McCartney Concert Voice
-
Thisbe211:
cfergoid:
Long Tall Sally sounded horrendous the other night! I would have wet myself with excitement if I had been there but it doesn't change the fact he simply can't sing it in the original key. On a positive note, the woooo oooh oooh sounded fantastic!
I unhappily have to agree. I LOVE that he did it, as it's always been one of my fave Paul bits, but it was kinda sad to hear the Seattle performance.
I'm thinking there's a reason he hasn't tackled that live for yonks...{[size=7]not very bloody good} God bless him though. He did it, not the best - but he did it! Hell it must have been a demanding song for him back in the 1960's!
-
Has anyone noticed his actual talking voice has changed dramatically in the last 6-7 years. I'm currently watching "The Love We Make" dvd and his talking voice is much more youthful and less "jawly" in 2001. I think it took a dive actually after the US Tour. I think the divorce aged him a bit. So perhaps that has affect his singing voice on certain songs; it's a natural aging process - but maybe that could have been said from his 89/90 & '93 tours compared to the 2002 tour. KISSES ON THE BOTTOM did amplify those vocal limitations on ballad type songs. I still think he sounds great on the harder rock vocal stuff; studio and live type situations.
-
cfergoid:
Long Tall Sally sounded horrendous the other night! I would have wet myself with excitement if I had been there but it doesn't change the fact he simply can't sing it in the original key. On a positive note, the woooo oooh oooh sounded fantastic!
It was fabulous - the excitement of the song and the energy of Paul and his band and special guests was electric. It sounded great in the stadium because it is such a rocking song and everyone was having SO much fun playing it. Paul was playing it for the moment and not giving a damn, screaming his head off and doing the Woo Oooh Ooohs like he was having the time of his life because it was a f---ing amazing rock show. Did he regret doing it the next day? Maybe But holy crap you gotta give him credit for pulling that one out. Also, I have to agree that YouTube sound quality of audience shot videos does not do anyone any favors. A few videos I've seen of the Seattle show do not sound nearly as good as he sounded live.
-
I give Paul credit for even performing at this point. But LONG TALL SALLY was ROUGH and not a great delivery. Did it ROCK??? YES!! But mainly if you were there. Watching it at home, I honestly can't sit through it for how painful it is on his voice.
-
MetalGod:
Has anyone noticed his actual talking voice has changed dramatically in the last 6-7 years. I'm currently watching "The Love We Make" dvd and his talking voice is much more youthful and less "jawly" in 2001. I think it took a dive actually after the US Tour. I think the divorce aged him a bit. So perhaps that has affect his singing voice on certain songs; it's a natural aging process - but maybe that could have been said from his 89/90 & '93 tours compared to the 2002 tour. KISSES ON THE BOTTOM did amplify those vocal limitations on ballad type songs. I still think he sounds great on the harder rock vocal stuff; studio and live type situations.
We talked about his speaking voice changing at least a year ago here on the forum. It is really quite a difference from just 10 or so years ago. Makes me sad cause I loved the way he talked when he was younger.
-
After all this back and forth, Paul McCartney is a living legend, and the condition of his voice is secondary to the experience of seeing the man perform his songs live. McCartney will continue to do what he does for many more years, and if his voice gets ragged, so be it. I, for one, am glad I got to see him eight times live in concert. That's a lot for most people!
-
Nancy R:
MetalGod:
Has anyone noticed his actual talking voice has changed dramatically in the last 6-7 years. I'm currently watching "The Love We Make" dvd and his talking voice is much more youthful and less "jawly" in 2001. I think it took a dive actually after the US Tour. I think the divorce aged him a bit. So perhaps that has affect his singing voice on certain songs; it's a natural aging process - but maybe that could have been said from his 89/90 & '93 tours compared to the 2002 tour. KISSES ON THE BOTTOM did amplify those vocal limitations on ballad type songs. I still think he sounds great on the harder rock vocal stuff; studio and live type situations.
We talked about his speaking voice changing at least a year ago here on the forum. It is really quite a difference from just 10 or so years ago. Makes me sad cause I loved the way he talked when he was younger.
Actually the "speaking voice" has changed way more than the "singing voice"... There's lot of info, books, and professionals about "talking voice" with kind of very different theories about it, just the same that happens with singing. Some will tell you to do "X", and some will tell you you must never do "X"... It's kind of complicated, I think the important about what "school/theory" one must follow is to know what you're looking for... A voice that sounds great? An effortless voice without pain? A loud voice? etc....
-
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
MetalGod:
Has anyone noticed his actual talking voice has changed dramatically in the last 6-7 years. I'm currently watching "The Love We Make" dvd and his talking voice is much more youthful and less "jawly" in 2001. I think it took a dive actually after the US Tour. I think the divorce aged him a bit. So perhaps that has affect his singing voice on certain songs; it's a natural aging process - but maybe that could have been said from his 89/90 & '93 tours compared to the 2002 tour. KISSES ON THE BOTTOM did amplify those vocal limitations on ballad type songs. I still think he sounds great on the harder rock vocal stuff; studio and live type situations.
We talked about his speaking voice changing at least a year ago here on the forum. It is really quite a difference from just 10 or so years ago. Makes me sad cause I loved the way he talked when he was younger.
Actually the "speaking voice" has changed way more than the "singing voice"... There's lot of info, books, and professionals about "talking voice" with kind of very different theories about it, just the same that happens with singing. Some will tell you to do "X", and some will tell you you must never do "X"... It's kind of complicated, I think the important about what "school/theory" one must follow is to know what you're looking for... A voice that sounds great? An effortless voice without pain? A loud voice? etc....
Generally, Paul sounds good given his age and the criteria put forth. But on LONG TALL SALLY the other night, he was certainly straining his voice beyond its capacity.
-
Here is Paul with the Beatles in 1963 doing Long Tall Sally:
Now, here he is a few days ago doing the same song in Seattle: The wear and tear and strain on his voice today is hard to ignore. I'd rather he didn't do that to himself. -
From an interview with Paul in Rolling Stone, the day after the Seattle show:
Do you think you'll ever retire from performing live? I don't know, man. I can't imagine ever not doing it. It's what I do, and it's what I've always done, and I love it so much. Of course, there's got to be some kind of physical limitation. But I haven't found it. I mean, I did that show last night, and I'm thinking, "Jesus, God, man. You know, you're not 25." But then, my other side of my head's going, "Yes, you are! Get on with it!" So I haven't found my physical limitation yet. If I do, then I'll have a think about the question. 'Til then, I'm ignoring it. Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/q-a-paul-mccartney-looks-back-on-his-latest-magical-mystery-tour-20130725#ixzz2a4xrf0dx Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
-
I don't think McCartney is anywhere near needing to retire from the concert stage. He can still deliver! Even if it's a bit rough around the edges, so what? B.B. King still performs. So does Tony Bennett. A few songs are vocally shaky, but if fans still fill venues and McCartney is feeling great doing it, more power to him.
-
His speaking really has changed a lot.
-
oobu24:
His speaking really has changed a lot.
Good thing folks aren't paying $300 a ticket to hear him speak!!
-
RMartinez:
oobu24:
His speaking really has changed a lot.
Good thing folks aren't paying $300 a ticket to hear him speak!!
-
(LOL) "Long Tall Sally" that was one of my nicknames for N. Shevell, when she first popped up on the scene I LOVE to hear Macca's speaking voice almost as much as his singing. I'd love for him to record an audio book or two
-
Of course people aren't paying to hear is speaking voice; it is however related to how he sings and annunciates certain words in his songs. Just an observation of why people are critiquing the quality of his singing. Everyone ages differently and certainly Paul, for what he had done is the last 12 years, has aged great. Ringo on the other hand is aging better than Paul; but in terms of performances it's comparing apples to oranges. I think I'd enjoy the Long Tall Sally song since he is just tearing it up screaming; i'd talk that over some of his ballads that do show the strain on his voice. But nonetheless its a living legend. I'm not criticising him at all; quite the opposite. I'm just pointing out observations.
-
MetalGod:
Of course people aren't paying to hear is speaking voice; it is however related to how he sings and annunciates certain words in his songs. Just an observation of why people are critiquing the quality of his singing. Everyone ages differently and certainly Paul, for what he had done is the last 12 years, has aged great. Ringo on the other hand is aging better than Paul; but in terms of performances it's comparing apples to oranges. I think I'd enjoy the Long Tall Sally song since he is just tearing it up screaming; i'd talk that over some of his ballads that do show the strain on his voice. But nonetheless its a living legend. I'm not criticising him at all; quite the opposite. I'm just pointing out observations.
It was a joke, that is why I put the wink and lauging heads after. Yes, I know YOU would like to hear Paul shred his voice on Long Tall Sally. But if he did that night after night, he would have to cancel some shows to rest his voice, I can guarantee you that.
-
Point taken. Very true indeed. Aside from having more time with his daughter, by doing event concert dates rather than full on four month long tours, these mini leg concert dates are helping extend his touring longevity.
-
RMartinez:
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
MetalGod:
Has anyone noticed his actual talking voice has changed dramatically in the last 6-7 years. I'm currently watching "The Love We Make" dvd and his talking voice is much more youthful and less "jawly" in 2001. I think it took a dive actually after the US Tour. I think the divorce aged him a bit. So perhaps that has affect his singing voice on certain songs; it's a natural aging process - but maybe that could have been said from his 89/90 & '93 tours compared to the 2002 tour. KISSES ON THE BOTTOM did amplify those vocal limitations on ballad type songs. I still think he sounds great on the harder rock vocal stuff; studio and live type situations.
We talked about his speaking voice changing at least a year ago here on the forum. It is really quite a difference from just 10 or so years ago. Makes me sad cause I loved the way he talked when he was younger.
Actually the "speaking voice" has changed way more than the "singing voice"... There's lot of info, books, and professionals about "talking voice" with kind of very different theories about it, just the same that happens with singing. Some will tell you to do "X", and some will tell you you must never do "X"... It's kind of complicated, I think the important about what "school/theory" one must follow is to know what you're looking for... A voice that sounds great? An effortless voice without pain? A loud voice? etc....
Generally, Paul sounds good given his age and the criteria put forth. But on LONG TALL SALLY the other night, he was certainly straining his voice beyond its capacity.
well, I think that was deliberate... as in Cut Me Some Slack, it's kind of Paul doing Nirvana, doing Dave Grohl, or doing Kurt Cobain, I don't know, but kind of making his singing fit with the members of Nirvana...
-
21st Century Paul:
RMartinez:
21st Century Paul:
Nancy R:
MetalGod:
Has anyone noticed his actual talking voice has changed dramatically in the last 6-7 years. I'm currently watching "The Love We Make" dvd and his talking voice is much more youthful and less "jawly" in 2001. I think it took a dive actually after the US Tour. I think the divorce aged him a bit. So perhaps that has affect his singing voice on certain songs; it's a natural aging process - but maybe that could have been said from his 89/90 & '93 tours compared to the 2002 tour. KISSES ON THE BOTTOM did amplify those vocal limitations on ballad type songs. I still think he sounds great on the harder rock vocal stuff; studio and live type situations.
We talked about his speaking voice changing at least a year ago here on the forum. It is really quite a difference from just 10 or so years ago. Makes me sad cause I loved the way he talked when he was younger.
Actually the "speaking voice" has changed way more than the "singing voice"... There's lot of info, books, and professionals about "talking voice" with kind of very different theories about it, just the same that happens with singing. Some will tell you to do "X", and some will tell you you must never do "X"... It's kind of complicated, I think the important about what "school/theory" one must follow is to know what you're looking for... A voice that sounds great? An effortless voice without pain? A loud voice? etc....
Generally, Paul sounds good given his age and the criteria put forth. But on LONG TALL SALLY the other night, he was certainly straining his voice beyond its capacity.
well, I think that was deliberate... as in Cut Me Some Slack, it's kind of Paul doing Nirvana, doing Dave Grohl, or doing Kurt Cobain, I don't know, but kind of making his singing fit with the members of Nirvana...
I don't think so. He could not have sung it any other way, given the key and his voice today. He was straining. Anyone who knows singing can hear that. That is different from singing in a passionate, bluesy voice like Paul did in 1976.