits of his labors with the new album headed our way this October. With a little help from his friends?producers Paul Epworth, Mark Ronson, Ethan Johns and Giles Martin?Paul has turned out twenty-one new songs, and it?s anyone?s guess if any more are still in the making. Most of the finished tracks were laid down at his home studio in Sussex, some were recorded at Abbey Road and still others were done here in New York at Hell's Kitchen's Avatar Studios, where last night his manager, Scott Rodger, auditioned rough mixes of five new tunes. The songs still have no titles; nor does the album, for that matter. According to Scott, these random samples of what has been completed so far were not played in any precise order or selected for any particular reason. Nevertheless, what he wished to make clear in his preface to the listening session was his opinion that the music ultimately to be included on this forthcoming album is Paul?s "best work since the late ?70s".
Please follow the above link to read further. Mod Edit Post edited to conform with copyright forum guidelines.
-
The producers' credits, in case you haven't explored: Giles Martin (son of George, of course) - mostly Beatles-related projects Ethan Johns (son of Glyn, as noted) - includes Laura Marling, Tom Jones, The Vaccines, Michael Kiwanuka, Kaiser Chiefs, Ray LaMontagne Mark Ronson - includes Amy Winehouse, Adele, Rufus Wainwright, Bruno Mars, Lil Wayne, Kaiser Chiefs again (Paul McCartney has expressed positive views of Kaiser Chiefs over the years) Paul Epworth - includes Adele, Bruno Mars, Foster the People, Florence + the Machine, Cee Lo Green, Kate Nash, Friendly Fires, Azealia Banks (plus remixes of Bloc Party, Interpol, Nine Inch Nails, Muse, U2, The Killers, etc.) Yeah, I'd say Paul wants a hit this time!
-
Wow that article is from July 18 & the songs still hadn't been named?
-
Something about this just doesn't seem right. From someone who is very careful not to let something out until he is happy with it....this is the second reported 'listening party' where half finished songs or snippets have been played. And this time this sound quality is indistinct ! If true .. what is the point in this ? It hardly creates the right sort of buzz prior to release which is normally the intention. And don't most songs normally get titled shortly after being written.
-
According to Scott, these random samples of what has been completed so far were not played in any precise order or selected for any particular reason. Nevertheless, what he wished to make clear in his preface to the listening session was his opinion that the music ultimately to be included on this forthcoming album is Paul?s "best work since the late ?70s".
The quote about Paul's "best work since the late '70's" made me laugh, Scott obviously hasn't any knowledge of the slating the last two Wings albums got from the critics.
For me if Paul's new album had the feel the energy and the diversity of Back To The Egg, but with much stronger songs it would be fantastic and rewarding. I love BTTE, but if the lyrics were stronger it would be one of Paul's best post Beatle records, but i guess we could say that about plenty of Paul's albums that are let down by lazy lyrics.
-
BOYCIE:
According to Scott, these random samples of what has been completed so far were not played in any precise order or selected for any particular reason. Nevertheless, what he wished to make clear in his preface to the listening session was his opinion that the music ultimately to be included on this forthcoming album is Paul?s "best work since the late ?70s".
The quote about Paul's "best work since the late '70's" made me laugh, Scott obviously hasn't any knowledge of the slating the last two Wings albums got from the critics.
For me if Paul's new album had the feel the energy and the diversity of Back To The Egg, but with much stronger songs it would be fantastic and rewarding. I love BTTE, but if the lyrics were stronger it would be one of Paul's best post Beatle records, but i guess we could say that about plenty of Paul's albums that are let down by lazy lyrics.
Just wondering which songs you were thinking about on BTTE? I recall his use of the phrase "my salamander" in "Getting Closer" was a bit weak, but nothing else comes to mind at the moment.
-
Beatles4Ever&Ever:
BOYCIE:
According to Scott, these random samples of what has been completed so far were not played in any precise order or selected for any particular reason. Nevertheless, what he wished to make clear in his preface to the listening session was his opinion that the music ultimately to be included on this forthcoming album is Paul?s "best work since the late ?70s".
The quote about Paul's "best work since the late '70's" made me laugh, Scott obviously hasn't any knowledge of the slating the last two Wings albums got from the critics.
For me if Paul's new album had the feel the energy and the diversity of Back To The Egg, but with much stronger songs it would be fantastic and rewarding. I love BTTE, but if the lyrics were stronger it would be one of Paul's best post Beatle records, but i guess we could say that about plenty of Paul's albums that are let down by lazy lyrics.
Just wondering which songs you were thinking about on BTTE? I recall his use of the phrase "my salamander" in "Getting Closer" was a bit weak, but nothing else comes to mind at the moment.
Hitting the chisel - making a joint.
-
-
A poster wrote that of 50 new Paul songs "only 12" will be really good--that's bollocks and B.S., I say
Look who we're dealing with, here--Paul Mc., who has had only a few real clinkers or song bombs during his entire career, I think. Just a very few sort of bad ones in comparison to an impressively extensive song catalogue or ouevre
-
The more I read the article the more I think it's fake - songs have no titles yet (!) unfinished songs, indistinct sound at a playback (!) songs similar to Free As a Bird and Come And Get It - all so unlikely .......
-
PDS:
The more I read the article the more I think it's fake - songs have no titles yet (!) unfinished songs, indistinct sound at a playback (!) songs similar to Free As a Bird and Come And Get It - all so unlikely .......
Or just a lazy observer. Maybe there's piano in a couple of songs and they reach for any comparison they can think of. (I remember reports from R.E.M.'s listening party for their "Around The Sun" album that compared it to "Automatic For The People"...umm, no, not even close.) Could it be fake? Maybe, but at any rate, looking at the producers involved, it's likely to be a combination of very modern combined with the retro touches that are Mark Ronson's trademark, plus some of the crunchy guitars and deep bass of Paul Epworth's mixing work.
-
This does not sound promising. By comparing it the "the late 70s", it doesnt look like the album will approach the mid 70 highlights of Band on the Run thru At the Speed of Sound.
-
SusyLuvsPaul:
A poster wrote that of 50 new Paul songs "only 12" will be really good--that's bollocks and B.S., I say
To be honest, that wouldn't surprise me one bit.
-
PDS:
The more I read the article the more I think it's fake - songs have no titles yet (!) unfinished songs, indistinct sound at a playback (!) songs similar to Free As a Bird and Come And Get It - all so unlikely .......
And no detail as to the style of the tracks, nobody can even remember one line of a song...the length of the songs...still not one title... I mean if it's Paul Effing McCartney - you'd at least ASK ABOUT THE STUFF! So I call bollocks too.
-
What's totally bullocks and insane is anyone believing that McCartney wrote 50 songs and only 12 of them are really good! How absolutely ridiculous!! Is anyone really gullable enough to believe such an insane statement? It totally surprises me that anyone could say it doesn't surprise them! When did Paul McCartney ever have a track record that bad, sure some say that his output since the Beatles hasn't been good for the most part, but that's totally insane and a bunch of bullocks as well! Do people really judge how good an album is by the lyrics! The lyrics? So the rest can be absolutely fantastic, but because the lyrics don't say what you think they should that causes the album to not be as good? If that's the case, I know a whole bunch of songs that would never ever have had the chance to be hits, because many of the lyrics don't make any sense at all. Tutti Fruity comes to mind as does I Am The Walrus. Since when did so called good lyrics become a criteria in rock and roll? As long as the lyrics aren't offensive or vulgar, I have no problem, this is rock and roll not rocket science!
-
left hand man:
What's totally bullocks and insane is anyone believing that McCartney wrote 50 songs and only 12 of them are really good! How absolutely ridiculous!! Is anyone really gullable enough to believe such an insane statement? When did Paul McCartney ever have a track record that bad, sure some say that his output since the Beatles hasn't been good for the most part, but that's totally insane and a bunch of bullocks as well! Do people really judge how good an album is by the lyrics! The lyrics? So the rest can be absolutely fantastic, but because the lyrics don't say what you think they should that causes the album to not be as good? If that's the case, I know a whole bunch of rock songs that would never ever be hits, because many of the lyrics don't make any sense at all. Tutti Fruity comes to mind as does I Am The Walrus. Since when did lyrics become a criteria in rock and roll? As long as the lyrics aren't offensive or vulgar, I have no problem, this is rock and roll not rocket science!
I didn't mention anything about lyrics, other than nobody supposedly hearing the songs has quoted any. But really...50 songs and only a dozen, "really good," doesn't mean the remainder are rubbish. The big batch of songs recorded for TOF/POP left about a third that were less than "really good." There's still heaps left over from Driving Rain that disn't make the cut. There's the story about Godrich telling Paul to "come up with better songs." No, I really wouldn't be surprised. When Paul is good he's VERY GOOD, and when he's ordinary, he's well, ordinary. Peace Brother!
-
I would be totally surprised, and wouldn't believe anyone that made such an insane statement! Paul McCartney has never ever been that bad, 12 out of 50, how can anyone even begin to believe such total nonsense? As for Godrich, I don't agree with him either, (how many hits has he written, and who is he to tell the greatest songwriter in the entire history of popular music to come up with better songs?) some of those songs were probably great the way they were, it's just that Godrich is anti rock and roll! It's one reason I don't want him to ever produce another McCartney record! He can take his slow depressing approach to music somewhere else! McCartney should work with producers that undrestand he's a rocker not some deep emotionally injured artist! A producer that pushes McCartney to do what he does best, not what the producer wants him to do, a producer that encourages not discourages him from using his band. A producer that understands McCartney's strengths!