Defense Case 2- Off the Ground
-
Kestrel:
Its not so much the songs or even the performances that ruin OTG for me, but the soulless,sterile production job its lumbered with.
They recorded much of the album live. Less room for soulless sterility them in other longer drawn out albums.
-
Off The Ground is one of my top 5 Paul albums. I love each track and that is rare for me.
-
hey bulldog:
Squid:
Off the Ground has a misconceived new age quality about it. The songs range between from anti-vivisection to "peace in the neighbourhood" without saying anything original or new about these issues; in fact, they're presented in such vague doped up terms that they can antagonise. Some are nice in spite of all this - Golden Earth Girl, for example. Or I Owe It All To You. The low point is the plainly abject attempt at a narrative song - Biker Like an Icon which, to this day, cannot be heard without Paul's exortation to "think about it" and the inevitable cringe. Winedark Open Sea is a long pointless dirge which has no business outside of a soundcheck; C'Mon People appears to be an offensive end of history track re fall of Communism. Peace in the Neighbourhood is a sort of drive-by song. The high points are the collaborations with Costello, particularly The Lovers that Never Were, which stands head and shoulders above everything else here. The album's case is not helped by the fact that those songs recorded at the sessions and then reserved for b-sides and extra tracks on Cds are better than most of the rubbish on it. Though not that much better, it has to be said. Plus the cover art is atrocious.
You like it then?
fantastic reply
-
Funny this is the only post redrose speedway album I never bought on the day of its release. I had been listening to it a good few months before it came out and apart from one or two songs. I found it didn't conect with me as a Macca album. I still find that when the iPods on random I tend to skip most tracks
-
For me OTG is like FITD part two, only with more accessible songs. I really like it. I thought Flaming Pie was better, but I also thought it was better than FITD. OTG has better songs than anything since 2002. Starting with Driving Rain, Paul's album's all sound like him doodling around with ideas that never really gel. NEW included. MAF is an exception, I really liked that one.
-
He played the songs from Off The Ground on the New World Tour and they sounded really good live. C'mon People was a show stopper. The album has a few weak songs, but was a solid follow up to Flowers in the Dirt. I'll agree with the others who said it should have been a double album.
-
His PP period (Polite Protest)
-
I would like to know why he waited four years to record this album. What happened between 1989 and 1993? just the tour I guess
-
WingsOfMacca:
I would like to know why he waited four years to record this album. What happened between 1989 and 1993? just the tour I guess
Don't forget the MTV gig and the small Unplugged 'tour' that followed (actually the first half of each show was unplugged, then they 'plugged in' for the second half)Then there was his first foray into classical music (Liverpool Oratorio) that was released at some point during that time span....He was pretty active during the period between these two albums
-
Two songs on "Flaming Pie"; "Calico Skies" and "Great Day" was recorded already back in 1992. There were the world tour of 1989-90, then you have "Liverpool Oratorio" released in October 1991, I think written and composed on and off with Carl Davis between 1988-91. And "Unplugged" performed and released the same year. Which leaves 1992, the year of the recording of "Off the Ground", which was released early 1993, January/February... Also, I think he and Elvis Costello recorded much more songs than actually released in this period. There excist an albums worth of bootlegged material. And he did some guest apperances, for 10cc's comeback album and performing on a comedy album by Eddie Murphy, and he recorded "It's Now or Never" for an Elvis Presley tribute album...
-
rich n:
WingsOfMacca:
I would like to know why he waited four years to record this album. What happened between 1989 and 1993? just the tour I guess
Don't forget the MTV gig and the small Unplugged 'tour' that followed (actually the first half of each show was unplugged, then they 'plugged in' for the second half)Then there was his first foray into classical music (Liverpool Oratorio) that was released at some point during that time span....He was pretty active during the period between these two albums
You're right, I forgot the classic works and the unplugged. He was trying to expand his own art. He was painting a lot, too.
-
WingsOfMacca:
I would like to know why he waited four years to record this album. What happened between 1989 and 1993? just the tour I guess
Some of it has do with contracts, or freedom from them. In the early days, The Beatles were churning out two albums a year. They released their first 6 albums in only three years! Then when they went solo, each one was putting out roughly an album a year. As they became free from record company contracts, releases became less frequent also. So by the 80's, Paul was putting out an album every two or three years, and in the 90's and 00's, an album of new material every four years. This was the pattern he broke in '07, when he released Memory Almost Full only two years after Chaos and Creation. And then it was another 6 years until NEW. But to be fair there was a LOT of stuff in between his rock albums.
-
beatlesfanrandy:
WingsOfMacca:
I would like to know why he waited four years to record this album. What happened between 1989 and 1993? just the tour I guess
Some of it has do with contracts, or freedom from them. In the early days, The Beatles were churning out two albums a year. They released their first 6 albums in only three years! Then when they went solo, each one was putting out roughly an album a year. As they became free from record company contracts, releases became less frequent also. So by the 80's, Paul was putting out an album every two or three years, and in the 90's and 00's, an album of new material every four years. This was the pattern he broke in '07, when he released Memory Almost Full only two years after Chaos and Creation. And then it was another 6 years until NEW. But to be fair there was a LOT of stuff in between his rock albums.
Did they become free from company contracts in the 80's? when did Paul create MPL? I'm just being curious
-
Didn't the EMI contract they signed in 1967 expire in 1976?
-
WingsOfMacca:
beatlesfanrandy:
WingsOfMacca:
I would like to know why he waited four years to record this album. What happened between 1989 and 1993? just the tour I guess
Some of it has do with contracts, or freedom from them. In the early days, The Beatles were churning out two albums a year. They released their first 6 albums in only three years! Then when they went solo, each one was putting out roughly an album a year. As they became free from record company contracts, releases became less frequent also. So by the 80's, Paul was putting out an album every two or three years, and in the 90's and 00's, an album of new material every four years. This was the pattern he broke in '07, when he released Memory Almost Full only two years after Chaos and Creation. And then it was another 6 years until NEW. But to be fair there was a LOT of stuff in between his rock albums.
Did they become free from company contracts in the 80's? when did Paul create MPL? I'm just being curious
-
HaileyMcComet:
Didn't the EMI contract they signed in 1967 expire in 1976?
Yes.
-
Read enough books about The Beatles and random useless tidbits just stick in your mind.
-
HaileyMcComet:
Read enough books about The Beatles and random useless tidbits just stick in your mind.
Yes, I used to be an encyclopedia when it came to music, have always read a lot next to listen, especially the Beatles related and release year of records, I have such things in my head, but then came Internet...