Paul's upcoming album review they say its HOT!
-
Michelley:
Well I don't know whether Rod S. is "cool" or not. I just don't like him and never have. But to avoid derailing the thread .... I'll try to go back on topic by list my wishes for how Paul would promote his new album. 1. Do it classy. No TV appearances on stupid shows like The View or Ellen. Bowie didn't do any cheesy TV shows with his new album; neither did Dylan or Springsteen. They just released their albums, did a video or two (Bowie and Dylan); did a major interview (Dylan, Springsteen); and toured the album (Springsteen). Too much can go wrong on a live TV performance and then Twitter just cuts you to pieces. Paul should do a big interview with a major magazine, or on NPR. TV just makes Paul look small. He needs to promote this in a sophisticated way. 2. No last-minute cheesy gigs like the I Heart Radio Festival. That festival is for teenybopper music -- not the latest album of a legend. And it's owned by a right-wing company that makes my skin crawl. Look, top 40 radio is not going to play Paul's new album. At this stage of his career, it's not about getting a "hit" single. The singles charts are for young artists. It's NOT a failure for Paul to NOT be on the singles charts anymore. No other artist his age is either. Nothing wrong with that. 3. Just release the album and do some small intimate concerts in New York, London, LA, that ONLY play the new album. No Beatles, no Wings, etc., etc. 4. Tone down the rhetoric. Raise expectations too high with excessive rhetoric ("the best thing he's done since ...") and all you do is set Paul up for a big fall if the album doesn't sell well or get good reviews. Frankly, I doubt it will sell in big numbers -- the new albums by Bowie, Dylan, and Springsteen haven't; Springsteen's Wrecking Ball has yet to sell 500,000 copies in the US and that album got a ton of press and Bruce has been touring with it for more for than a year. So again, lower the sales expectations about Paul's album. Let it be what it is: One of the final albums by a legend. And let's just listen, enjoy, and hope it's great. Let this be about the music. Not about the promotion.
This is a recipe for commercial suicide. Bowie's album was different: He'd released no new music and been basically invisible for 10 years so there was a lot of anticipation. Still, though it initially hit #2 in the U.S., it dropped like a rock and has not yet gone gold. By doing the sorts of things you tell him not to do -- like going on major TV shows -- Paul has consistently sold more albums than the artists you name. Why on earth should he refuse to do what works?
-
Bob Gannon:
From what I have heard possible single by end of August or early Septmeber and album in October. Of course alot of rumors going around so if this timetable is any good, we'll know soon
If a single was coming in August, the industry sites that I and others have posted would have the info by now.
-
Bruce M.:
Michelley:
Well I don't know whether Rod S. is "cool" or not. I just don't like him and never have. But to avoid derailing the thread .... I'll try to go back on topic by list my wishes for how Paul would promote his new album. 1. Do it classy. No TV appearances on stupid shows like The View or Ellen. Bowie didn't do any cheesy TV shows with his new album; neither did Dylan or Springsteen. They just released their albums, did a video or two (Bowie and Dylan); did a major interview (Dylan, Springsteen); and toured the album (Springsteen). Too much can go wrong on a live TV performance and then Twitter just cuts you to pieces. Paul should do a big interview with a major magazine, or on NPR. TV just makes Paul look small. He needs to promote this in a sophisticated way. 2. No last-minute cheesy gigs like the I Heart Radio Festival. That festival is for teenybopper music -- not the latest album of a legend. And it's owned by a right-wing company that makes my skin crawl. Look, top 40 radio is not going to play Paul's new album. At this stage of his career, it's not about getting a "hit" single. The singles charts are for young artists. It's NOT a failure for Paul to NOT be on the singles charts anymore. No other artist his age is either. Nothing wrong with that. 3. Just release the album and do some small intimate concerts in New York, London, LA, that ONLY play the new album. No Beatles, no Wings, etc., etc. 4. Tone down the rhetoric. Raise expectations too high with excessive rhetoric ("the best thing he's done since ...") and all you do is set Paul up for a big fall if the album doesn't sell well or get good reviews. Frankly, I doubt it will sell in big numbers -- the new albums by Bowie, Dylan, and Springsteen haven't; Springsteen's Wrecking Ball has yet to sell 500,000 copies in the US and that album got a ton of press and Bruce has been touring with it for more for than a year. So again, lower the sales expectations about Paul's album. Let it be what it is: One of the final albums by a legend. And let's just listen, enjoy, and hope it's great. Let this be about the music. Not about the promotion.
This is a recipe for commercial suicide. Bowie's album was different: He'd released no new music and been basically invisible for 10 years so there was a lot of anticipation. Still, though it initially hit #2 in the U.S., it dropped like a rock and has not yet gone gold. By doing the sorts of things you tell him not to do -- like going on major TV shows -- Paul has consistently sold more albums than the artists you name. Why on earth should he refuse to do what works?
Exactly! That's the George Harrison Gone Troppo approach of promotion!
-
Well I don't know whether Rod S. is "cool" or not. I just don't like him and never have. But to avoid derailing the thread .... I'll try to go back on topic by list my wishes for how Paul would promote his new album. 1. Do it classy. No TV appearances on stupid shows like The View or Ellen. Bowie didn't do any cheesy TV shows with his new album; neither did Dylan or Springsteen. They just released their albums, did a video or two (Bowie and Dylan); did a major interview (Dylan, Springsteen); and toured the album (Springsteen). Too much can go wrong on a live TV performance and then Twitter just cuts you to pieces. Paul should do a big interview with a major magazine, or on NPR. TV just makes Paul look small. He needs to promote this in a sophisticated way. 2. No last-minute cheesy gigs like the I Heart Radio Festival. That festival is for teenybopper music -- not the latest album of a legend. And it's owned by a right-wing company that makes my skin crawl. Look, top 40 radio is not going to play Paul's new album. At this stage of his career, it's not about getting a "hit" single. The singles charts are for young artists. It's NOT a failure for Paul to NOT be on the singles charts anymore. No other artist his age is either. Nothing wrong with that. 3. Just release the album and do some small intimate concerts in New York, London, LA, that ONLY play the new album. No Beatles, no Wings, etc., etc. 4. Tone down the rhetoric. Raise expectations too high with excessive rhetoric ("the best thing he's done since ...") and all you do is set Paul up for a big fall if the album doesn't sell well or get good reviews. Frankly, I doubt it will sell in big numbers -- the new albums by Bowie, Dylan, and Springsteen haven't; Springsteen's Wrecking Ball has yet to sell 500,000 copies in the US and that album got a ton of press and Bruce has been touring with it for more for than a year. So again, lower the sales expectations about Paul's album. Let it be what it is: One of the final albums by a legend. And let's just listen, enjoy, and hope it's great. Let this be about the music. Not about the promotion. (1) He has to do some TV promotion. As far as Dylan and Bowie...neither have ever really promoted on TV. As far as Springsteen, we must have forgotten the full week of Jimmy Fallon that he did featuring new songs from Wrecking Ball each night. He also appeared on the Grammy's as the single was fairly new. (2) I heart is looking like it may be done..which also has Elton John there so not just a teeny bopper crowd. As far as setlist....you may see the new single in the set. I doubt he'll play too many songs as the album would not have been released yet and he seems paranoid about leaking the album before release (3) Small gigs like the ones in 2007 might not be a bad idea but it doesn't really grease the promotion machine all too much. (4) As far as the rhetoric, I never pay attention to that nor does anyone I know. We judge the album by what's on the album
-
If a single was coming in August, the industry sites that I and others have posted would have the info by now This was a timetable that came out of the listening event for radio in New York. End of August, beginning of September. Other general info about the album was also given but people who attended were told not to post, blog or discuss anything. Seems to be quite a bit of cloak and dagger going on pre release. Also notice that the East Village Radio article has been dedacted.
-
Bob Gannon:
If a single was coming in August, the industry sites that I and others have posted would have the info by now This was a timetable that came out of the listening event for radio in New York. End of August, beginning of September. Other general info about the album was also given but people who attended were told not to post, blog or discuss anything. Seems to be quite a bit of cloak and dagger going on pre release. Also notice that the East Village Radio article has been dedacted.
If I had to take a wild guess, I would say he's waiting till after his final Canadian date tomorrow (August 14), which would mark the end of this promotional phase, where he's had a certain set list on tour that brings back WOA standouts. Then he would be free to announce the new single and album and start to re-jigger the set list to include a few of the new songs (and delete others) for his fall dates (though I Heart Radio could be an outlier as far as what he plays). Yes, all very cloak-and-dagger, but when he strikes, I think it will be a major effort. I bet there'll be a really big tour next year, too. Rumors and speculation; don't mind me!
-
Bruce M.:
Michelley:
Well I don't know whether Rod S. is "cool" or not. I just don't like him and never have. But to avoid derailing the thread .... I'll try to go back on topic by list my wishes for how Paul would promote his new album. 1. Do it classy. No TV appearances on stupid shows like The View or Ellen. Bowie didn't do any cheesy TV shows with his new album; neither did Dylan or Springsteen. They just released their albums, did a video or two (Bowie and Dylan); did a major interview (Dylan, Springsteen); and toured the album (Springsteen). Too much can go wrong on a live TV performance and then Twitter just cuts you to pieces. Paul should do a big interview with a major magazine, or on NPR. TV just makes Paul look small. He needs to promote this in a sophisticated way. 2. No last-minute cheesy gigs like the I Heart Radio Festival. That festival is for teenybopper music -- not the latest album of a legend. And it's owned by a right-wing company that makes my skin crawl. Look, top 40 radio is not going to play Paul's new album. At this stage of his career, it's not about getting a "hit" single. The singles charts are for young artists. It's NOT a failure for Paul to NOT be on the singles charts anymore. No other artist his age is either. Nothing wrong with that. 3. Just release the album and do some small intimate concerts in New York, London, LA, that ONLY play the new album. No Beatles, no Wings, etc., etc. 4. Tone down the rhetoric. Raise expectations too high with excessive rhetoric ("the best thing he's done since ...") and all you do is set Paul up for a big fall if the album doesn't sell well or get good reviews. Frankly, I doubt it will sell in big numbers -- the new albums by Bowie, Dylan, and Springsteen haven't; Springsteen's Wrecking Ball has yet to sell 500,000 copies in the US and that album got a ton of press and Bruce has been touring with it for more for than a year. So again, lower the sales expectations about Paul's album. Let it be what it is: One of the final albums by a legend. And let's just listen, enjoy, and hope it's great. Let this be about the music. Not about the promotion.
This is a recipe for commercial suicide. Bowie's album was different: He'd released no new music and been basically invisible for 10 years so there was a lot of anticipation. Still, though it initially hit #2 in the U.S., it dropped like a rock and has not yet gone gold. By doing the sorts of things you tell him not to do -- like going on major TV shows -- Paul has consistently sold more albums than the artists you name. Why on earth should he refuse to do what works?
Because it's not 1975 anymore, or 1985. He's not a commercial juggernaut and hasn't been for a couple decades and never will be again. That's not a criticism; that's where he is in his career along with all the other older artists. Appearing on Ellen and The View moved a few more copies of Electric Arguments but certainly not major numbers -- at all. At this point, I personally don't think it's important for Paul t0 sell in huge numbers. It's his solo reputation -- and the quality of the late-career work that needs to be emphasized -- not the chart numbers. In stories about older legends who are still producing good work, Paul's name doesn't get mentioned as often as Dylan or Bowie, etc. I'm more interested in him getting the same respect for his late-career work as Dylan, Bowie, etc. -- being one of the elder statesmen of rock who is still regarded as putting out good albums. I want him to be perceived as a talented artist, not as desperate for a hit single when he's past that point in his career. I'm not interested in seeing him pretend to be a commercial force and do things that diminish him in an era when there's no way he can compete with the younger artists who dominate the charts and it just looks silly to try. David Bowie got an absolute avalanche of glowing press when his first single came out and "The Next Day" still only made it to No. 6 in the UK on the singles chart and that's only because people thought he was on his death bed and because there was a massive amount of hype in the UK. Paul's new album is not going to get that kind of hype. I think the focus should be on the quality of the music -- on Paul as a creative force -- and not having his team say stupid embarrassing things like "we think this will put Paul back in the pop charts." : I hope the album does well on the album charts. The singles charts don't matter. And I would like to see a sophisticated campaign. If he does got on TV, I agree with Audi that it should be on Fallon or Conan.
-
I don't think the tour will be any bigger than what has been going on, those days are long over. He didn't do over 7 or 8 shows in any month this year. I'd expect more of the same
-
Personally I don't care if they promote the album via Indian smoke signal, morse code or carrier pigeon. All that I want is for Paul to deliver a cracking quality album. Couldn't give a rat's clacker if it's number 1 or number 100 on the charts.
-
moptops:
Personally I don't care if they promote the album via Indian smoke signal, morse code or carrier pigeon. All that I want is for Paul to deliver a cracking quality album. Couldn't give a rat's clacker if it's number 1 or number 100 on the charts.
-
Paul has always stated that what matters to him most are fans liking & supporting his new music, not what the critics think. He would be devastated if the new album did not sell in big numbers.
-
Michelley:
BOYCIE:
Michelley:
Rod's album did debut at No. 1 in the UK. Apparently there are a lot of older women in Britain with very bad taste in music.
My Aunt is a big Rod Stewart fan. It's funny my Aunt used to love the Beatles in her youth and Wings in their early days too, but since the '80's her taste in music has gone right down the pan. The worrying thing is my cousin her daughter is a RS fan too so the horrible tradition continues.
I really, really don't get it. I can't think of a more horrific concert than having to watch Rod Stewart in his 60s prance around the stage singing Do Ya Think I'm Sexy? Um, no. Not now. Not then. Ick.
Alas, poor Rod...Lets not forget he delivered some cracking music in the early 70s with Every Picture Tells a Story & his work wit The Faces. But, he quickly became the 1st adult contemporary star with Tonite's The Night & its been downhill since Still, I love the Faces cover of Maybe I'm Amazed. Rod at his peak!
-
Michelley:
Bruce M.:
Michelley:
Well I don't know whether Rod S. is "cool" or not. I just don't like him and never have. But to avoid derailing the thread .... I'll try to go back on topic by list my wishes for how Paul would promote his new album. 1. Do it classy. No TV appearances on stupid shows like The View or Ellen. Bowie didn't do any cheesy TV shows with his new album; neither did Dylan or Springsteen. They just released their albums, did a video or two (Bowie and Dylan); did a major interview (Dylan, Springsteen); and toured the album (Springsteen). Too much can go wrong on a live TV performance and then Twitter just cuts you to pieces. Paul should do a big interview with a major magazine, or on NPR. TV just makes Paul look small. He needs to promote this in a sophisticated way. 2. No last-minute cheesy gigs like the I Heart Radio Festival. That festival is for teenybopper music -- not the latest album of a legend. And it's owned by a right-wing company that makes my skin crawl. Look, top 40 radio is not going to play Paul's new album. At this stage of his career, it's not about getting a "hit" single. The singles charts are for young artists. It's NOT a failure for Paul to NOT be on the singles charts anymore. No other artist his age is either. Nothing wrong with that. 3. Just release the album and do some small intimate concerts in New York, London, LA, that ONLY play the new album. No Beatles, no Wings, etc., etc. 4. Tone down the rhetoric. Raise expectations too high with excessive rhetoric ("the best thing he's done since ...") and all you do is set Paul up for a big fall if the album doesn't sell well or get good reviews. Frankly, I doubt it will sell in big numbers -- the new albums by Bowie, Dylan, and Springsteen haven't; Springsteen's Wrecking Ball has yet to sell 500,000 copies in the US and that album got a ton of press and Bruce has been touring with it for more for than a year. So again, lower the sales expectations about Paul's album. Let it be what it is: One of the final albums by a legend. And let's just listen, enjoy, and hope it's great. Let this be about the music. Not about the promotion.
This is a recipe for commercial suicide. Bowie's album was different: He'd released no new music and been basically invisible for 10 years so there was a lot of anticipation. Still, though it initially hit #2 in the U.S., it dropped like a rock and has not yet gone gold. By doing the sorts of things you tell him not to do -- like going on major TV shows -- Paul has consistently sold more albums than the artists you name. Why on earth should he refuse to do what works?
Because it's not 1975 anymore, or 1985. He's not a commercial juggernaut and hasn't been for a couple decades and never will be again. That's not a criticism; that's where he is in his career along with all the other older artists. Appearing on Ellen and The View moved a few more copies of Electric Arguments but certainly not major numbers -- at all. At this point, I personally don't think it's important for Paul t0 sell in huge numbers. It's his solo reputation -- and the quality of the late-career work that needs to be emphasized -- not the chart numbers. In stories about older legends who are still producing good work, Paul's name doesn't get mentioned as often as Dylan or Bowie, etc. I'm more interested in him getting the same respect for his late-career work as Dylan, Bowie, etc. -- being one of the elder statesmen of rock who is still regarded as putting out good albums. I want him to be perceived as a talented artist, not as desperate for a hit single when he's past that point in his career. I'm not interested in seeing him pretend to be a commercial force and do things that diminish him in an era when there's no way he can compete with the younger artists who dominate the charts and it just looks silly to try. David Bowie got an absolute avalanche of glowing press when his first single came out and "The Next Day" still only made it to No. 6 in the UK on the singles chart and that's only because people thought he was on his death bed and because there was a massive amount of hype in the UK. Paul's new album is not going to get that kind of hype. I think the focus should be on the quality of the music -- on Paul as a creative force -- and not having his team say stupid embarrassing things like "we think this will put Paul back in the pop charts." : I hope the album does well on the album charts. The singles charts don't matter. And I would like to see a sophisticated campaign. If he does got on TV, I agree with Audi that it should be on Fallon or Conan.
Excellent post, agree totally. I would rather see crtitical acclaim for new record than worry about hitting the pop charts. I know people here don't like RS magazine but he should do interview with them about record, he did similiar thing with CHAOS. IMO - he should be adding new songs into setlist for upcoming concerts. If the record is ready to be released, I am sure the band knows how to play the songs. If he does go on TV, he should talk about record but not perform. McCartney's voice does not do well with TV performances generally.
-
The only times recently that I can recall songs being played live before they were released would be Your Loving Flame (played on Parkinson) well before Driving Rain was released and Follow Me played at Glastonbury in July, months before being released on Chaos.
-
Bob Gannon:
I don't think the tour will be any bigger than what has been going on, those days are long over. He didn't do over 7 or 8 shows in any month this year. I'd expect more of the same
I just think that he'll do a few selected arena dates this fall, and then next summer hit some of the major stadiums he skipped in '13. Not a constant barrage of dates, but definitely bigger than this year, I would think.
-
JoeySmith:
Paul has always stated that what matters to him most are fans liking & supporting his new music, not what the critics think. He would be devastated if the new album did not sell in big numbers.
Yes, I think that is the case. Why would he have hired the producers behind Adele, Bruno Mars, and Amy Winehouse if that weren't the case? But of course if it's a great album and doesn't sell, that would be fine with me!
-
JoeySmith:
Paul has always stated that what matters to him most are fans liking & supporting his new music, not what the critics think. He would be devastated if the new album did not sell in big numbers.
I think even at this late stage i think Paul would love a multi-million selling album. As a fan i'd love Paul's albums to be big sellers and compete with the Adele's of this world, just to show he's not washed up as an artist, though it's very unlikely to happen more's the pity.
-
BOYCIE:
JoeySmith:
Paul has always stated that what matters to him most are fans liking & supporting his new music, not what the critics think. He would be devastated if the new album did not sell in big numbers.
I think even at this late stage i think Paul would love a multi-million selling album. As a fan i'd love Paul's albums to be big sellers and compete with the Adele's of this world, just to show he's not washed up as an artist, though it's very unlikely to happen more's the pity.
He wont compete with the pop stars of today.. freaking Bieber, Adele, rappers, whoever.. but done correctly (like he and his team know how to do) he can strike the charts at #1. get Dave Grohl on the album, write a hit.. Paul should be able to hit #1. a RS interview and some sensationalism about the new songs, get it done Paul! #1 is where you belong. going gold for Paul is no problem, his fan base with take it gold no sweat. but I want to see him get a #1 for a week or what ever. he totally should.
-
JoeySmith:
Michelley:
BOYCIE:
Michelley:
Rod's album did debut at No. 1 in the UK. Apparently there are a lot of older women in Britain with very bad taste in music.
My Aunt is a big Rod Stewart fan. It's funny my Aunt used to love the Beatles in her youth and Wings in their early days too, but since the '80's her taste in music has gone right down the pan. The worrying thing is my cousin her daughter is a RS fan too so the horrible tradition continues.
I really, really don't get it. I can't think of a more horrific concert than having to watch Rod Stewart in his 60s prance around the stage singing Do Ya Think I'm Sexy? Um, no. Not now. Not then. Ick.
Alas, poor Rod...Lets not forget he delivered some cracking music in the early 70s with Every Picture Tells a Story & his work wit The Faces. But, he quickly became the 1st adult contemporary star with Tonite's The Night & its been downhill since Still, I love the Faces cover of Maybe I'm Amazed. Rod at his peak!
Unfortunately that is how Macca is viewed in the UK, did some good stuff early on ie Band On The Run but has done nowt scince ! Now we know this isn't the truth, but the man himself hasn't helped matters for the last 20 years with his backward looking set - lists. Also Rod is still viewed over here as a bit of a " lad " etc, which still gives him a bit of street cred, something that abandoned Macca here about 1976.
-
JoeySmith:
21st Century Paul:
Bruce M.:
21st Century Paul:
Warning: Long Post I think there's 2 "eras" in Paul's after-the-Beatles career. One is from 1970 to Off The Ground or so. That's when he did promotion, wrote hits, had a lot of airplay, you know... And then in 1994 or so he started not to like doing promotion or so, so he stopped... he left EMI, and all that, as he said in some interview: Manager or so:"Tomorrow we're going to Cologne" Paul:"Why?" Manager:"To do promotion" Paul:"How boring"
You've completely misinterpreted this interview, which came out at the time of release of MAF and which I heard live at the time. It was Paul's way of explaining why he left EMI. The point was not that he didn't want to do promotion. The point was that EMI's idea of promotion was always to do the same press gaggle at Cologne, they had no new or original ideas for how to get his music out there, and he was sick of it. He was quite explicit that he left EMI for Hear Music because he wanted to reach a new and larger audience. I don't know about other places, but in the U.S. "Hope of Deliverance" did NOT have a lot of airplay. "The World Tonight" (which you ignored) and "Freedom" had more, as did "Ever Present Past," which was a pretty obvious attempt to have a catchy, commercial single (the fact that it didn't get a video till after it had run its course on radio was marketing malpractice, but that's a separate issue).
Maybe I got wrong that interview... specially considering my English was worst some years ago Maybe you're right and he only was bored of EMI's promotions not of promoting itself. But if that's true it doesn't make much sense to move out from a major to Hear Music... if Paul would wanted more promotion he would have signed with one of the majors, Universal, Warner, Sony... Here Hope Of Deliverance had lots of airplay, and in Germany it sold like 6 milion records or so, it kind of became one the best selling singles of all-time in Germany, Paul explains it in The McCartney Years.
Hope of Deliverance was a HUGE hit in Europe, reaching the Top 5 in most countries including #1 in Spain. It was even a Top 20 hit in the UK. Why big in Europe & not in US?? Not sure. Maybe the song topic & timing, coming right after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Well Bruce M. said the song had not much airplay in the US. No airplay no sales, you know. It was a monster hit, 6 milion sold only in Germany are a looot of records... and he doesn't sing it in when he sings in Germany. I think only Paul does that. Having a song not just as a hit or #1 in some place but as one of the best sold singles of all-time somewhere and yet not singing the songs when he plays there. Mull Of Kintyre, Hope Of Deliverance...