Set List critique
-
audi:
... He doesn't respect his solo-catalog. ]
This. Shamefully.
And sadly for us. Great post Audi...the entire post.
-
oobu24:
audi:
... He doesn't respect his solo-catalog. ]
This. Shamefully.
And sadly for us. Great post Audi...the entire post.
I agree. Great post. And gutsy to skip his concert to back up your point, Audi.
-
Great post by my dear friend Audi.
-
"When Paul went back on tour in 2002...Next, the 2004 summer tour, which led up to the Glastonbury gig, happened....2005 came, and so commenced the soon-to-be-overused "Magical Mystery Tour" show-openers.....Those 2007 mini-concerts to promote ..." I have a lot to say with this post, but let me start here. (And I am going to be using your signature list of shows- I hope it is accurate). You spend a lot of time complaining about set lists to concerts you never attended. Why? What does it matter? I'm confused about this particular point here. The only thing that matters when one makes a decision about attending a future concert is what he is likely to play at that said concert. Case in point is your comment about MMT being overused. According to your list, you heard it as the opener ONCE. So, how is it overused to you? Looking at your shows, each time you have heard a fair amount of different songs. It isn't like you have seen the same show two times in a row. "I'll sum up and say that the collective whining about his oldies-show has gone far beyond mere frustration: This is a man who was, after all, only one-fourth of The Beatles; yet, he tours as if he were all four of them. The whole reason I became a diehard fan in the first place was, not because he was a Bealte, but because he dared to out-do them afterward. He doesn't respect his solo-catalog. He has accepted that he's an oldies act. And why not? It's easy applause, and he gets to milk his Beatle legacy, which feeds his ego; he gets his ass kissed everywhere he goes. I no longer expect an all-solo tour -- fair enough. But what's fair about pretending that gems like "My Brave Face," "Wanderlust," "About You" and "Jenny Wren" never existed? It's becoming offensive to fans like me, the ones who made those albums Gold/Platinum." Once again, it needs to be said. His solo stuff (post 1980, which is what you have been clamoring for) is basically irrelevant in the eyes of the general public compared to his Beatle days. There isn't a McCartney fan out there who wishes this wasn't true, but it sadly is. Everyone has to accept it. He hasn't had a #1 hit since.... what, Ronald Reagan's first term? People attending his shows are still by and large first timers. They are people who prefer Beatles (and Wings) to solo. It is what it is. His massive amount of songs is also another thing that goes against him in some ways. You will complain about hearing 15-20 "staples" and yes, that sounds high. But, realize that his total set list clocks in at 39... so we are talking about half of the show being massive hits/crowd pleasing numbers. That ain't bad. The Rolling Stones just performed and only played 19 songs. About half of their songs I recognize, and I don't own a single Rolling Stones album. His 2013 Out There Tour featured about 9 songs that are either new or haven't been played in a while. So, yeah, 9 songs out of 39 doesn't make a dent, but 9/19 is "a major overhaul." " I'll always love the dude, but I sho' nuff don't respect him anymore." With all respect, this sounds childish. Why are you spending time on a forum for a guy you "don't respect?" That's the overall problem with any fandom, whether it be music or entertainment. The musician or writer of show has to first produce something that HE/SHE WANTS, then something that should please THE MAJORITY of fans. And if you are a fan that doesn't have his singular needs met, you complain and complain and complain.... Look, I would love more songs, but I'm not going to get hyperbolic about it. AND I've been to 4 shows on this current tour, so it isn't like I am being a hypocrite here.
-
I think you just got hyperbolic!
I think the essence of this is what you said: Paul is playing for first timers. For some reason, he feels he is racing against time to play for as many people on the planet and secure his Beatle legacy (which, truth be said, is already secure and has been for decades). And he does tour as if he is the Beatles. If not, why on earth keep playing Something, or put Mr. Kite in your set, but ignore Oh Darling and Another Girl? Maybe his solo music is irrelevant because he never plays it. Gee, SORRY he wrote Silly Love Songs and With A Little Luck and then we bought it, liked it, and made them hits. Is that the fan's fault? It's possible HE has made his solo material irrelevant. And yet, he keeps producing solo music, saying he wants to still be relevant. But I get it. Truth be told, folks like Audi and many others are just not McCartney's target audience. The girl who has a sign that says "Sign My Butt" and has heard The Beatles on the radio all twenty years of her life is his audience, fans of the last 40 or 50 years be damned. I'm also not his target audience. And that's ok. But people should not get upset when, after following the man for decades and buying his product and traveling far distances to attend his show, people get upset with some of the things he does career-wise.
-
I'm hoping to hear some unusual NEW songs at the upcoming concerts. How great would it be if he did a world premiere of Alligator (only done at soundchecks so far), Appreciate, Early Days or Hell To Pay?
-
5th-beatle:
I'm hoping to hear some unusual NEW songs at the upcoming concerts. How great would it be if he did a world premiere of Alligator (only done at soundchecks so far), Appreciate, Early Days or Hell To Pay?
That would be great. If he can play them at sound check, he can play them in the regular set list. And should.
-
I said it before and I'll say it again. I want to hear "On my way to work" live!
-
javilu:
I said it before and I'll say it again. I want to hear "On my way to work" live!
Javi...put it on a sign. It worked for me in Albany
-
audi:
My oldest friend couldn't believe that I skipped McCartney's recent Nashville show. This led to an online conversation, and he asked me to make my case regarding Paul's stale setlist. Here's what I said in that email: Paul is, unfortunately, dedicated to his solo songs only when he's promoting a new album; then he discards 'em (some would say "banish") once the album has exhausted its commercial potential. Granted, Paul has updated his setlist several times over the years, but he will not budge when it comes to simply rotating his signature songs. It's OK to play signature tunes, of course, but Paul insists on singing ALL 15-20 of his signature songs at EVERY show, leaving little room for a major overhaul. When Paul went back on tour in 2002, I didn't mind the Beatle-heavy setlist -- especially with that then-new band. I considered Driving Rain a good record at the time -- give or take -- but he picked the wrong songs to perform live. I'll never understand why he never performed the song on Driving Rain best suited for live-performance, "About You." In fact it should've been the lead single, but I digress. Next, the 2004 summer tour, which led up to the Glastonbury gig, happened: Updated setlist, tons o' Beatles (again) -- however, we got live versions of "Flaming Pie" and "Calico Skies." VERY encouraging signs! 2005 came, and so commenced the soon-to-be-overused "Magical Mystery Tour" show-openers. Also, Rusty convinced Paul to perform the super-obscure song from Ram, "Too Many People." Oddly, I never cared for that song, as with Band On The Run's "Nineteen Hundred And Eighty-Five," until Macca did it live. (hint, hint) Those 2007 mini-concerts to promote Memory Almost Full were great."House Of Wax" and "That Was Me" were clearly the crowd-pleasers -- fantastic audience-response -- but both songs were history by the time he'd resumed full-scale touring the following year. We were left with one mediocre song ("Dance Tonight") and one great song ("Only Mama Knows"). But -- thanks to the fans in Ukraine -- we got "Mrs. Vandebilt." Another encouraging sign, but, alas, 2009 turned out to be the same ol' same ol'. 2010 was definitely a good tour for Wings fans: "Ram," "Rockshow" and "Letting Go." All total shockers. By that point, songs like "Long & Winding Road," "Eleanor Rigby" and "Let It Be" officially became bathroom-break songs to me. 2011 and 2012: I followed his tours online, and I kept wondering why he barely acknowledges his work beyond 1980. As a longtime McCartney consumer, this sh-t is starting to get a little old, and "Here Today" isn't cutting it anymore. Setlist updates continued in 2012, but the practice is now: "Replacing Beatle songs with other Beatle songs -- and don't you DARE touch my precious, career-defining anthems." No bold moves at all. After seeing him at Bonnaroo last year, I became convinced that -- at this rate -- he'll be doing Ringo's songs by next year. (Incidentally, I give him a free-pass on "Benefit Of Mr. Kite" because he plays a mean bass on that one). I'll sum up and say that the collective whining about his oldies-show has gone far beyond mere frustration: This is a man who was, after all, only one-fourth of The Beatles; yet, he tours as if he were all four of them. The whole reason I became a diehard fan in the first place was, not because he was a Bealte, but because he dared to out-do them afterward. He doesn't respect his solo-catalog. He has accepted that he's an oldies act. And why not? It's easy applause, and he gets to milk his Beatle legacy, which feeds his ego; he gets his ass kissed everywhere he goes. I no longer expect an all-solo tour -- fair enough. But what's fair about pretending that gems like "My Brave Face," "Wanderlust," "About You" and "Jenny Wren" never existed? It's becoming offensive to fans like me, the ones who made those albums Gold/Platinum. I'll always love the dude, but I sho' nuff don't respect him anymore. All I can hope for now is that next month's tribute-album results in a huge concert with Paul performing with some of the album's artists.
Post of the entire year !!! Never understood not playing "About You" either, song rocks !!!
-
RMartinez:
I think you just got hyperbolic!
I think the essence of this is what you said: Paul is playing for first timers. For some reason, he feels he is racing against time to play for as many people on the planet and secure his Beatle legacy (which, truth be said, is already secure and has been for decades). And he does tour as if he is the Beatles. If not, why on earth keep playing Something, or put Mr. Kite in your set, but ignore Oh Darling and Another Girl? Maybe his solo music is irrelevant because he never plays it. Gee, SORRY he wrote Silly Love Songs and With A Little Luck and then we bought it, liked it, and made them hits. Is that the fan's fault? It's possible HE has made his solo material irrelevant. And yet, he keeps producing solo music, saying he wants to still be relevant. But I get it. Truth be told, folks like Audi and many others are just not McCartney's target audience. The girl who has a sign that says "Sign My Butt" and has heard The Beatles on the radio all twenty years of her life is his audience, fans of the last 40 or 50 years be damned. I'm also not his target audience. And that's ok. But people should not get upset when, after following the man for decades and buying his product and traveling far distances to attend his show, people get upset with some of the things he does career-wise.
"But I get it. Truth be told, folks like Audi and many others are just not McCartney's target audience. The girl who has a sign that says "Sign My Butt" and has heard The Beatles on the radio all twenty years of her life is his audience, fans of the last 40 or 50 years be damned. " IMO that is a shame. We are the ones shelling out money for his new recordings and these others haven't spent a dime in years outside of going to one concert.
-
I respect, and even agree somewhat, with audi's comments. I often fear Paul is treading a little too close to becoming what some of those "oldie" acts are, the ones that bill themselves with the original group name, but only contain one of the original members. Yes, I realize how difficult it must be to put together a playlist to try to include something for everyone in the audience. Some changes are needed, though. I took some people to see him for their first time, and of course they were blown-away by the show. I took them again two years later, and they commented on how it was almost the exact same show, with the same stories told, etc. I, too, am afraid Paul's shows now are mainly for all those people who say they are checking it off their "bucket list", they've seen a "Beatle." At the same time, I'm happy he is still "Out There" and given the chance, I'm sure I'll go see him again!
-
"He doesn't respect his solo catalogue." I am sure he phoned you to tell you this. Paul is playing Beatles-heavy setlists because that is what the overwhelming majority of concert goers crave. Period. It's a shame you've lost respect for the man, whose just trying to please his fans and not let anyone down. He, I am sure (though like you did with the above quote I am purely speculating) he almost feels burdened to carry the flame of the Beatles and keep them alive. Yes it's true he is only 1/4 of the band. But he is only one of two remaining, and, let's be honest, the last remaining Beatle who could pull those songs off live. It will be a sad, sad, sad day when fans will no longer be able to hear Let It Be and Hey Jude sung by the man who penned those beautiful anthems. Jenny Wren is a great tune, and constantly shuffled on my playlist at home, but it won't be a travesty to never hear it performed live again.
-
No one is saying he shouldn't play more solo stuff. I just find some of the complaints about it to be over the top. Which is why I made the larger point about fandom.
-
Macca84:
"When Paul went back on tour in 2002...Next, the 2004 summer tour, which led up to the Glastonbury gig, happened....2005 came, and so commenced the soon-to-be-overused "Magical Mystery Tour" show-openers.....Those 2007 mini-concerts to promote ..." I have a lot to say with this post, but let me start here. (And I am going to be using your signature list of shows- I hope it is accurate). You spend a lot of time complaining about set lists to concerts you never attended. Why? What does it matter? I'm confused about this particular point here. The only thing that matters when one makes a decision about attending a future concert is what he is likely to play at that said concert. Case in point is your comment about MMT being overused. According to your list, you heard it as the opener ONCE. So, how is it overused to you? Looking at your shows, each time you have heard a fair amount of different songs. It isn't like you have seen the same show two times in a row. "I'll sum up and say that the collective whining about his oldies-show has gone far beyond mere frustration: This is a man who was, after all, only one-fourth of The Beatles; yet, he tours as if he were all four of them. The whole reason I became a diehard fan in the first place was, not because he was a Bealte, but because he dared to out-do them afterward. He doesn't respect his solo-catalog. He has accepted that he's an oldies act. And why not? It's easy applause, and he gets to milk his Beatle legacy, which feeds his ego; he gets his ass kissed everywhere he goes. I no longer expect an all-solo tour -- fair enough. But what's fair about pretending that gems like "My Brave Face," "Wanderlust," "About You" and "Jenny Wren" never existed? It's becoming offensive to fans like me, the ones who made those albums Gold/Platinum." Once again, it needs to be said. His solo stuff (post 1980, which is what you have been clamoring for) is basically irrelevant in the eyes of the general public compared to his Beatle days. There isn't a McCartney fan out there who wishes this wasn't true, but it sadly is. Everyone has to accept it. He hasn't had a #1 hit since.... what, Ronald Reagan's first term? People attending his shows are still by and large first timers. They are people who prefer Beatles (and Wings) to solo. It is what it is. His massive amount of songs is also another thing that goes against him in some ways. You will complain about hearing 15-20 "staples" and yes, that sounds high. But, realize that his total set list clocks in at 39... so we are talking about half of the show being massive hits/crowd pleasing numbers. That ain't bad. The Rolling Stones just performed and only played 19 songs. About half of their songs I recognize, and I don't own a single Rolling Stones album. His 2013 Out There Tour featured about 9 songs that are either new or haven't been played in a while. So, yeah, 9 songs out of 39 doesn't make a dent, but 9/19 is "a major overhaul." " I'll always love the dude, but I sho' nuff don't respect him anymore." With all respect, this sounds childish. Why are you spending time on a forum for a guy you "don't respect?" That's the overall problem with any fandom, whether it be music or entertainment. The musician or writer of show has to first produce something that HE/SHE WANTS, then something that should please THE MAJORITY of fans. And if you are a fan that doesn't have his singular needs met, you complain and complain and complain.... Look, I would love more songs, but I'm not going to get hyperbolic about it. AND I've been to 4 shows on this current tour, so it isn't like I am being a hypocrite here.
Yes.
-
Thisbe211:
I respect, and even agree somewhat, with audi's comments. I often fear Paul is treading a little too close to becoming what some of those "oldie" acts are, the ones that bill themselves with the original group name, but only contain one of the original members. Yes, I realize how difficult it must be to put together a playlist to try to include something for everyone in the audience. Some changes are needed, though. I took some people to see him for their first time, and of course they were blown-away by the show. I took them again two years later, and they commented on how it was almost the exact same show, with the same stories told, etc. I, too, am afraid Paul's shows now are mainly for all those people who say they are checking it off their "bucket list", they've seen a "Beatle." At the same time, I'm happy he is still "Out There" and given the chance, I'm sure I'll go see him again!
"Oldies acts" do not sell out stadiums worldwide, and Paul does not try and pass himself off as "The Beatles". He does not base his setlist on people who have seen his show multiple times. Also, modern sound technology and his ace band give enough energy to the songs to make them fresh sounding, even urgent. His 50 year old Beatles tunes sound just as good today as they ever did, and fit right along side of My Valentine and the NEW songs. That's because a great song is a great song, and he's the guy that wrote them! People would go see him stand there and "drink it all in" for three hours, because he is, after all, a living legend...one of The Beatles. He could just "phone it in" as so many do. Fortunately for us though, he puts on one hell of a show instead!
-
Macca84:
No one is saying he shouldn't play more solo stuff. I just find some of the complaints about it to be over the top. Which is why I made the larger point about fandom.
What you said was spot on.
-
Oh, and I'd venture to say, he respects the hell outta his solo catalogue. And in his heart of hearts probably would LOVE to one day just play all solo and/or Wings tunes and it would be a helluva concert. But why? If you've read the book "man on the run" it chronicles Paul in the 1970s and showed a lost man trying to outrun his Beatles past and find himself. Now, 40 years later he no longer feels the need. What he did as a solo artist stands alone. Of course. But he was a Beatle first and will always be that to most people. So, to quote the man himself, "And what's wrong with that? I'd like to know."
-
RMartinez:
I think you just got hyperbolic!
I think the essence of this is what you said: Paul is playing for first timers. For some reason, he feels he is racing against time to play for as many people on the planet and secure his Beatle legacy (which, truth be said, is already secure and has been for decades). And he does tour as if he is the Beatles. If not, why on earth keep playing Something, or put Mr. Kite in your set, but ignore Oh Darling and Another Girl? Maybe his solo music is irrelevant because he never plays it. Gee, SORRY he wrote Silly Love Songs and With A Little Luck and then we bought it, liked it, and made them hits. Is that the fan's fault? It's possible HE has made his solo material irrelevant. And yet, he keeps producing solo music, saying he wants to still be relevant. But I get it. Truth be told, folks like Audi and many others are just not McCartney's target audience. The girl who has a sign that says "Sign My Butt" and has heard The Beatles on the radio all twenty years of her life is his audience, fans of the last 40 or 50 years be damned. I'm also not his target audience. And that's ok. But people should not get upset when, after following the man for decades and buying his product and traveling far distances to attend his show, people get upset with some of the things he does career-wise.
-
yankeefan7:
audi:
My oldest friend couldn't believe that I skipped McCartney's recent Nashville show. This led to an online conversation, and he asked me to make my case regarding Paul's stale setlist. Here's what I said in that email: Paul is, unfortunately, dedicated to his solo songs only when he's promoting a new album; then he discards 'em (some would say "banish") once the album has exhausted its commercial potential. Granted, Paul has updated his setlist several times over the years, but he will not budge when it comes to simply rotating his signature songs. It's OK to play signature tunes, of course, but Paul insists on singing ALL 15-20 of his signature songs at EVERY show, leaving little room for a major overhaul. When Paul went back on tour in 2002, I didn't mind the Beatle-heavy setlist -- especially with that then-new band. I considered Driving Rain a good record at the time -- give or take -- but he picked the wrong songs to perform live. I'll never understand why he never performed the song on Driving Rain best suited for live-performance, "About You." In fact it should've been the lead single, but I digress. Next, the 2004 summer tour, which led up to the Glastonbury gig, happened: Updated setlist, tons o' Beatles (again) -- however, we got live versions of "Flaming Pie" and "Calico Skies." VERY encouraging signs! 2005 came, and so commenced the soon-to-be-overused "Magical Mystery Tour" show-openers. Also, Rusty convinced Paul to perform the super-obscure song from Ram, "Too Many People." Oddly, I never cared for that song, as with Band On The Run's "Nineteen Hundred And Eighty-Five," until Macca did it live. (hint, hint) Those 2007 mini-concerts to promote Memory Almost Full were great."House Of Wax" and "That Was Me" were clearly the crowd-pleasers -- fantastic audience-response -- but both songs were history by the time he'd resumed full-scale touring the following year. We were left with one mediocre song ("Dance Tonight") and one great song ("Only Mama Knows"). But -- thanks to the fans in Ukraine -- we got "Mrs. Vandebilt." Another encouraging sign, but, alas, 2009 turned out to be the same ol' same ol'. 2010 was definitely a good tour for Wings fans: "Ram," "Rockshow" and "Letting Go." All total shockers. By that point, songs like "Long & Winding Road," "Eleanor Rigby" and "Let It Be" officially became bathroom-break songs to me. 2011 and 2012: I followed his tours online, and I kept wondering why he barely acknowledges his work beyond 1980. As a longtime McCartney consumer, this sh-t is starting to get a little old, and "Here Today" isn't cutting it anymore. Setlist updates continued in 2012, but the practice is now: "Replacing Beatle songs with other Beatle songs -- and don't you DARE touch my precious, career-defining anthems." No bold moves at all. After seeing him at Bonnaroo last year, I became convinced that -- at this rate -- he'll be doing Ringo's songs by next year. (Incidentally, I give him a free-pass on "Benefit Of Mr. Kite" because he plays a mean bass on that one). I'll sum up and say that the collective whining about his oldies-show has gone far beyond mere frustration: This is a man who was, after all, only one-fourth of The Beatles; yet, he tours as if he were all four of them. The whole reason I became a diehard fan in the first place was, not because he was a Bealte, but because he dared to out-do them afterward. He doesn't respect his solo-catalog. He has accepted that he's an oldies act. And why not? It's easy applause, and he gets to milk his Beatle legacy, which feeds his ego; he gets his ass kissed everywhere he goes. I no longer expect an all-solo tour -- fair enough. But what's fair about pretending that gems like "My Brave Face," "Wanderlust," "About You" and "Jenny Wren" never existed? It's becoming offensive to fans like me, the ones who made those albums Gold/Platinum. I'll always love the dude, but I sho' nuff don't respect him anymore. All I can hope for now is that next month's tribute-album results in a huge concert with Paul performing with some of the album's artists.
Post of the entire year !!! Never understood not playing "About You" either, song rocks !!!