SECOND SINGLE FROM "NEW" - "QUEENIE EYE"
-
The Eggman67:
darrel:
Sounds great No one else has mentioned this yet but on the player it says this is a radio edit so the album version will be longer.
The radio edit is about 3'26", and according to iTunes the album version is 3'48"
I'm hearing there are other promo edits that involve Paul introducing the song and telling the story behind it.
-
The Eggman67:
darrel:
Sounds great No one else has mentioned this yet but on the player it says this is a radio edit so the album version will be longer.
The radio edit is about 3'26", and according to iTunes the album version is 3'48"
It can be ten minutes long and that's fine with me, love that song.
-
Amazing song! Is it a Beatles lost hit? I hear echoes of Walrus, Lady Madonna, Hey Bulldog, Monkberry Moon Delight, Flaming Pie, Fine Line.... Definitely in all of them we've got the same piano player... P
-
Seems they've taken the link down...
-
thenightfish:
Seems they've taken the link down...
and now it seems to be back up.
-
The more I think of it after repeat listens is that it has a "Sowing The Seeds Of Love" vibe from Tears for Fears.... Which, by the way has a Beatles feel..... I love this song. Definitely the strongest of the few we have heard so far.
-
Very strong, instantly catchy. I would say lyrically very clever as well. Anyone any news on the accompanying video??
-
Definitely like Queenie Eye more so than New (although the latter is starting to grow on me...LOL)
-
Strawberry kiss:
Amazing song! Is it a Beatles lost hit? I hear echoes of Walrus, Lady Madonna, Hey Bulldog, Monkberry Moon Delight, Flaming Pie, Fine Line.... Definitely in all of them we've got the same piano player...
Funny you say that because I find that it's almost like a marriage involving the soundtrack of I Am The Walrus and the vocal style of That Was Me...that opinion probably doesn't sound flattering at first, but I mean it in a positive way and find the results very pleasing
-
Ok folks.... I'm just saying right now. Best single from Paul in over two decades. The Eppworth touch is evident. The lyrics are interesting. the twists and turns are amazing. the middle slows down. This is a rocking roller coaster ride.... It's pure brilliance...
-
I really like it. It's different, unique. My wife thinks it sounds like Walrus. I think it's from the Fireman. I don't know. I just really like it--and that all I need from Paul.
-
"Queenie Eye" has yet to show up on any of the publicly available airplay charts -- not a huge surprise after just a couple days -- but some Triple A stations seem to have dropped "New" in favor of "Queenie." Poking around on radio station websites shows, for example, that WXRT in Chicago played "Queenie Eye" twice today and seems to have dropped "New." What remains to be seen is whether the new single breaks through to any significant number of radio stations/formats that didn't play "New." UPDATE: Further poking around finds one pretty significant station, KGSR in Austin, that was not playing New and is playing Queenie Eye. A trend? We shall see...
-
Bruce M.:
"Queenie Eye" has yet to show up on any of the publicly available airplay charts -- not a huge surprise after just a couple days -- but some Triple A stations seem to have dropped "New" in favor of "Queenie." Poking around on radio station websites shows, for example, that WXRT in Chicago played "Queenie Eye" twice today and seems to have dropped "New." What remains to be seen is whether the new single breaks through to any significant number of radio stations/formats that didn't play "New." UPDATE: Further poking around finds one pretty significant station, KGSR in Austin, that was not playing New and is playing Queenie Eye. A trend? We shall see...
My local Triple A (WXPN) played "Queenie Eye" three times yesterday, and "New" once. http://xpn.org/playlists/xpn-playlist Good times!
-
Beatles4Ever&Ever:
Just read that the second single from "New" will be "Queenie Eye". Anybody heard it???? :
Youtube clip from yesterday in Times Square.
-
Really liking it!
-
Hi all. First post on here in a long, long time. I used to be oh! darling but couldn't get my account to work and had to make a new one (btw, it would be helpful if there was a link to contact a moderator without being signed in in case the problem is logging in). Anyway, I love what I've heard so far, but especially Queenie eye. Was a little worried when I saw the title, but it's a lot of fun and very Beatlesque. (why is it a compliment for anyone else to be Beatlesque but sometimes seen as an insult in reviews when it's Paul?) Looking forward to the new release.
-
prudence1964:
Hi all. First post on here in a long, long time. I used to be oh! darling but couldn't get my account to work and had to make a new one (btw, it would be helpful if there was a link to contact a moderator without being signed in in case the problem is logging in). Anyway, I love what I've heard so far, but especially Queenie eye. Was a little worried when I saw the title, but it's a lot of fun and very Beatlesque. (why is it a compliment for anyone else to be Beatlesque but sometimes seen as an insult in reviews when it's Paul?) Looking forward to the new release.
I have just sent you a PM.
-
Prudence asked why's it an "insult" for a Paul song to be called "Beatlesque" when that's a big compliment for anyone else--why are Beatles songs sometimes called "Old-fashioned," I've wondered that lately, too. Why aren't they just considered very good, often brilliant songs that are wonderful in a timeless way?
-
SusyLuvsPaul:
Prudence asked why's it an "insult" for a Paul song to be called "Beatlesque" when that's a big compliment for anyone else--why are Beatles songs sometimes called "Old-fashioned," I've wondered that lately, too. Why aren't they just considered very good, often brilliant songs that are wonderful in a timeless way?
Furthermore, what constitutes 'Beatlesque'? Especially when they covered such a wide variety of styles, etc etc etc? My take on it is that the most common 'sounds' labeled as 'Beatlesque' include production work that sound like Strawberry Fields or I am the Walrus...not too many 'Paul' songs from the Beatle era that fit into the 'Beatlesque' type cast...even with the notion that they are in fact Beatles songs....LOL...For example, if Paul produced a new song on acoustic guitar with strings added, no one is going to call it 'Beatlesque' just because he did that with Yesterday or Eleanor Rigby (at least in terms of strings)...but he makes something that sounds a bit familiar to Walrus or Strawberry Field, and he gets 'accused' of that. Paul flat out said that he borrowed the style of guitar playing he used while making Blackbird when he came up with Jenny Wren, and that song never resonated as 'Beatlesque' despite actually sounding like something that could've come right out of the white album sessions, right along side Blackbird. But to answer your question more directly, I think it's because to some, it seems to insinuate that Paul hasn't done much since the Beatles and the only time he can still catch someone's ear is if he tries to copy them (both on stage when touring and when coming up with new material)...but c'mon - between all the (post Beatles) albums sold, filled stadiums, etc...you know that's just a load of poo, right?
-
Here is my argument on the subject. I think after the Beatles, Paul wanted to create his own sound his own identity. I'm sure he went out of his way to not sound like he used to. Sometimes, way out of his way. I'm so glad he has seemed to go back to his "beatly" style a bit. Its what we love. Its not copying when its your own. Embraced, enhanced and old yet so modern sounding at the same time. Maybe ten plus years of touring with all the great songs made him very comfortable in embracing the sounds. Queenie Eye represents to me just a small insight to the kind of music the Beatles would be making today. So, yes lets attach that kind of significance to it. Its thrilling, its refreshing, comforting and familiar. Why the heck not? Its allowed!