Could the new Kanye/McCartney single All Day be his best?
-
Hendrix Ibsen:
Well, it had been fifty million years of silence in the thousands of homes, suddenly threatened rock & roll to tear down the house. Electricity... I don't think you can compare the 50s and 60s to now, it was a bit like revolutionary time. Not that I was there, but, as I see it...
Have you considered that what feels like a revolutionary time to one generation may not seem that way to another? Hip-hop fans may disagree with your assessment. Musically, hip-hop has certainly been a revolution, largely displacing rock from the charts. I may not approve, but it's true.
-
Young people always think their music and styles are better than older generations. That is normal. But what happened in the 50s and 60s was unlike anything going on today. Kanye West is good at what he does. But he is no Elvis Presley. That is just ludicris!
-
RMartinez:
crisstti:
People don't seem too fond of his Michael Jackson collaborations either. But I like them. And I like these songs too. They're good, due to Paul's involvement no doubt
Even with Paul's involvement these songs do nothing for me. I am clearly not his audience in this collaboration.
Well, they're not great either.
-
crisstti:
RMartinez:
crisstti:
People don't seem too fond of his Michael Jackson collaborations either. But I like them. And I like these songs too. They're good, due to Paul's involvement no doubt
Even with Paul's involvement these songs do nothing for me. I am clearly not his audience in this collaboration.
Well, they're not great either.
Good point.
-
RMartinez:
Young people always think their music and styles are better than older generations. That is normal. But what happened in the 50s and 60s was unlike anything going on today. Kanye West is good at what he does. But he is no Elvis Presley. That is just ludicris!
By definition what happened 50-60 years ago isn't like what's happening today. That's about as insightful as saying that gravity makes stuff fall. What's the significance of any piece of popular culture typically isn't clear for decades -- just as the significance of Elvis and the Beatles was not clear to 98% of society back then. An awful lot of seemingly intelligent people dismissed them as fads who'd be forgotten in two years. The judgements of adults regarding youth culture are almost always laughably wrong in retrospect, which is why I prefer to reserve judgement.
-
The fact that this collaboration seems to upset, even almost offend, so many Paul fans is all the more reason for him to have done it in my mind. Good for him for having an open mind, and for challenging himself to do something different.
-
audi:
It took collaborating with Paul McCartney to come up with this piece of sh-t?
As my good friend Harry Callahan might say.... "yuh". Spot on.
-
Bruce M.:
RMartinez:
Young people always think their music and styles are better than older generations. That is normal. But what happened in the 50s and 60s was unlike anything going on today. Kanye West is good at what he does. But he is no Elvis Presley. That is just ludicris!
By definition what happened 50-60 years ago isn't like what's happening today. That's about as insightful as saying that gravity makes stuff fall. What's the significance of any piece of popular culture typically isn't clear for decades -- just as the significance of Elvis and the Beatles was not clear to 98% of society back then. An awful lot of seemingly intelligent people dismissed them as fads who'd be forgotten in two years. The judgements of adults regarding youth culture are almost always laughably wrong in retrospect, which is why I prefer to reserve judgement.
And certain parts of society are much slower to accept musical changes than others. Look at the Super Bowl half-time shows, which were mostly just marching bands and drill teams for a long time, with an occasional aging vocalist thrown in. As recently as 1987, the main performers were Mickey Rooney and George Burns! So surely a part of the Janet Jackson controversy in 2004 was the general atmosphere of the show, which also featured rap performances by Nelly, P. Diddy, and Kid Rock. Certain audiences were probably already seething with rage and disgust even before the 'wardrobe malfunction.' Of course, who did they bring in to "clean up" the image of the show the next year, but our Paul! And now, here he is, collaborating with the very same types of artists they tried to "protect" us from!
-
favoritething:
Bruce M.:
RMartinez:
Young people always think their music and styles are better than older generations. That is normal. But what happened in the 50s and 60s was unlike anything going on today. Kanye West is good at what he does. But he is no Elvis Presley. That is just ludicris!
By definition what happened 50-60 years ago isn't like what's happening today. That's about as insightful as saying that gravity makes stuff fall. What's the significance of any piece of popular culture typically isn't clear for decades -- just as the significance of Elvis and the Beatles was not clear to 98% of society back then. An awful lot of seemingly intelligent people dismissed them as fads who'd be forgotten in two years. The judgements of adults regarding youth culture are almost always laughably wrong in retrospect, which is why I prefer to reserve judgement.
And certain parts of society are much slower to accept musical changes than others. Look at the Super Bowl half-time shows, which were mostly just marching bands and drill teams for a long time, with an occasional aging vocalist thrown in. As recently as 1987, the main performers were Mickey Rooney and George Burns! So surely a part of the Janet Jackson controversy in 2004 was the general atmosphere of the show, which also featured rap performances by Nelly, P. Diddy, and Kid Rock. Certain audiences were probably already seething with rage and disgust even before the 'wardrobe malfunction.' Of course, who did they bring in to "clean up" the image of the show the next year, but our Paul! And now, here he is, collaborating with the very same types of artists they tried to "protect" us from!
Oddly enough, when I am watching my football side play in the ultimate game I do not give a shite about the half time entertainment.... a sentiment shared by many on these shores. We are purists, care more about the game itself, than the frills. I am too nervous, outside having a beer, just waiting for the next quarter to start..... although I am curious.... Mickey Rooney and George Burns!?
-
toris:
favoritething:
Bruce M.:
RMartinez:
Young people always think their music and styles are better than older generations. That is normal. But what happened in the 50s and 60s was unlike anything going on today. Kanye West is good at what he does. But he is no Elvis Presley. That is just ludicris!
By definition what happened 50-60 years ago isn't like what's happening today. That's about as insightful as saying that gravity makes stuff fall. What's the significance of any piece of popular culture typically isn't clear for decades -- just as the significance of Elvis and the Beatles was not clear to 98% of society back then. An awful lot of seemingly intelligent people dismissed them as fads who'd be forgotten in two years. The judgements of adults regarding youth culture are almost always laughably wrong in retrospect, which is why I prefer to reserve judgement.
And certain parts of society are much slower to accept musical changes than others. Look at the Super Bowl half-time shows, which were mostly just marching bands and drill teams for a long time, with an occasional aging vocalist thrown in. As recently as 1987, the main performers were Mickey Rooney and George Burns! So surely a part of the Janet Jackson controversy in 2004 was the general atmosphere of the show, which also featured rap performances by Nelly, P. Diddy, and Kid Rock. Certain audiences were probably already seething with rage and disgust even before the 'wardrobe malfunction.' Of course, who did they bring in to "clean up" the image of the show the next year, but our Paul! And now, here he is, collaborating with the very same types of artists they tried to "protect" us from!
Oddly enough, when I am watching my football side play in the ultimate game I do not give a shite about the half time entertainment.... a sentiment shared by many on these shores. We are purists, care more about the game itself, than the frills. I am too nervous, outside having a beer, just waiting for the next quarter to start..... although I am curious.... Mickey Rooney and George Burns!?
Ha, found it!
George Burns doesn't sing, he just introduces it, and I couldn't find Mickey Rooney, though he's supposedly there somewhere. More like a Disney tribute to Hollywood. Wow, I'll bet a lot of people wish we could go back to this kind of show, come to think of it! I'm the opposite of you: I have no interest in the game whatsoever, but I may watch the half-time show if someone good is on. Paul's 2005 appearance was probably the only one I've really watched closely. -
cheers! thanks for that, fave thing.... I did find Mickey Rooney somewhere in that.... now, they're getting into Footloose..... officially time for me to go to sleep!
-
Bruce M.:
RMartinez:
Young people always think their music and styles are better than older generations. That is normal. But what happened in the 50s and 60s was unlike anything going on today. Kanye West is good at what he does. But he is no Elvis Presley. That is just ludicris!
By definition what happened 50-60 years ago isn't like what's happening today. That's about as insightful as saying that gravity makes stuff fall. What's the significance of any piece of popular culture typically isn't clear for decades -- just as the significance of Elvis and the Beatles was not clear to 98% of society back then. An awful lot of seemingly intelligent people dismissed them as fads who'd be forgotten in two years. The judgements of adults regarding youth culture are almost always laughably wrong in retrospect, which is why I prefer to reserve judgement.
You can reserve judgment all you like. But history is on my side, not yours. Kanye West isn't some huge phenomenon some of us might be mistaking to be a flash in the pan. He has been around for years and it is pretty clear what his role is in music in this era. And it is nothing like what Elvis or the Beatles were like in their day. Period. Neither is U2 for that matter, and they are debatably much bigger and more famous than Kanye. To keep arguing Kanye West is this generation's Elvis or Beatles the way you keep doing is pretty simplistic. If that's the case, then so is Justin Bieber based on what I perceive to be a pretty feeble argument on your part.
-
brettb3:
The fact that this collaboration seems to upset, even almost offend, so many Paul fans is all the more reason for him to have done it in my mind. Good for him for having an open mind, and for challenging himself to do something different.
People here, from what I have read, are not offended or upset, they just don't think it is that great or reflective of Paul's work. As far as using the "N" word in a so-called song, we are supposed to be offended by that. I see people being offended at that as a good thing and would hope people of all backgrounds will be against that.
-
favoritething:
Bruce M.:
RMartinez:
Young people always think their music and styles are better than older generations. That is normal. But what happened in the 50s and 60s was unlike anything going on today. Kanye West is good at what he does. But he is no Elvis Presley. That is just ludicris!
By definition what happened 50-60 years ago isn't like what's happening today. That's about as insightful as saying that gravity makes stuff fall. What's the significance of any piece of popular culture typically isn't clear for decades -- just as the significance of Elvis and the Beatles was not clear to 98% of society back then. An awful lot of seemingly intelligent people dismissed them as fads who'd be forgotten in two years. The judgements of adults regarding youth culture are almost always laughably wrong in retrospect, which is why I prefer to reserve judgement.
And certain parts of society are much slower to accept musical changes than others. Look at the Super Bowl half-time shows, which were mostly just marching bands and drill teams for a long time, with an occasional aging vocalist thrown in. As recently as 1987, the main performers were Mickey Rooney and George Burns! So surely a part of the Janet Jackson controversy in 2004 was the general atmosphere of the show, which also featured rap performances by Nelly, P. Diddy, and Kid Rock. Certain audiences were probably already seething with rage and disgust even before the 'wardrobe malfunction.' Of course, who did they bring in to "clean up" the image of the show the next year, but our Paul! And now, here he is, collaborating with the very same types of artists they tried to "protect" us from!
Oh brother.
-
toris:
audi:
It took collaborating with Paul McCartney to come up with this piece of sh-t?
As my good friend Harry Callahan might say.... "yuh". Spot on.
One agree for each of you! -
Isn't the Paul's whistling melody taken from an unreleased McC/Wings track? The name escapes me for now. Seems very familiar
'When the wind is blowing' Beautiful track.
Stop Press: It's -
ewanme:
Isn't the Paul's whistling melody taken from an unreleased McC/Wings track? The name escapes me for now. Seems very familiar
'When the wind is blowing' Beautiful track. Stop Press: It's And here he is with the song on Parkinson:
-
RMartinez:
Young people always think their music and styles are better than older generations. That is normal. But what happened in the 50s and 60s was unlike anything going on today. Kanye West is good at what he does. But he is no Elvis Presley. That is just ludicris!
Funny how you spell ludicrous like the rapper "Ludicris!"
(actually he spells it Ludacris) -
Nancy R:
RMartinez:
Young people always think their music and styles are better than older generations. That is normal. But what happened in the 50s and 60s was unlike anything going on today. Kanye West is good at what he does. But he is no Elvis Presley. That is just ludicris!
Funny how you spell ludicrous like the rapper "Ludicris!"
(actually he spells it Ludacris) -
Shawn:
I honestly thought Paul was better than all this. These days, for the first time, I am questioning my assessment of the situation. These "collaborations", the same old set list, the weak vocal performances... Maybe I'm overreacting, but it's all making me feel a little sad. I'm truly sorry to be so negative, but I just don't see the good in this. Not this time.
I agree, it looks like he is desperate to be on the charts since he can't do it with his solo work IMO. The man is in his 70's so vocal performances are not going to get better. If he wants to continue and not become a laughing stock he will need to choose his songs better or change the arrangement.
