"New" Reviews
-
http://music.yahoo.com/news/review-mccartney-stays-fresh-familiar-160231759.html
The result is both fresh and comfortably familiar. Still, he's no Bob Dylan. Much of the credit for the success of "New" goes to McCartney's four producers most of all, fun to listen to. -
jimmix:
http://music.yahoo.com/news/review-mccartney-stays-fresh-familiar-160231759.html
The result is both fresh and comfortably familiar. Still, he's no Bob Dylan. Much of the credit for the success of "New" goes to McCartney's four producers most of all, fun to listen to.Thank God he is no Bob Dylan - lol. Really, did not know the producers wrote the songs, played the instruments and sung the vocals which most people would give credit to the person who did that on a record - lol
-
Johnny A:
This from the Washington Post. Seems pretty positive. http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/music/review-paul-mccartneys-new-album-new-producers-inject-liveliness-into-latest-record/2013/10/14/1b83ee76-34d3-11e3-80c6-7e6dd8d22d8f_story.html
Oh, pretty positive doesn't begin to describe the review.!!! It was so GREAT. The reviewer could not have come up with any more superlatives than he did!! ...This review is a keeper!!!
-
3 out of 5 stars from NY Daily News: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music-arts/new-music-review-article-1.1484982
-
That reviewer comes across sour and crabby, about Paul's new music. He's not giving the music and Paul its due, one feels. Shame he didn't do for Paul's what he does for the Avett Brothers (their review from him is below Paul's)-- made me want to get the Avetts' music. They're from North Carolina, btw. -
SusyLuvsPaul:
That reviewer comes across sour and crabby, about Paul's new music. He's not giving the music and Paul its due, one feels. Shame he didn't do for Paul's what he does for the Avett Brothers (their review from him is below Paul's)-- made me want to get the Avetts' music. They're from North Carolina, btw.You could tell the writer did not know anything he was talking about when he called the music of MAF upbeat or sweet. Really, "The End of the End" was not upbeat unless you consider a song about the day you die fun. I doubt anybody would call "House of Wax" upbeat either although it does have great guitar riff. As for the review of "New", to each their own. Most reviews we have posted on this thread have been quite complimentary especially the LA Times and RS. BTW - I have seen the Avett Brothers live and they are very good.
-
I've said it before: The NY Daily News is NOT Paul-friendly, and hasn't been for a while, now. I don't know why; back in the day, it used to be the first place I would go to for Beatles-related news/articles/photos. It really gets to me: it's a NYC paper, Paul is often right there, and you'd think they'd have plenty of coverage of him, but, no. I don't know who exactly owns it now, but it is turning into a real tabloid type paper. (I sometimes think Rihanna owns it, as they manage to have something about her in there every day!! Not my idea of news...) Even this reviewer used to be more enthusiastic about Paul and/or Beatles. Guess maybe he's received his orders from the new bosses.
-
Thisbe211:
I've said it before: The NY Daily News is NOT Paul-friendly, and hasn't been for a while, now. I don't know why; back in the day, it used to be the first place I would go to for Beatles-related news/articles/photos. It really gets to me: it's a NYC paper, Paul is often right there, and you'd think they'd have plenty of coverage of him, but, no. I don't know who exactly owns it now, but it is turning into a real tabloid type paper. (I sometimes think Rihanna owns it, as they manage to have something about her in there every day!! Not my idea of news...) Even this reviewer used to be more enthusiastic about Paul and/or Beatles. Guess maybe he's received his orders from the new bosses.
The NY Post gave it one of the worst reviews I have seen in US, see below. Note ** It is after Pearl Jam album review. Kind of funny how the NY Times is the only NY paper that liked "New". http://nypost.com/2013/10/14/five-year-hiatus-pays-off-for-pearl-jam/
-
yankeefan7:
SusyLuvsPaul:
That reviewer comes across sour and crabby, about Paul's new music. He's not giving the music and Paul its due, one feels. Shame he didn't do for Paul's what he does for the Avett Brothers (their review from him is below Paul's)-- made me want to get the Avetts' music. They're from North Carolina, btw.You could tell the writer did not know anything he was talking about when he called the music of MAF upbeat or sweet. Really, "The End of the End" was not upbeat unless you consider a song about the day you die fun. I doubt anybody would call "House of Wax" upbeat either although it does have great guitar riff. As for the review of "New", to each their own. Most reviews we have posted on this thread have been quite complimentary especially the LA Times and RS. BTW - I have seen the Avett Brothers live and they are very good.
Actually only Dance Tonight, and certain parts of See your Sunshine and Vintage Clothes even vaguely fits this discription...LOL
-
yankeefan7:
Thisbe211:
I've said it before: The NY Daily News is NOT Paul-friendly, and hasn't been for a while, now. I don't know why; back in the day, it used to be the first place I would go to for Beatles-related news/articles/photos. It really gets to me: it's a NYC paper, Paul is often right there, and you'd think they'd have plenty of coverage of him, but, no. I don't know who exactly owns it now, but it is turning into a real tabloid type paper. (I sometimes think Rihanna owns it, as they manage to have something about her in there every day!! Not my idea of news...) Even this reviewer used to be more enthusiastic about Paul and/or Beatles. Guess maybe he's received his orders from the new bosses.
The NY Post gave it one of the worst reviews I have seen in US, see below. Note ** It is after Pearl Jam album review. Kind of funny how the NY Times is the only NY paper that liked "New". http://nypost.com/2013/10/14/five-year-hiatus-pays-off-for-pearl-jam/
Basically, even with all that said (in the NY Times article), I would give 'solid but not especially memorable' 3 stars...that sounds like the right 'grade' for something you think is average (and btw, that is not the grade I'd personally give this CD...I'm just referring if I were rating a hypothetical record and called it 'solid, but not especially memorable', I'd intend that to mean 'average' and would give 3 stars)
-
thrillington:
SusyLuvsPaul:
"The New Yorker" review is mostly a big put down and the word "generic" tipped that off. "Early Days" is "one of the rare (McCartney) songs to sound written by a real human and show real honest emotion"? (paraphrased) And earlier in the review the writer seems to be wanting a Plastic Ono Band album-type "ragged" totally open and revealing quality--the writer might be a closet Lennon booster, preferring John's work to Paul's. I find the implication McCartney isn't a real artist and only a "rock star" offensive and untrue. The reviewer even finds fault with Paul's parting words to the arts high school teens, after Paul has given his all to them as a surprise free gift of his time and talents and inspiration.
Paul does write songs that are generic in that they might express a specific situation but they have larger meaning. For example, "Here Today" is about John and him but it is also generic in that it could apply to various relationships that any of us have had. I thought that this was where the reviewer was going but unfortunately that was not the case. Paul's songs are also often described as meaning nothing. I disagree, a song like "Jet" might not make a lot of sense but it is a song about escape and freedom like the entire album that it comes from. Then of course, the criticism that Paul does bring emotion. Okay, listen to Flaming Pie and his anguish or his anger on Nothing Too Much Just Out of Sight on EA or....
Guess the critic never heard "Angry" from Press To Play" - lol. You were 100% correct about "Here Today". Yes, it was specifically written about Paul and John but it could be very generic also. How many of us have often wished after a loved one passed that we could had another chance to tell them we loved them.
-
yankeefan7:
thrillington:
SusyLuvsPaul:
"The New Yorker" review is mostly a big put down and the word "generic" tipped that off. "Early Days" is "one of the rare (McCartney) songs to sound written by a real human and show real honest emotion"? (paraphrased) And earlier in the review the writer seems to be wanting a Plastic Ono Band album-type "ragged" totally open and revealing quality--the writer might be a closet Lennon booster, preferring John's work to Paul's. I find the implication McCartney isn't a real artist and only a "rock star" offensive and untrue. The reviewer even finds fault with Paul's parting words to the arts high school teens, after Paul has given his all to them as a surprise free gift of his time and talents and inspiration.
Paul does write songs that are generic in that they might express a specific situation but they have larger meaning. For example, "Here Today" is about John and him but it is also generic in that it could apply to various relationships that any of us have had. I thought that this was where the reviewer was going but unfortunately that was not the case. Paul's songs are also often described as meaning nothing. I disagree, a song like "Jet" might not make a lot of sense but it is a song about escape and freedom like the entire album that it comes from. Then of course, the criticism that Paul does bring emotion. Okay, listen to Flaming Pie and his anguish or his anger on Nothing Too Much Just Out of Sight on EA or....
Guess the critic never heard "Angry" from Press To Play" - lol. You were 100% correct about "Here Today". Yes, it was specifically written about Paul and John but it could be very generic also. How many of us have often wished after a loved one passed that we could had another chance to tell them we loved them.
I would also put "That was Me" in the generic category and a song that I think is brilliant. The song is obviously about Paul looking through a scrapbook and thinking "that was me" and the fact that he is an icon must make that experience very special. But when I listen to the song I can think of me looking through a scrapbook of my life. I might not had played the Cavern but the sentiment that Paul relates in that song is very strong.
-
Thisbe211:
I've said it before: The NY Daily News is NOT Paul-friendly, and hasn't been for a while, now. I don't know why; back in the day, it used to be the first place I would go to for Beatles-related news/articles/photos. It really gets to me: it's a NYC paper, Paul is often right there, and you'd think they'd have plenty of coverage of him, but, no. I don't know who exactly owns it now, but it is turning into a real tabloid type paper. (I sometimes think Rihanna owns it, as they manage to have something about her in there every day!! Not my idea of news...) Even this reviewer used to be more enthusiastic about Paul and/or Beatles. Guess maybe he's received his orders from the new bosses.
These reviewers get a Promo copy from the record company, listen to it once, and write their first impression. I rarely have a complete impression after one listen, it usually takes me 3 or 4 listens for a McCartney album to settle in and fully enjoy it. Then invariably with his albums, the melodies will start sticking in my brain. That's when I know it's a winner. This time though with NEW, it hit me right off. This is a GREAT album!
-
beatlesfanrandy:
Thisbe211:
I've said it before: The NY Daily News is NOT Paul-friendly, and hasn't been for a while, now. I don't know why; back in the day, it used to be the first place I would go to for Beatles-related news/articles/photos. It really gets to me: it's a NYC paper, Paul is often right there, and you'd think they'd have plenty of coverage of him, but, no. I don't know who exactly owns it now, but it is turning into a real tabloid type paper. (I sometimes think Rihanna owns it, as they manage to have something about her in there every day!! Not my idea of news...) Even this reviewer used to be more enthusiastic about Paul and/or Beatles. Guess maybe he's received his orders from the new bosses.
These reviewers get a Promo copy from the record company, listen to it once, and write their first impression. I rarely have a complete impression after one listen, it usually takes me 3 or 4 listens for a McCartney album to settle in and fully enjoy it. Then invariably with his albums, the melodies will start sticking in my brain. That's when I know it's a winner. This time though with NEW, it hit me right off. This is a GREAT album!
The Daily News is more interested in writing about how 'old" Paul looks these days They aren't interested in his artistic achievements. That doesn't sell papers. I don't even want to imagine/guess which photo of Paul they used......unflattering as it may be. That's all we can expect from that newspaper. Period. These days. Sad. Aside from that observation.....I don't even want to 'read ' what they may have said about his album...as if they have an actual person who is qualified to comment on such things.
-
Can someone get Jim Fusilli's Wall Street Journal Review on this Site...fabulous and maybe best review yet. He loves the cd and says some remarkable things re: Paul's Solo career (let alone his time with the Beatles) Man does this make up for those 2 idiots from the NY Dailt News and Post.
-
Here's a pretty good one: http://consequenceofsound.net/2013/10/album-review-paul-mccartney-new/ The writer knows Paul's work AND its context in today's music.
-
B J Conlee:
Can someone get Jim Fusilli's Wall Street Journal Review on this Site...fabulous and maybe best review yet. He loves the cd and says some remarkable things re: Paul's Solo career (let alone his time with the Beatles) Man does this make up for those 2 idiots from the NY Dailt News and Post.
My favorite article thus far! http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303376904579137241993947378
-
Aplusn:
B J Conlee:
Can someone get Jim Fusilli's Wall Street Journal Review on this Site...fabulous and maybe best review yet. He loves the cd and says some remarkable things re: Paul's Solo career (let alone his time with the Beatles) Man does this make up for those 2 idiots from the NY Dailt News and Post.
My favorite article thus far! http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303376904579137241993947378
Wonderful.
-
I'd argue that this qualifies both as one of the biggest "victories" in term of landing a good review, and one of the very best, on target ones in it's own right: http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/18634-paul-mccartney-new/
-
B J Conlee:
Can someone get Jim Fusilli's Wall Street Journal Review on this Site...fabulous and maybe best review yet. He loves the cd and says some remarkable things re: Paul's Solo career (let alone his time with the Beatles) Man does this make up for those 2 idiots from the NY Dailt News and Post.
Wow, awesome review. If I had to have NY papers be split on the reviews, rather see good ones come from Times and Journal which "New did thankfully. Bascially, "New" has done well with all the important ones IMO (NY Times, LA Times, WSJ, RS, USA Today etc). Actually, I think the most vocal critics have been people on this board - lol.
