What's More Unfortunate?
-
yankeefan7:
AcresOfFun:
Agreed. I regret being a bit negative earlier, since the never-ending same complaints over and over caused me to lurk for years and now dip in and out, yet it's easy to get caught up in the negativity. Though I might go a bit more out of my way to see him in additional shows if I feared missing something special, I'll continue going -- and totally loving going -- as often as possible, even if he's just reading a phone book, and he's lightyears from that now. He's really still the best out there, and it's the "casual" fans I hear that from the most!
Just curious. Is it negative to want Mr. McCartney to play more solo songs in his set list after giving people approx 25 Beatle/Wings hits every concert? I actually think it is a compliment that myself and others want to hear more of his wonderful music past 1980 live. It keeps getting mentioned each tour because some of us hoped each tour it may change. I have given up now, his set list is what it is - lol.
Agree!
-
The only unfortunate thing is everyone loses to father-time. Let's see where we are at in 2027 - most likely not at a Paul McCartney concert.
-
I stayed up till nearly 3 AM this morning putting together a spreadsheet of all the songs I've heard Paul perform since 2002. The total was 102 and it didn't include the Sound Check I attended in Tulsa or the concert I attended at Texas Stadium in the 1980's. Are there some songs I would like to hear that I haven't? Sure. But when I balance that against the enjoyment I get out of each concert, the enjoyment wins every single time Looking forward to OKC on July 17th!
-
MsProudSooner:
I stayed up till nearly 3 AM this morning putting together a spreadsheet of all the songs I've heard Paul perform since 2002. The total was 102 and it didn't include the Sound Check I attended in Tulsa or the concert I attended at Texas Stadium in the 1980's. Are there some songs I would like to hear that I haven't? Sure. But when I balance that against the enjoyment I get out of each concert, the enjoyment wins every single time Looking forward to OKC on July 17th!
Everyone knows I love Paul and I commend that you took the time to do a spreadsheet. My point with changed setlists is not that this one is bad, he can't do a bad song. But like many who have gone even close to the amount of Paul shows I have just would like to hear some new ones. I'm not talking wholesale changes because that will never happen but if he took 3 to 4 out of the 37 songs to appease the hardcore fan, I think many would be happy. And just for shits and giggles, 2016....Bruce Springsteen did over 147 different songs in one tour, not over 15 years but 1 year. And that excites me because a cover or obscure songs almost has as much as a chance to be played as a #1 hit. And trust me, Bruce fans don't walk out on the lesser known ones. I love Paul, and with his amazing Beatles and solo catalogs, I imagine him doing a show like that and his audience would never be the same! Bruce goes as far as pulling signs from the audience with requests on them and then actually playing several of the requests. Could you even imagine how cool and spontaneous it would be to see Paul do shows like that?
-
Bob Gannon:
MsProudSooner:
I stayed up till nearly 3 AM this morning putting together a spreadsheet of all the songs I've heard Paul perform since 2002. The total was 102 and it didn't include the Sound Check I attended in Tulsa or the concert I attended at Texas Stadium in the 1980's. Are there some songs I would like to hear that I haven't? Sure. But when I balance that against the enjoyment I get out of each concert, the enjoyment wins every single time Looking forward to OKC on July 17th!
Everyone knows I love Paul and I commend that you took the time to do a spreadsheet. My point with changed setlists is not that this one is bad, he can't do a bad song. But like many who have gone even close to the amount of Paul shows I have just would like to hear some new ones. I'm not talking wholesale changes because that will never happen but if he took 3 to 4 out of the 37 songs to appease the hardcore fan, I think many would be happy. And just for shits and giggles, 2016....Bruce Springsteen did over 147 different songs in one tour, not over 15 years but 1 year. And that excites me because a cover or obscure songs almost has as much as a chance to be played as a #1 hit. And trust me, Bruce fans don't walk out on the lesser known ones. I love Paul, and with his amazing Beatles and solo catalogs, I imagine him doing a show like that and his audience would never be the same! Bruce goes as far as pulling signs from the audience with requests on them and then actually playing several of the requests. Could you even imagine how cool and spontaneous it would be to see Paul do shows like that?
_________________________________________________ Bob, You bring up a fascinating point comparing Paul and Bruce shows. No doubt Bruce tours relative to his setlist are much more diverse. To be fair, comparing Paul and Bruce's careers is so radically different. Yes they are both superstars but Paul was 1/4 of the greatest band ever whereas Bruce was always a Solo Artist. The Beatles is obviously where Paul got his fame. Even if you argue that Paul was 1/2 of the greatest songwriter pair ever, Bruce was always a "single" songwriter throughout his career. Because of this fact, Paul's tours always have to keep the Beatles as a group as its chief motivation as far as driving ticket sales. Growing up with the Beatles and Paul (I'm 6 one thing I've noticed with friends of mine that I grew up with. Beatle boomers in many ways left the Beatles when the Fabs split. In my opinion, the heavy percentage of Beatle fans do not keep up with the individual Beatles very much. When they go to a Macca show, they want to hear the songs (primarily Beatle song) they grew up with. Paul could never have a successful tour if he only played even 25% Beatle songs. It just wouldn't happen...that is his base. Bruce on the other hand has a much greater % of fans that attend his shows are very hard core. They expect to hear deep cuts and would be very disappointed if he only did hits. They know his albums inside out. I agree with you, Yankeefan and others on this Site. We know that Paul can't do wholesale changes with more Solo songs than Beatles. We just want, as you say, 3 or 4 new Solo songs of the 37 "each year" that he tours. This will not disappoint his base Beatle audience but will make his hard core fans much happier. That is all we are saying. Personally, I'm not saying obscure Solo Paul songs either. I'm saying very good solo songs that came from some of his most popular albums. Is it too much to expect Mr Brave Face, Put It There, Wanderlust, Take it away, Little Willow, Young Boy, The World Tonight, That Was Me, House of Wax etc. etc to be rotated with each tour. They are not obscure B-sides.
-
yankeefan7:
AcresOfFun:
Agreed. I regret being a bit negative earlier, since the never-ending same complaints over and over caused me to lurk for years and now dip in and out, yet it's easy to get caught up in the negativity. Though I might go a bit more out of my way to see him in additional shows if I feared missing something special, I'll continue going -- and totally loving going -- as often as possible, even if he's just reading a phone book, and he's lightyears from that now. He's really still the best out there, and it's the "casual" fans I hear that from the most!
Just curious. Is it negative to want Mr. McCartney to play more solo songs in his set list after giving people approx 25 Beatle/Wings hits every concert? I actually think it is a compliment that myself and others want to hear more of his wonderful music past 1980 live. It keeps getting mentioned each tour because some of us hoped each tour it may change. I have given up now, his set list is what it is - lol.
Yankeefan...it's not negative to want to hear Mccartney play more solo songs, but I think it is negative to repeat it so often. You always seem to mention songs post 1980. I'm sure you realize that Paul had a lull in performing between 1980 and 1988, which looking back was unfortunate for all his fans. Since 1989, Paul included several songs from his latest LP's EVERY time he toured to promote it. Did you ever think maybe that once Paul plugs an LP for a solid year or two, he doesn't feel it's necessary to do so any more. Let's face it 95% of his audience would rather hear a Beatle tune before a gem from any of his solo works...and that's too bad for the diehard fans like us that want some of those gems. Either way, regardless of the setlist, I'm going to have the time of my life watching and listening to the most famous song writer / performer in history!
-
MsProudSooner:
...or the concert I attended at Texas Stadium in the 1980's.
Just a minor nitpick, but Paul didn't play Texas in the 1980's. It was April 7, 1990.
-
B J Conlee:
Bob Gannon:
MsProudSooner:
I stayed up till nearly 3 AM this morning putting together a spreadsheet of all the songs I've heard Paul perform since 2002. The total was 102 and it didn't include the Sound Check I attended in Tulsa or the concert I attended at Texas Stadium in the 1980's. Are there some songs I would like to hear that I haven't? Sure. But when I balance that against the enjoyment I get out of each concert, the enjoyment wins every single time Looking forward to OKC on July 17th!
Everyone knows I love Paul and I commend that you took the time to do a spreadsheet. My point with changed setlists is not that this one is bad, he can't do a bad song. But like many who have gone even close to the amount of Paul shows I have just would like to hear some new ones. I'm not talking wholesale changes because that will never happen but if he took 3 to 4 out of the 37 songs to appease the hardcore fan, I think many would be happy. And just for shits and giggles, 2016....Bruce Springsteen did over 147 different songs in one tour, not over 15 years but 1 year. And that excites me because a cover or obscure songs almost has as much as a chance to be played as a #1 hit. And trust me, Bruce fans don't walk out on the lesser known ones. I love Paul, and with his amazing Beatles and solo catalogs, I imagine him doing a show like that and his audience would never be the same! Bruce goes as far as pulling signs from the audience with requests on them and then actually playing several of the requests. Could you even imagine how cool and spontaneous it would be to see Paul do shows like that?
_________________________________________________ Bob, You bring up a fascinating point comparing Paul and Bruce shows. No doubt Bruce tours relative to his setlist are much more diverse. To be fair, comparing Paul and Bruce's careers is so radically different. Yes they are both superstars but Paul was 1/4 of the greatest band ever whereas Bruce was always a Solo Artist. The Beatles is obviously where Paul got his fame. Even if you argue that Paul was 1/2 of the greatest songwriter pair ever, Bruce was always a "single" songwriter throughout his career. Because of this fact, Paul's tours always have to keep the Beatles as a group as its chief motivation as far as driving ticket sales. Growing up with the Beatles and Paul (I'm 6 one thing I've noticed with friends of mine that I grew up with. Beatle boomers in many ways left the Beatles when the Fabs split. In my opinion, the heavy percentage of Beatle fans do not keep up with the individual Beatles very much. When they go to a Macca show, they want to hear the songs (primarily Beatle song) they grew up with. Paul could never have a successful tour if he only played even 25% Beatle songs. It just wouldn't happen...that is his base. Bruce on the other hand has a much greater % of fans that attend his shows are very hard core. They expect to hear deep cuts and would be very disappointed if he only did hits. They know his albums inside out. I agree with you, Yankeefan and others on this Site. We know that Paul can't do wholesale changes with more Solo songs than Beatles. We just want, as you say, 3 or 4 new Solo songs of the 37 "each year" that he tours. This will not disappoint his base Beatle audience but will make his hard core fans much happier. That is all we are saying. Personally, I'm not saying obscure Solo Paul songs either. I'm saying very good solo songs that came from some of his most popular albums. Is it too much to expect Mr Brave Face, Put It There, Wanderlust, Take it away, Little Willow, Young Boy, The World Tonight, That Was Me, House of Wax etc. etc to be rotated with each tour. They are not obscure B-sides.
________________________________________________ I was rushing out the door when I wrote the above post so it was a little sloppy. I wanted to point out that I'm sixty eight years old. Whenever I try to type the numeral eight it doesn't take on Maccaboard. I became a huge Paul and Beatles fan when I was a freshman in high school. Also want to say that after 126 shows (or some crazy figure like that) no one knows Paul's fan base at his live shows like Bob. I do defer to his opinions when it comes to Paul's audience. I would think that most attendees are Beatle Paul fans first and foremost. They know the Beatles albums like the hard core Bruce fans know his albums. How could they not if they grew up in the 60's. In my opinion, most fans attending a Paul show couldn't name 3 songs each off most Paul solo albums. That is why Paul has to play a majority of Beatle songs at every show. Yankee fan, myself and others are not objecting to that fact. When Bob says he would like to hear just 3-4 "new" songs with each tour, I couldn't agree more. That is all that many of the hard core Paul fans are saying here.
-
I am a big Springsteen fan too and go to as many shows of his as I can. He also has many casual fans at his shows that get bored during deep cuts, and many diehards that complain about his set lists when they are not varied *enough from night to night. While Bruce does change up his shows and no two of them are ever the same, he has taken to doing more repetitive encores lately, and there are pages of people complaining about that on his fan boards. So it's all relative. It would be great if Paul took sign requests like Bruce, but I have been seeing his concerts since 1976 and he's just not that kind of performer. There are also Bruce fans who don't like the sign requests...he picks covers and they would rather hear a Springsteen original; he picks a song he plays all the time and they would rather hear a rarity, etc.
-
thenightfish:
I am a big Springsteen fan too and go to as many shows of his as I can. He also has many casual fans at his shows that get bored during deep cuts, and many diehards that complain about his set lists when they are not varied *enough from night to night. While Bruce does change up his shows and no two of them are ever the same, he has taken to doing more repetitive encores lately, and there are pages of people complaining about that on his fan boards. So it's all relative. It would be great if Paul took sign requests like Bruce, but I have been seeing his concerts since 1976 and he's just not that kind of performer. There are also Bruce fans who don't like the sign requests...he picks covers and they would rather hear a Springsteen original; he picks a song he plays all the time and they would rather hear a rarity, etc.
______________________________________________________ Thanks for the info about Bruce shows night fish. I would bet however that the % of hard core Bruce fans at any of his shows are much, much higher than the % of hard core McCartney fans at Macca shows. As I said, the large % of people attending Macca shows are putting out the money because Paul was a huge part of the Beatles story and they are going to hear Beatles' songs. My experience going to about 10 Macca shows (and I'm a real extrovert and have talked to many fans) is that their knowledge of Paul's Solo Career is very limited. Many boomers did follow the individual Beatles in the 70's but once we got in the 80's their interest in Paul, George, and Ringo as individuals really declined. The boomers attending Paul shows now are very nostalgic and that is their motivation. Many are 1st timers and they realize that Paul is old. It's a "last chance" motivation and is why Paul continues to sell out arenas even at the hight prices. Do they love that Paul does so many Beatle songs? They surely do and as I said they know the songs frontwards and backwards. Bruce's big base of fans are younger (like 10 years) and Bruce was always a Solo performer (even though he has a great band). His base knows all his albums from track to track. And many have seen him countless times. Yes, I would think that he does get a large number of casual fans these days but he always has that base of serious fans constantly in the audience. Paul has the same but they are Beatle Paul fans. That is why Paul's overall career is not represented in his setlists. He has a more difficult time than Bruce from that perspective. Even if he wanted to, Paul is limited in playing what he probably would like. He has to play about 75% Beatles. Bruce can play whatever he wants and his serious demand that he plays deep tracks. Am I pretty accurate Night Fish? Let me know where you disagree.
-
I've read that Beatles / McCartney tribute bands are doing "album concerts" now, sometimes... such as a group playing a concert of (for example) the Abbey Road album... or the entire "Venus and Mars" or "McCartney II" etc etc. Maybe fans can put in a request for Paul to do special (but smaller venue) "album concerts" of their favorite McCartney albums? Personally I like that he does a variety and wide range of music in his One on One concerts, I wouldn't ever be disappointed in that, and am just thankful to be able to see him at all. Was just thinking there's some fans who'd like to hear seldom performed songs from particular albums, and "album concerts" every once in a while might be something people would enjoy.
-
If if you want to hear tribute bands do a complete Beatles album, go to AROTR in Jeffersonville IN. I've never seen a complete McCartney album performed though. Paul would never do that though, wouldn't matter how many people requested it!
-
Honestly, I could quote you every lineup, every story he tells, what he will say next....because it hasn't changed much in well over a decade. But, I am just more excited about being able to see an actual living legend in concert than I am worried about what songs he plays on repeat. Would I love to see a whole bunch of songs chucked out? Yep. Would I love to hear Mull of Kintyre played in the US so I can hear him sing it live? Y E S!!!!!!!!!!!!! But, overall, I feel blessed and lucky to be able to spend even the smallest amount of time breathing the same air as the Man and singing along to every song. KJ
-
I wouldn't want to hear him do only ONE album. That is limiting him. His list of songs are so varied, I'd hate to have him limit himself to one album.
-
oobu24:
I wouldn't want to hear him do only ONE album. That is limiting him. His list of songs are so varied, I'd hate to have him limit himself to one album.
I wasn't wanting him to limit himself.... or to have him do just one album regularly, or on tour. I enjoy his current setlists and listening to whatever songs he wants to sing for us!. Just was saying it could be an idea for a separate special event sometime, and wouldn't have to be done that often. I understand now it's no use trying to come up with ideas to please everyone, or to be helpful. It should rightly be up to Paul to decide what he wants to perform. I'm just grateful that I have the opportunity of hearing him. From the very beginning, each song he's created has come from his heart and the wonderful musical gift he has, and that in itself is special. I'm glad to hear whatever he wants to sing for us! I just wish there was time to be able to listen to each and every one of his songs, because I appreciate them all in their own way.
shacat wrote: But, overall, I feel blessed and lucky to be able to spend even the smallest amount of time breathing the same air as the Man and singing along to every song.
Yes, same here! And at every concert it must warm his heart so much to hear us sing along with him!
-
It also is the band members that have to remember chords and lyrics. They are a very tight band!
-
LadyLeslie:
oobu24:
I wouldn't want to hear him do only ONE album. That is limiting him. His list of songs are so varied, I'd hate to have him limit himself to one album.
I wasn't wanting him to limit himself.... or to have him do just one album regularly, or on tour. I enjoy his current setlists and listening to whatever songs he wants to sing for us!. Just was saying it could be an idea for a separate special event sometime, and wouldn't have to be done that often. I understand now it's no use trying to come up with ideas to please everyone, or to be helpful. It should rightly be up to Paul to decide what he wants to perform. I'm just grateful that I have the opportunity of hearing him. From the very beginning, each song he's created has come from his heart and the wonderful musical gift he has, and that in itself is special. I'm glad to hear whatever he wants to sing for us! I just wish there was time to be able to listen to each and every one of his songs, because I appreciate them all in their own way. ...
I meant that I wouldn't want an entire album or even 2. I'd much rather a couple songs off of each album. Or a medley even. He should really start doing that. He has so many songs it is a shame to stick to the same few. I've always said that on a 2 nighter in the same city the 2nd show should consist of a few more recent tunes & be advertised as such.
-
Only album I could ever see him doing in full is Band on the Run, and he let that opportunity pass both for the reissue in 2010 (though he added 1985 and Bluebird to the set), and the 40th in 2013. What if he did a show 4 years ago like- sigh... Eight Days A Week Junior's Farm All My Loving Listen to What The Man Said Paperback Writer My Valentine The Long and Winding Road Maybe I'm Amazed I've Just Seen A Face We Can Work It Out Another Day And I Love Her Blackbird Here Today Your Mother Should Know Lady Madonna Lovely Rita Eleanor Rigby Being For The Benefit of Mr Kite Back In The USSR Something Let It Be Hey Jude Intermission: Band on the Run Jet Bluebird Mrs Vanderbilt Let Me Roll It Mamunia No Words Picasso's Last Words Nineteen Hundred and Eighty Five Encore: Yesterday Day Tripper Get Back Live and Let Die Golden Slumbers Carry That Weight The End
-
MaccaBassman:
So what is more unfortunate?? -The fact that Paul has for the most part stuck to a very similar setlist over the past few tours? OR -The fact that people continuously whine over the setlist/his voice?
Complaining that a 75-year-old doesn't sound like a 25-year-old is like complaining that the Pacific Ocean doesn't fit in your swimming pool. But then, so is complaining about people who complain online. Other than complain online, there's absolutely nothing any of us can do about his voice, setlist or wardrobe. If you don't like his show, don't go. Leave more room for the people who want to see it. But then, you have to complain somewhere.
-
MaccaBassman:
MY WHOLE HEARTED OPINION: The facts are the facts. Paul McCartney is a 75 year old man who can still hit more notes than I'll say 98% of the people on this board. If you expect to go to a McCartney concert and hear him sound EXACTLY like he did with The Beatles or Wings then DON'T GO and don't complain. As for the setlist... Listen, I love eating at Wendy's from time to time after a long gig. I was so mad when they changed the fries years ago. Boy I'd love to have the old fries again. Did it make me complain on the Wendy's board? Did I stop going? NO! Because I love the burgers, because I love the fake-chicken (Sorry Paul and all Veg's). My point is this; NO ONE here is a fan of Paul's solely based on what he plays at his shows. We love Paul for who he is, what he has meant to all of us our entire lives, or for some new fans just recently. With John, George, Ringo, Wings, and his solo career, he has created a soundtrack for MILLIONS of lives. Not just for my life, and not just for yours. Does everyone have the right to voice their opinion just like I am right now, for the first time after years of keeping it to myself? ABSOLUTELY. But C'Mon People (ah thank you) how many tours have some of you now made the same comments about the set? Has it done anything? Not really. Did you still buy tickets for this tour? Of course you did because you're going for a lot more reasons than just a setlist. We're all DIEHARD fans of Paul and everything related to Paul. I think sometimes we have to just remember that we make up maybe 5-10% of the people at each of those shows. He may be making the set list for 90% of the people there, but we can all admit once we leave, 100% of the people are happy. Could he throw out some "never before played" stuff? Would it be INCREDIBLE to hear? YEAH!! Look at how many different songs we've all heard since our first tour? How many different songs is that? I bet A LOT! Let's be grateful for what we all have been given by Paul over the years and still today.
Agree with this post very much! (Especially the line in bold) Well Said, my friend.