# Music by Genre > Rock, Folk Rock, Roots Rock, Rockabilly >  Who is Paul McCartney?

## John Flynn

OK, I thought this was a joke, but it is being reported as true by ABC News and USA Today. Apparently, Kanye West has collaborated with Paul McCartney on a single “Only.” That's not the story. The story is it has generated some interesting Tweets, including:

"I don't know who Paul McCartney is, but Kanye is going to give this man a career w/ this new song!!"

"who tf is paul mccartney???!??! this is why i love kanye for shining light on unknown artists"

"Who is Paul McCartney? Why do people love him?"

"I still don't know who Paul MacArthur (sp) is"

"...Kanye West's Paul McCarthy (sp) collab is dope."

Has the Apocalypse begun?

----------


## rubydubyr

Gotta be teenagers doing the tweets.....

----------


## John Flynn

No doubt, but I knew who Louie Armstrong and Frank Sinatra were when I was a teenager listening to the Beatles.

----------

Ben Cooper, 

Billgrass, 

DavidKOS, 

LongBlackVeil

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> OK, I thought this was a joke, but it is being reported as true by ABC News and USA Today. Apparently, Kanye West has collaborated with Paul McCartney on a single Only. That's not the story. The story is it has generated some interesting Tweets, including:
> 
> "I don't know who Paul McCartney is, but Kanye is going to give this man a career w/ this new song!!"
> 
> "who tf is paul mccartney???!??! this is why i love kanye for shining light on unknown artists"
> 
> "Who is Paul McCartney? Why do people love him?"
> 
> "I still don't know who Paul MacArthur (sp) is"
> ...


No apocalypse just Kanye West fans -- enough said!   :Mandosmiley:

----------

Dave Greenspoon, 

FLATROCK HILL, 

journeymanjohn, 

William Smith

----------


## journeybear

That's like those bumper stickers: "Who are The Grateful Dead and why do they keep following me?"  :Laughing: 

On second thought, it's nothing at all like that.  :Whistling: 

Yes, it would have to be kids tweeting those. Kids with earbuds in, paying attention only to the latest, most current music, not looking into where it came from or even the origin of the samples being used. 

BTW, The Beatles broke up nearly 45 years ago, or two generations ago. I guess one could cut these clueless kids a little slack. Maybe a little. Just a little ...

Reading the above paragraph, i feel older than before ...  :Frown:

----------

Michael Weaver, 

Timbofood

----------


## Ben Cooper

> No apocalypse just Kanye West fans -- enough said!


Yup!

----------


## rubydubyr

“Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.”  Socrates
Seems every generation despairs of the generation that comes after.   :Laughing:

----------


## Pete Braccio

More likely, they know who Paul is and are just screwing with us old folks a bit to see how many they get get a bit spun up.

----------

Wink Dinkerson

----------


## jaycat

You can't rest on your laurels forever. Paul McCartney's best work is inarguably 45 years behind him.

The same cannot be said of Louie Armstrong and Frank Sinatra when John was a teenager listening to the Beatles.

----------

Timbofood

----------


## Clement Barrera-Ng

Totally missed this (I got off GMA a long while ago). It really won't surprise me at all if young people today don't know who The Fab Four is (I actually had to explain that term to a friend recently) but is it possible everyone is just kidding around? 
http://www.billboard.com/articles/ne...cartney-joking

----------


## fatt-dad

OMG!

f-d

----------

derbex

----------


## crisscross

After I read this thread, I googled "Kanye West".

----------

Jeff Mando

----------


## rubydubyr

Actually, it IS all kinda funny  :Grin:

----------


## DavidKOS

Can this Kanye person even play a note or is he just another guy dragging samples around?

----------


## journeybear

No, and no, but he does have plenty of money, enough to hire people to put together beats, backing tracks, and procure and pay for all the samples he wants.

Hidden in this is Paul McCartney's motivation. I saw a couple of interviews he did on the occasion of the release of a vieo game to which he contributed a newly-written song. Seems he wants his music to be included in a medium to which his kids pay attention.  :Disbelief:  I'm sure he was quite handsomely compensated, as well.  :Wink:  The sales of these games is mind-boggling, comparable to the box office of Hollywood movies. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was something similar in his mind regarding a collaboration with Kanye West. Also, bear in min d that one way immortality, or at least, greater career longevity, is achieved is to produce something that appeals to a younger age group than one's previous demographic. Sir Paul is a smart feller, after all, and he's always thinking ahead.  :Cool: 

BTW, I haven't heard it yet, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn the song sucks.  :Whistling:  Seems like a bad fit.

----------


## northfolk

Who is kanye west????????

----------


## Bertram Henze

> "I don't know who Paul McCartney is, but Kanye is going to give this man a career w/ this new song!!"


...is but a walking shadow, a poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more. A tale told by an idiot: full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
(Shakespeare, _Macbeth_)

----------

Ben Cooper, 

Cecily_Mandoliner

----------


## John Flynn

> You can't rest on your laurels forever. Paul McCartney's best work is inarguably 45 years behind him.  The same cannot be said of Louie Armstrong and Frank Sinatra when John was a teenager listening to the Beatles.


Yeah, he's a has been. Three Grammies last year and one each for the previous three years. Packed 41 shows in some of the largest venues in the country this past year. 

Also, when I was a teenager, all my contemporaries knew who Benny Goodman was. We weren't fans, but we were familiar with who he was and his sound.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> when I was a teenager, all my contemporaries knew who Benny Goodman was. We weren't fans, but we were familiar with who he was and his sound.


What has changed since is bandwidth (pun intended). Back then, there were only so many radio stations in your area and only so many vinyl records you could buy and swap with your friends. Nobody had a chance to avoid hearing everything.
Today, nobody has a chance to hear even a percent of everything going on in the virtual media. The musical universe has expanded and the local event horizon is shrinking - so the world is back in the 19th century.

----------

JEStanek, 

LongBlackVeil, 

Wink Dinkerson

----------


## Larry S Sherman

If you're curious what Paul's been up to here's a recent interview on the Nerdist podcast.



Larry

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> Yeah, he's a has been. Three Grammies last year and one each for the previous three years. Packed 41 shows in some of the largest venues in the country this past year. 
> 
> Also, when I was a teenager, all my contemporaries knew who Benny Goodman was. We weren't fans, but we were familiar with who he was and his sound.


Oh to be a has been!  :Smile: 

I think with the electronic information flood and huge expansion options of things to do in life that historical perspectives on most aspects of the world are diminishing.  Running on contrast is the ability to intensely focus on *selected* topics of interests.  Like mandolins for this crowd for example.

Despite my comment about Kayne West fans it isn't just them.

Just click through many of the singing videos post by young folks (and some older folks as well) and you often find the song attribution given to the last person who got notoriety for performing/recording it.  

Many (most?) of the current generation think that "I will always love you" is a Whitney Houston song for example --of course Dolly Parton wrote it and had a big country hit with it decades ago.  "Will you still love me tomorrow" is often called an Amy Winehouse song despite the fact that the Carol King wrote it and the Shirelles first hit huge with it in the early 1960's.  

Other examples abound.

----------


## John Flynn

> What has changed since is bandwidth (pun intended). Back then, there were only so many radio stations in your area and only so many vinyl records you could buy and swap with your friends. Nobody had a chance to avoid hearing everything.
> Today, nobody has a chance to hear even a percent of everything going on in the virtual media. The musical universe has expanded and the local event horizon is shrinking - so the world is back in the 19th century.


OK, Interesting point. What I've always heard about these "social bandwidth" theories is that old guys like me are less able to cope with all the information overload than the teenagers. But if that is true, I should be saying, "Who is this kid collaborating with Sir Paul? Yet I not only know who Kanye is, I know who he's married to, what his kid's name is and some of his nefarious exploits.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> What I've always heard about these "social bandwidth" theories is that old guys like me are less able to cope with all the information overload than the teenagers.


Well, those theories are correct in my case at least, though I would not say it's ability that makes the difference, it's motivation. Even now I have no time to google Kayne...

----------


## JEStanek

Yo, guys I'm Happy for you and I'mma let you finish (posting), but Kanye had one of the best videos of all time.

Jamie

----------

Ed Goist, 

nickster60

----------


## nickster60

I honestly wish I didn't know who Kanye West was.

----------

Bernie Daniel, 

Jeff Mando, 

Michael Weaver

----------


## tree

> You can't rest on your laurels forever. Paul McCartney's best work is inarguably 45 years behind him.


Seems like a non sequitur to me.  

His best work still resonates powerfully with an awful lot of people regardless of how old it is.  

If he had quit writing and recording music 45 years ago, maybe he could be considered "resting on his laurels", but he obviously hasn't.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> His best work still resonates powerfully with an awful lot of people regardless of how old it is.


He never surpassed "Hard Day's Night".  :Cool:

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> You can't rest on your laurels forever. Paul McCartney's best work is inarguably 45 years behind him....



I know and they used to say that about Johann Sebastian Bach too!   :Smile:

----------


## Dave Greenspoon

My oldest saw Kanye for his 19th b-day in Brooklyn; he knew every word and every beat. He and his friend were the only two white faces he could see in the crowd. At one point, the folks in front of them turned around to express they were impressed.  My kid also knows who Paul--and the Fab Four--is/were.  I posted on FB the true story that follows:

It's 1986-87, at my work-study job in the A/V Lab--two students come to check out a viewing room; TV in the background was running a tape of "Our American Century" or some such. The Beatles' appearance on the Ed Sullivan show was on and inspired the following exchange:

Clueless student #1: Who'se that on the TV?

Slightly less clueless student #2: Oh, that's Paul McCartney.

Clueless student #1: Really? Who is the band he's playing with?

Slightly less clueless student #2: That's the band he was in before Wings.

So, what's my point? That people grow and learn. When I was a teen listening to Clapton, Zep, etc. I really had no idea about Robert Johnson, Howling Wolf. etc. During my enlistment listening to Alabama, etc I had no appreciation for Monroe, F&S, etc. much less the old-time/Appalachian traditions that preceded them. The Carolina Chocolate Drops make it clear that they are trying to reintroduce forgotten "black" music to the black kids. So, while this is equally funny-sad, IMO it is only the latest iteration of "the more things change..."

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> He never surpassed "Hard Day's Night".



But but but "Yesterday" has been covered about 2500 times....that ain't hay.  :Smile:

----------


## MikeEdgerton

We might as well look at the Tweets that sparked it all

----------


## jaycat

> . . . 
> If he had quit writing and recording music 45 years ago, maybe he could be considered "resting on his laurels", but he obviously hasn't.


If he had quit writing and recording music 45 years ago, I would have a lot more respect for him.

If there is anyone on here who honestly believes that any of the Beatles made better music during their solo careers than when they were together, raise your hand. (Possible exception -- Lennon's 1st solo record).

Oh, the Grammies, a handy fallback. Conveniently forgetting Christopher Cross, Milli Vanilli, etc. Yes, and packing 41 stadiums, well there are a hell of a lot of Boomers with disposable income longing to relive the Good Old Days . . .

Interesting how when these guys get a bit long in the tooth, they'll try anything. Paul and Kanye, Dylan does a Christmas record, Elvis C. and his string quartet . . . It's OK, Muhammad Ali and Joe Louis didn't know when to quit either.

OK, rant over . . .

----------

LongBlackVeil

----------


## DavidKOS

> My oldest saw Kanye for his 19th b-day in Brooklyn; he knew every word and every beat.


Word and beat...where is the melody and chord changes? 

http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-rap-music-real-music

Some people claim rap is not music.

No melody = not music by dictionary definition:

"What defines music? I am not a hater of rap music. I enjoy several of the popular artists today. My opinion however is that rap should be grouped into a category all on its own. Music is usually defined by instruments and singing, so while it does not quite fit into this category, maybe it could be called a form of poetry, since that is what rap is at its core. Rap is a form of art for sure as are all other genres, but I do not believe it quite fits in with other MUSIC persay."

"Ask a rapper to "sing" any song, just once... The fact sadly is that rap is not music, but a mix of sounds, and already used beats. Any rapper you ask to actually "sing" any other song will fail miserably. The "talent" they have is not in their voice, but could be in their ability to mix like sounds, and contrasting sounds that people can dance to. It's not a real music, it's borrowed from others, and then strung together with lyrics."

Others of course say rap is just as music music as anything else.

'The opposition keeps quoting the "definition" of music. The issue is I refuse to think narrow minded, musice is more than a defintion. Music FOREMOST is expression, and art. The individuals are using definitions designed to describe their favorite type of music, lets face it alot of people who don't like rap never listened to it, proven .By the oppositions "generic" reasons for saying rap isn't music. Music that is given a fixed definition is not music at all end of.Discussion."

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/foru...y-Music?page=5

"rap and everyone that listens to it, but to show that it simply does not fit the definition of music. There is no melody, no singing, no instruments, etc. The only instrument-like sounds form a beat, and that just doesn't cut it. Talking is not singing as any elementary school music teacher will point out. And yea, the subject matter being 90% about crime, drugs, and bitches does not help rap's case. You can be entertained by it all you want, but don't try to pass it off a music."

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...8142345AAkIJGJ

'My rule of thumb is if it can't be played on a piano and still be recognizable, it's not music. Regardless of what you think of the lyrics, it's still clearly just words. There's no melody of any kind. If you read a book out loud to a beat, you wouldn't consider that music right?

As someone said, sometimes it's accompanied with music but rap itself is definitely not music."

http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com...4901090&page=4


But I see the business logic behind Macca's partnership with a younger hotter artist.

wiki_
'Kanye Omari West ( June 8, 1977) is an American rapper, songwriter, record producer, director, entrepreneur, and fashion designer."

Notice they did not say 'musician"!

----------


## John Flynn

As mentioned previously, I am an old guy and not much of a rap fan, although there is some of it I like. However, i will come to rap's defense as being "music." Music is a combination of lots of things, including melody, harmony, rhythm, lyrics, chords, etc. But it does not have to be all of them. Some religious chanting is open meter and therefore devoid of rhythm. Some music does not have harmony or chords. Some music does not have lyrics. But it is still music.

Arguably the earliest music made by man was rhythm (drums, hand clapping, foot stomping, etc.) and vocal interpretations of natural sounds. It was probably devoid of melody and harmony. It may have been tonal, but it may also have included non-tonal grunting and other vocalizing. But it was still considered early music. I see rap as kind of a dichotomy of modern urban experience combined with a return to music's earliest roots. It is music with everything but the rhythm and the lyrics stripped away. As for the sampling, there was rap before sampling and it is not only rappers who do sampling. It does not define the genre.

----------


## LongBlackVeil

> But I see the business logic behind Macca's partnership with a younger hotter artist.


Wait whos Macca? is that some other new age rapper?  :Wink: 

Really im suprised Kanye knows who McCartney is. I wonder if he really wanted to do this, or is it a decision made by someone else.

I agree about McCartney being WAYYY past his prime. He hasnt done anything even remotely great in a long long time. Grammys and filling up gigs dont mean much. If he wasnt a former Beatle, and it was based solely on his current output,  neither of those would be happening for him

----------


## journeybear

> He never surpassed "Hard Day's Night".





> But but but "Yesterday" has been covered about 2500 times....that ain't hay.


Also, "A Hard Day's Night" was a John song.




> That's the band he was in before Wings.


I've seen this elsewhere before. But it has more resonance, and hurts more, when it's a personal anecdote.




> When I was a teen listening to Clapton, Zep, etc. I really had no idea about Robert Johnson, Howling Wolf. etc.


Same with me, too - at first. But I looked them up. I dug deeper. I wanted to find out where this music came from. I wanted to get to the source. I wanted to find the wellspring of inspiration that flowed through this fascinating music and fed its proponents and practitioners. I used to spend hours in our local record store reading liner notes, looking for clues and connections. I don't know how -  I must have gone to the library  - but I learned about the men whose names these were: McKinley Morganfield, Chester Burnett, Ellis McDaniels, and more. (That's Muddy Waters, Howlin' Wolf, and Bo Diddley - ICYDK.) I looked up the lyrics whenever I could, learning what they were and how they were changed by rockers, finding out that some of the songs I loved ("Crossroads," for examples) were put together from two different Robert Johnson songs. All this discovery and learning was fueled by a curiosity that wouldn't let me go, wouldn't leave me alone, until I could satisfy it - with  knowledge and understanding.

I don't remember how I accomplished this, back in the days before the internet and wikipedia. I  must have gone to the library, because I didn't buy any books about this. Or maybe I asked people, and then verified what I was told, because I had to know the truth, and not depend on hearsay. It took some doing, it wasn't easy, but I had to know, and found ways to learn and sources from which to learn. I must have yearned for an easier, quicker way, a means of finding information with the ease of the push of a button and at the speed of light. But there was nothing like that, and so much I wanted to know, so I used whatever resources existed at the time.

Nowadays, it is so easy to get a quick answer to a question, I wonder whether curiosity even exists on this level anymore. People can put a couple of words into a search engine and find what they want in seconds. This has led to a mindset, an attitude, a habit, a cultural consensus, in which one doesn't need to actually know *anything,* one just needs to know how to find it. I've gotten pretty good at this myself, but half the time I go to wikipedia it's to confirm what I already know, not to actually discover something or learn something. Half the rest of the time I'm just checking spelling or determining the actual date or definition for a datum already (mostly) in my memory bank. But I think many, if not most, people growing up in the computer age, in which this ease of information gathering is a given, accept what they find in the process unquestioningly. I think they think its veracity doesn't matter, and to them "wikipedia says" and "the truth is" are equivalent. 

It seems as if information being made so readily available has devalued it. And it devolves to a point at which apathy creeps in and an indifferent attitude assumes control. "Oh, so this old white dude, Paul McWhatever, used to be in some band or something. Whatever. He don't look hip. He's as old as my grandpa." It seems as though only the most current occurrences are what matters, and where they originated doesn't. The present was built upon the past, and even if we don't see it, or hear it, or feel it, it's real. It's here, there, and everywhere. (Another John song.) And it's worthwhile learning, and digging deeper, and finding the source of what intrigues one. When someone says "Got a good reason for taking the easy way out" (finally, a Paul song - I think), there should really be a reason, beyond wanting the easy way.

----------

rfloyd

----------


## JeffD

I think the whole thing is a hoax. Yea there may in fact be folks that ignorant but I think the tweet thing is made up, to tweek old guys.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> Also, "A Hard Day's Night" was a John song.


I didn't say Paul composed it, just that he never surpassed it  :Grin: 
The one of his own songs he never surpassed either was Live and Let Die.  :Cool:

----------


## Tobin

Personally, I think Sir Paul has to be at a low point in his career to partner up with someone like Kanye West who is way, way below his station (musically speaking).  I can't believe he's doing it because it would be musically rewarding to him.  It seems like a desperate attempt to reclaim some level of notoriety by hitching his wagon to someone who is popular in contemporary circles.  If this doesn't work, he may be relegated to singing on infomercials for prescription medications or something.  




> As mentioned previously, I am an old guy and not much of a rap fan, although there is some of it I like. However, i will come to rap's defense as being "music." Music is a combination of lots of things, including melody, harmony, rhythm, lyrics, chords, etc. But it does not have to be all of them. Some religious chanting is open meter and therefore devoid of rhythm. Some music does not have harmony or chords. Some music does not have lyrics. But it is still music.


I just don't see how rhythm and lyrics by themselves can make something music.  As mentioned by someone else, when we put words to a meter, we call it poetry.  Not music.  Rap, at its core, is really just poetry with a beat.  To be music, it really has to have notes involved somehow.  Granted, many rap songs do have music as the background, so perhaps it should be considered a hybrid form of artistry that blends poetry and music. 

Many people feel the emotional and physiological effects of rap just like they do with music.  It makes them want to bob their heads, tap their feet, dance, or whatever.  And that makes them want to put it in the same category as music, but I think it's important to maintain a logical separation.  It muddies the definition of "music" to include rap, but it makes much more sense if we consider modern hip-hop or rap or whatever they're calling it nowadays to be a hybrid.

----------


## journeybear

Paul has done so much, and he probably wants to do everything, so if he wants to try this ... what's to stop him? Fear of a possible hit to his reputation? Please! He's been through so much and suffered so much derogation, I don't think he pays any attention to negative criticism. Nor needs to. I'm not saying this is what he should be doing with his time and talent, nor that the results are going to stand with the rest of his work, but I'm not going to begrudge him for trying to expand his capabilities. It seems he's more open-minded than some people are willing to accept.




> If there is anyone on here who honestly believes that any of the Beatles made better music during their solo careers than when they were together, raise your hand..


Raising my hand here. (Damn! no such smiley.) Nearly everything on "All Things Must Pass," much of "Double Fantasy," much of "Band On The Run," "Maybe I'm Amazed," the list goes on. Even "Back Off Boogaloo" is better than a bunch of Beatles songs. There were songs on albums I would almost always skip over, like "Yes It Is" and "Baby's In Black." "Piggies?" Really? They weren't uniformly brilliant, nor is the output of the former Beatles uniformly dull. Nonsense.

McCartney puts out music all the time that is pretty darned good. It isn't encased in amber with a 1960s date, viewed through rose-colored glasses, but it's still good. It's unreasonable to expect people to continue to produce music that hasn't evolved when they themselves have evolved from where and what they were in their younger days. It's OK for him to perform "I Saw Her Standing There" - it's a kick-ass dance song with a killer bass line and an irresistible groove - but he can't, or shouldn't, write a song about coming on to a 17-year-old girl at age 70. It would be, ah, inappropriate.

----------


## tree

> If he had quit writing and recording music 45 years ago, I would have a lot more respect for him.


I don't follow . . . but that's okay.  It seems like you're saying you would have more respect for him if he did actually "rest on his laurels".  

I don't understand faulting him for following his calling, regardless of what you think of his body of work since 1970. In my opinion, it was the collaboration that made the work he participated in pre-1970 so much greater than the sum of its parts.  There's not a single collaborator from that work who ever measured up to the extraordinarily high bar set by the Beatles.  

There is no accounting for taste, which is what this is basically about.  

McCartney has been commercially successful, by any stretch of the imagination, over his entire career - why would anyone quit trying to succeed at making a living?  If people continue to consume his output, and he likes what he's doing enough that he can continue to stand up in front of them and sing it and make a good living, isn't that the point of being a professional musician?  Music isn't athletics, where age quickly slows the body and forces retirement.

With few exceptions, I'm not particularly fond of most of his post-Beatles stuff, but I have no doubt that his pre-1970 collaborative work will stand as long as humans like melody and harmony.

----------


## jaycat

OK, I'll give you Maybe I'm Amazed. As for Yes It Is, give it another listen, especially the bridge.




> . . . It's here, there, and everywhere. (Another John song.) . . . "Got a good reason for taking the easy way out" (finally, a Paul song - I think). . . .


I think you may have those the wrong way around.

I don't listen to rap but have nothing against it. There was a kid rockin' out on the subway this morning, listening on his earbuds, and I thought, more power to him, that's how music is supposed to make you feel.

----------


## jaycat

> I don't follow . . . but that's okay.  It seems like you're saying you would have more respect for him if he did actually "rest on his laurels".


Perhaps a poor choice of words. What I meant was better expressed by LongBlackVeil above: "He hasnt done anything even remotely great in a long long time. Grammys and filling up gigs dont mean much. If he wasnt a former Beatle, and it was based solely on his current output, neither of those would be happening for him"

----------


## Scott Tichenor

> I think the whole thing is a hoax. Yea there may in fact be folks that ignorant but I think the tweet thing is made up, to tweek old guys.


My take exactly. Throw out a few pieces of rotting bait for the internet and it delivers back more free marketing that can possibly be purchased. Creators giddy with glee. In spades. Mandolin Cafe Forum members happily contributing to the cause.

The internet is so easy to manipulate if you understand how it works. I look at this like, "wow, some dumb people were discovered on the internet."

Really. I mean who saw THAT coming???

----------


## journeybear

> OK, I'll give you Maybe I'm Amazed. As for Yes It Is, give it another listen, especially the bridge.


It may be I was young and excitable, and had no interest in slower 3/4 or 6/8 songs. But the point I'm making is that not all of their songs were great. On nearly every album there were songs I would skip over, and still do. And that all blanket statements are false.  :Wink: 




> I think you may have those the wrong way around.


Yah. Oops!  :Redface:  I remembered reading somewhere that it was John's song, and thinking that was strange, because it sounded so Paul.

----------


## tree

> I agree about McCartney being WAYYY past his prime. 
> 
> He hasnt done anything even remotely great in a long long time. 
> 
> Grammys and filling up gigs dont mean much. 
> 
> If he wasnt a former Beatle, and it was based solely on his current output,  neither of those would be happening for him


1.  Ouch.  He's 72 years old, which seems in and of itself reason to cut the guy a little slack.

2.  Matter of taste/opinion, but I happen to agree.

3.  Grammies and filling up gigs don't mean much unless you're the one getting the Grammy and filling up the stadiums.  That's pretty much the definition of commercial success, which, correct me if I'm wrong, is what professional musicians aspire to.

4. But he IS a former Beatle, so this is moot. Paul McCartney can't be separated from the Beatles.  You don't have to like his post-Beatles career, but you can't deny that he's a successful professional musician, and that in and of itself is an accomplishment.

----------


## Steve Ostrander

Is he the guy from Wings?  :Smile:

----------


## LongBlackVeil

i think this video, from 1:14 on, pretty much sums up how Paul McCartney puts together songs, and how, sort of vapid it all really is. I just think its all a little cheesey and contrived. It doesnt have any honesty in it. This is how all of his recent work seems to me, ALL of it. Its almost like hes doing a parody of himself, but sadly, hes not.

I dont ask that his new work be as great as his old stuff. I just ask that it be honest, otherwise its no better than Kanye Wests music

 But yes, hes no doubt successful, cant take that away from him...



*sorry for the distasteful title of the video, if i need to take it down i will

----------


## John Flynn

I just saw where McCartney's 2013 album "New" got to #3 both on Billboard and the UK list. Some artists would kill to get that once in their careers. Did he get the opportunity to do the album because he was a Beatle? Probably. Did it is sell because he was a Beatle? You'd have to assume he has such a loyal fan base that they would buy anything he puts out "45 years after he did his best work." I don't think that's true, but even if it is, does it really matter?

----------


## Jacob

"Not to know what happened before you were born is to be a child forever. 
For what is the time of a man, except it be interwoven with that memory of ancient things of a *superior age*?" - Cicero  :Wink:

----------

Wink Dinkerson

----------


## Tom Smart

To those of you who believe musicians should "know when to quit":

What do you do for a living? Is your best work behind you? How come you don't know when to quit?

For that matter, maybe your best cafe posts are behind you. When are you going to give it up?

----------

MikeEdgerton

----------


## MikeEdgerton

The best part is that Paul is at the point in life where what anybody thinks probably doesn't matter too much to him. He's managed to make it in an industry that few can even stay remotely attached to business wise. Personally, I think they were lost when they let Pete Best go but hey, everybody is entitled to their own opinion.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> What do you do for a living? Is your best work behind you? How come you don't know when to quit?


I do know my fun work is behind me. But luckily, in my profession we don't have "fans"  :Wink: 




> maybe your best cafe posts are behind you.


I'll tell you that when I know it: right after my last post.

----------


## John Flynn

> ...maybe your best cafe posts are behind you. When are you going to give it up?


My best Cafe' posts were deleted by moderators long ago!!!  :Laughing:

----------

jaycat, 

LongBlackVeil, 

Mark Wilson, 

Tom Smart

----------


## jaycat

> To those of you who believe musicians should "know when to quit":
> 
> What do you do for a living?


I'm a bureaucrat. I work for the Commonwealth.




> Is your best work behind you?


Undoubtedly.




> How come you don't know when to quit?


I'll know when to quit when I scratch off that $1M lottery ticket.




> For that matter, maybe your best cafe posts are behind you. When are you going to give it up?


When you pry the Cafe from my cold dead hands.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> When you pry the Cafe from my cold dead hands.


 :Laughing:  :Laughing:  :Confused:  :Chicken:

----------


## JeffD

http://www.dailydot.com/lol/who-is-paul-mccartney/

Despite the questionable veracity of the original post, the side bar conversations, that would not have existed but for the hoax, have taken a life of their own.

I love this place.

----------


## DavidKOS

> Despite the questionable veracity of the original post, the side bar conversations, that would not have existed but for the hoax, have taken a life of their own.
> 
> I love this place.


Hoaxes?

Since we're discussing Sir Paul, let's go whole hog and bring up the hoax of the century:

http://plasticmacca.blogspot.com/

http://sabotagetimes.com/music/the-c...artneys-death/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_is_dead

http://hoaxes.org/archive/permalink/paul_is_dead

According to that hoax, the guy you're talking about isn't even the original James Paul McCartney!

lol  :Laughing:

----------


## Paul Kotapish

McCartney certainly doesn't need any career boost--his recent tour and sales are proof that he still has a huge following all on his lonesome.

As for McCartney's music, I would argue that he's still writing at a pretty high level and performing at an amazing level.

We saw his final show at Candlestick Park in past August, and he delivered an incredible, high-energy show that ran nearly three hours. He sang and played bass, acoustic and electric guitars, ukulele, and keyboards at a level that most of us would envy--from solo acoustic numbers to full-tilt raves. He included some recent pieces, including several from _New_, and they stood up really well in the context of his fairly amazing catalog. 

I suspect that few folks who saw that show would argue that he should have hung it up years ago. He's clearly still engaged, still doing what he loves, and still doing it well.

I don't love everything he's generated and a lot of his work in the middle years wasn't great, but I've really enjoyed much of what he's put out in the last decade or so. I think _New_ is a good record on any terms, and some of those songs are real ear worms. 

One could argue that Bill Monroe created his best music some 50 years before he finally joined the Angel Band, but I'm glad he didn't rest on his laurels and he kept creating and making music right up until the end. Some of it was lousy, some of it was terrific. I saw him many times over the years, and there were times that his performances were pretty shaky, but the energy and passion and creative drive still shone brightly.

I have no opinion on Kanye West's music. The little I've heard from him hasn't done a thing for me and his public persona and childish rants have turned me off from wanting to hear any more. I have no idea why McCartney collaborated with the guy, but he has a long history of one-off collaborations with all kinds of artists. from Lulu to Johnny Cash to Stevie Wonder to Tony Bennett. This is just one more.

----------

rfloyd

----------


## mrmando

> You can't rest on your laurels forever. Paul McCartney's best work is inarguably 45 years behind him.


Wha, wha ... huh? It's been less than 8 years since he finally discovered the mandolin. 




> The same cannot be said of Louie Armstrong and Frank Sinatra when John was a teenager listening to the Beatles.


I'm no Sinatra expert, but Armstrong's schtick was getting pretty tired by the '60s. It had been a long time since the Hot 5.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> I think the whole thing is a hoax. Yea there may in fact be folks that ignorant but I think the tweet thing is made up, to tweek old guys.


Possible of course but even if so I saw a lot of *young guys and gals* who were taken in by it.....but personally I don't give that crowd that much credit. LOL!

----------


## tree

> I dont ask that his new work be as great as his old stuff. I just ask that it be honest, otherwise its no better than Kanye Wests music


Yikes!  It's a great deal more honest than a random Youtube video with no context other than an obviously misleading title . . .

----------


## MikeEdgerton

> Hoaxes?
> 
> Since we're discussing Sir Paul, let's go whole hog and bring up the hoax of the century...


That was the hoax of the last century, this apparently is the hoax of this century although I think the Sony Hack is still better than this one.

----------


## journeybear

> He sang and played bass, acoustic and electric guitars, ukulele, and keyboards at a level that most of us would envy--from solo acoustic numbers to full-tilt raves.


Wait - no mandolin?!?  :Disbelief:   :Confused:   :Crying: 




> i think this video, from 1:14 on, pretty much sums up how Paul McCartney puts together songs, and how, sort of vapid it all really is. I just think its all a little cheesey and contrived. It doesnt have any honesty in it. This is how all of his recent work seems to me, ALL of it. Its almost like hes doing a parody of himself, but sadly, hes not.
> 
> I dont ask that his new work be as great as his old stuff. I just ask that it be honest, otherwise its no better than Kanye Wests music


Actually, what he is discussing is stagecraft as much as writing itself, if not more so. He is looking for a way to elicit a specific reaction from the crowd for the closing song at this one event, and that involves aspects of a song beside the craft involved in writing. This is based on tried and true observations of crowd reactions, and most successful touring acts incorporate some of this into their stage show. You'd be foolish *not* to do this and simply rely on the crowd's affection for a song, and naive to think that this sort of manipulation isn't worked into these shows in one form or another. 

He's talking about arranging the song so people will react a certain way, and someone who has been performing for well more than a half century knows how to work a crowd, whether or not it sounds cynical when he talks about it out loud in front of an intruding camera. 

My band does the same thing on a smaller level, stuff like doing an a capella verse followed by an ensemble vocal verse to end a song, or a stop-time verse followed by an ensemble chorus to end a song. It's dramatic, dynamic arranging, and it works - every time. People make choices about their songwriting and arranging all the time with crowd reaction in mind, be they the richest performer in history or an obscure bar band. You want the crowd to leave with smiles on their faces (as Joni Mitchell said, "Leave them laughing when they go"), and this is a sure way to do it. That's show biz, and it ain't no big thing.

----------


## LongBlackVeil

> Wait - no mandolin?!?   
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, what he is discussing is stagecraft as much as writing itself, if not more so. He is looking for a way to elicit a specific reaction from the crowd for this one event, and that involves aspects of a song beside the craft involved in writing. This is based on tried and true observations of crowd reactions, and most successful touring acts incorporate some of this into their stage show. You'd be foolish not to do this and simply rely on the crowd's affection for a song, and naive to think that this sort of manipulation isn't worked into these shows in one form or another. He's talking bout arranging the song so people will react a certain way, and someone who has been performing for well more than a half century knows how to work a crowd, whether or not it sounds cynical.


Makes sense, maybe I'm just reacting to the undeniable ugly side of all popular performance art and not just Paul. Doesn't really change how I feel about it but maybe I'm being a little hard on Paul. I do know he's super talented, probably the most talented Beatle musically. Many people close to the beatles say the same thing.  I'm not one of those people who thinks Paul didn't do anything good after the beatles, but his recent stuff, I just can't get into. And I'm a young person in my 20s.

I just gave pauls new album a listen. Really it doesn't sound far off from a Kanye cd as far as the beats and the music. Just not my kind of thing, but really the collaboration makes more sense after listening to it.

----------


## journeybear

> I just gave pauls new album a listen. Really it doesn't sound far off from a Kanye cd as far as the beats and the music ... the collaboration makes more sense after listening to it.


Yikes! That's possibly the most awful thing that's been said here yet. Paul and Kanye - close stylistically to begin with?  :Confused:  The overriding premise here has been that the collaboration *doesn't* make sense - which makes sense. And now this?  :Disbelief:  The horror!  :Disbelief:  The horror!  :Crying: 

Oh well!  :Whistling:

----------


## LongBlackVeil

> Yikes! That's possibly the most awful thing that's been said here yet. Paul and Kanye - close stylistically to begin with?  The overriding premise here has been that the collaboration *doesn't* make sense - which makes sense. And now this?  The horror!  The horror! 
> 
> Oh well!


I'm sure your not too aware of Kanyes music. (Maybe I'm wrong) but Kanye and that type of music was a big part of the culture when I was in school (not that long ago obviously) and I heard plenty of it. listen to a song like "struggle" before Paul starts singing in it, I could easily imagine Kanye coming in instead. That was the first song on the album. It's verh stylistically similar to a Kanye beat. It has that space agey, industrial type feel to it.

----------


## Rick Nelson

50 years from now people will say Paul McCartney was playing in my space pod last night.  They will have NO idea who Kanye West was.

----------

Wink Dinkerson

----------


## Timbofood

What's the old saying...
"No such thing as bad publicity!"
And it's gotten three pages here
See what happens when too many mandolin folks get together? We talk about Paul McCartney and Kanye West. :Confused:

----------


## journeybear

I admit to being not very familiar with Kanye's music, nor rap or hip-hop in general. Doesn't do much for me, and as I am a melody-oriented guy, I doubt it ever will. I still tune in to some acts when they perform on talk shows, and sometimes get all the way through the spot, and even tape some of them - though more often than not, it's because of the show they put on, not the song, especially the dancers.  :Wink:  Sorry, that's about all that appeals to me in these performances. I don't care for people talking about subjects that don't interest me, and if you add to that volume, and anger, and attitude, and belligerent tone of voice, and repetition, and repetition, and repetition, you're just going to drive me away. I understand where rap came from, but it just seems to perpetuate stereotypes and hurtful times rather than point toward evolution and progress toward kinder times. The best thing I've heard in the genre has come in the past couple of year, with the inclusion of a singer providing a hook between verses. It's through B.O.B. that I was introduced to Bruno Mars, though I'm beginning to get the impression he's not living up to his promise.

I disagree with those who say it's not music, though. The three basic elements of music are rhythm, melody, and harmony; while rap has virtually no harmony, and precious little melody, it does have rhythm in abundance. It's music, all right, just not very good music. And most of it is sorely lacking in what I like about music - beauty, feeling, passion, kindness, warmth, cleverness, transcendence, exploration, innovation. Perhaps there is something of some of those in some raps, but I find so much of them off-putting that I don't want anything to do with it.

Beyond that, Kanye is guilty of one of the rudest, meanest, most selfish acts of boorish behavior I've ever seen - cutting off Taylor Swift in the middle of her acceptance speech at the 2009 VMAs, taking the mike right out of her hand and bellowing about how the award should have gone to Beyoncé, ruining her moment. She should have slapped him - he deserved no less. Whatever else he ever does, I doubt I'll ever forgive him for that.



Beyoncé herself was so aghast at this that when she won an award a little later, she gave up most of her moment so Taylor could enjoy the rest of hers. That's class.

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

All I knew about Kanye West is that he married a Kardasian, and if it wasn't in my face every day I wouldn't even have known that...

----------


## mrmando

Well, that might be punishment enough for his crimes against good taste.

----------

MikeEdgerton

----------


## Bertram Henze

> I understand where rap came from, but it just seems to perpetuate stereotypes and hurtful times rather than point toward evolution and progress toward kinder times.


That's exactly the reason I always gave for staying away from Blues. I guess these rappers wake up every morning.

----------


## journeybear

Well, OK, maybe the blues does rework several recurring themes, but at least it incorporates all three elements, and singing rather than speaking. Also, it allows for a lot of instrumental improvisation, even if the majority of songs have the same I-IV-V 12- or 16-bar structure. Indeed, given these few basics, it's remarkable how many variations have been produced.

The same can be said of bluegrass, and country, and even pop, though these tend to allow more freedom in chord structure, especially pop. There's something about the blues, though, that engenders empathy in the listener for whatever situation or feelings the singer is describing. Even if the listener isn't in the same emotional state, he can relate to the singer, as the music and lyrics resonate with him, touching him in some way, perhaps eliciting memories of having experienced similar situations and feelings. I don't get that from rap.

Songs in general work because they express what listeners cannot, but can relate to, and understand, and feel as though they would have said just that, if they only could. The expression "that's my song" results from this dynamic, when a song touches a listener in a meaningful way and creates an emotional resonance. That's the real magic of music - a mysterious combination of its elements that is greater than the sum of its parts.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> ...empathy in the listener for whatever situation the singer is decribing.


True, that's one big difference. A rapper always seems to accuse the listener of being responsible for his (the rappers) situation. I guess that's attractive only if the listener tends to accuse others, too, and recognises a like mind.

----------


## journeybear

I'm not sure rappers are accusing listeners, but their tone of voice is usually accusatory. That tends to make me want to avoid them. I don't like being yelled at or shouted at, and I'm not likely to want to put myself in the line of fire of verbal abuse. Even rap that isn't like that still incorporates that tone of voice, or others that aren't endearing to me, either. For instance, I enjoy some of what Iggy Azalea does, but that snotty, snooty tone she uses is really annoying. Really catchy hooks though. I'll grant that her music is more pop than a lot of rap, but that's her field.

----------


## JEStanek

Rap is most often associated with a masculine aggressive style.  Hip Hop can be quite different and playful (think Fresh Prince or Heavy D).  Rap can cover everything from political statements to misogyny to drug culture to everyday stuff.  The nuances between rap and hip hop are like the ones between Old Time and Bluegrass.  

I think it's pretty safe to say Sir Paul is pretty savvy in the music biz to still be important this long in his career.  One thing I'll say for him is he's not afraid to do new things.

Jamie

----------


## DavidKOS

> I disagree with those who say it's not music, though. The three basic elements of music are rhythm, melody, and harmony; while rap has virtually no harmony, and precious little melody, it does have rhythm in abundance. *It's music, all right, just not very good music.* And most of it is sorely lacking in what I like about music - beauty, feeling, passion, kindness, warmth, cleverness, transcendence, exploration, innovation.


Well said, and I agree!

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

> That's exactly the reason I always gave for staying away from Blues. I guess these rappers wake up every morning.


More's the pity...

----------

Mike Anderson

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

I was talking with my son this morning and told him I was listening tp Rap music going to work yesterday.  "But you don't like rap, he said.  "That's right", I replied... it was three lanes over...

----------

Bernie Daniel, 

Bertram Henze, 

LongBlackVeil, 

Mike Anderson

----------


## Tobin

> I disagree with those who say it's not music, though. The three basic elements of music are rhythm, melody, and harmony; while rap has virtually no harmony, and precious little melody, it does have rhythm in abundance. It's music, all right, just not very good music.


I don't get this line of thinking.

It's like saying a bacon and tomato sandwich has three ingredients: bacon, tomato, and bread.  If you're eating a piece of bacon with no bread and no tomato, you can't very well say it's a bacon and tomato sandwich, _just not a very good one_.  One ingredient does not make a dish, if that dish requires three ingredients.

And likewise, if music is defined as having a combination of particular basic elements, then it must have all those basic elements to qualify as music.  Rhythm alone can't be music unless music is defined as only requiring rhythm with no other necessary elements in the mix.  Lyrics alone do not qualify as music either, and in fact music does not require lyrics to be music.  Lyrics can _become_ music alone, though, right?  It forces us to ask: what is the core combination of elements required to make music?

Personally, I don't see how it can possibly be music without a series of notes/pitches involved somehow, which are distinctly different from the spoken voice.  If simply speaking words isn't music by any definition, but singing can be music, what are the added ingredients that makes it become music?  I would think pitch/notes and rhythm have to be involved.

----------

Mike Anderson, 

Ryk Loske

----------


## JeffD

I am a contrarian. And one of the things I kick at is anything cool or trendy. And right now hating Rap is way too cool and trendy for me. The real transgressive stance (if you are into such things) is probably to like Rap.

On its own merits I have no opinion, pleading ignorance.

----------


## JeffD

> Beyond that, Kanye is guilty of one of the rudest, meanest, most selfish acts of boorish behavior I've ever seen - cutting off Taylor Swift in the middle of her acceptance speech at the 2009 VMAs, taking the mike right out of her hand and bellowing about how the award should have gone to Beyoncé, ruining her moment. She should have slapped him - he deserved no less. Whatever else he ever does, I doubt I'll ever forgive him for that.


I remember that. And it did happen. (As opposed to kids not knowing who Paul McCartney is, which didn't happen.)

It shows the triumph and value of bad publicity - if anyone deserves obscurity for an action, it is Kanye.

----------


## RichM

> It's 1986-87, at my work-study job in the A/V Lab--two students come to check out a viewing room; TV in the background was running a tape of "Our American Century" or some such. The Beatles' appearance on the Ed Sullivan show was on and inspired the following exchange:
> 
> Clueless student #1: Who'se that on the TV?
> 
> Slightly less clueless student #2: Oh, that's Paul McCartney.
> 
> Clueless student #1: Really? Who is the band he's playing with?
> 
> Slightly less clueless student #2: That's the band he was in before Wings.


I was just reading an interview with Dave Grohl. The interviewer asked him about his new album, and he said something to the effect of, "I'm playing drums a lot on this album. I actually used to be the drummer in another band before Foo Fighters."

Yes. Yes, he was. The funny thing is, it seemed he was talking completely without irony, like we might not know who that band was.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> I was talking with my son this morning and told him I was listening tp Rap music going to work yesterday.  "But you don't like rap, he said.  "That's right", I replied... it was three lanes over...


And sounds just a bad from that distance I would guess!

----------


## RichM

> Perhaps a poor choice of words. What I meant was better expressed by LongBlackVeil above: "He hasnt done anything even remotely great in a long long time. Grammys and filling up gigs dont mean much. If he wasnt a former Beatle, and it was based solely on his current output, neither of those would be happening for him"


So you're saying a musician should stop making music because you no longer enjoy it?

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> ...it's like saying a bacon and tomato sandwich has three ingredients: bacon, tomato, and bread.  If you're eating a piece of bacon with no bread and no tomato, you can't very well say it's a bacon and tomato sandwich, _just not a very good one_.....



I must agree with you sir!   But you forgot the lettuce and mayonnaise!   :Smile:

----------


## jaycat

> So you're saying a musician should stop making music because you no longer enjoy it?


I really thought I was done with this thread but I guess I should respond. I think if you will re-read my posts you will find that I never suggested that McCartney stop making music.

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> So you're saying a musician should stop making music because you no longer enjoy it?


Well maybe only from his perspective?  But yes.

And I see no reason why anyone should make music that I don't like -- but others might see it differently and that's OK!  :Smile:

----------


## Bernie Daniel

> I am a contrarian. And one of the things I kick at is anything cool or trendy. And right now hating Rap is way too cool and trendy for me. The real transgressive stance (if you are into such things) is probably to like Rap.
> 
> On its own merits I have no opinion, pleading ignorance.


This kind of makes you a politically correct contrarian -- interesting.  :Smile:

----------


## RichM

> Well maybe only from his perspective?  But yes.
> 
> And I see no reason why anyone should make music that I don't like -- but others might see it differently and that's OK!


Yeah, I guess I never really understood the perspective of "I would respect him more if he stopped before I stopped liking him." A musician makes music. Why should he ever stop. If you don't like the music he's making, stop listening to him. Easy.

I suspect (not for Bernie, but for others) it roughly translates to "I would respect him more if he stopped before:"

- his popularity made my liking him less cool
- his perceived old-fogeyism made me seem more like an old fogey
- his obvious aging made me more aware of my own mortality

----------


## Tobin

> I must agree with you sir!   But you forgot the lettuce and mayonnaise!


I'm glad you said that, as it helps illustrate my point.  I like mayonnaise on my bacon and tomato sandwiches, but I can take or leave the lettuce (that takes it into BLT-ville).  And that's OK.  Like music, it's still a bacon and tomato sandwich whether it has lettuce and mayo or not!  I also like some coarse ground black pepper on it.  These extra ingredients may make for different variations of the sandwich, just like other ingredients make for different types of music (and we will all have different tastes in each of them).  But the core ingredients have to be there for it to be defined as a bacon and tomato sandwich.  Or music.  Extra ingredients are fine, but a dearth of core ingredients becomes a sandwich fail.

----------


## Mike Anderson

I absolutely loathe cool and trendy, but I also hate rap like poison. As usual, pigeonholing me is impossible.  :Wink:

----------


## JeffD

> This kind of makes you a politically correct contrarian -- interesting.


I know, right? 

Its a fine line. I know posers on both sides, those that profess to hate it cuz its cool to hate it and those that profess to love it because its shows so much PC and not being a hater, or because it gives some kind of urban street cred.

What do I think when I hear it? I don't have anything like an informed opinion.

----------


## Eddie Sheehy

I really liked the sessions he did with Diana Krall and her band...

----------


## Jeff Mando

I can't really hate on Sir Paul.  He was a Beatle, for Pete's sake! (Pete Best, that is!) Anyway, I don't think he is trying to stay current or prove anything and he certainly doesn't need the money, so?  Probably, just likes to get out of the house now and then.

Bing Crosby did a duet with David Bowie in the 70's.  No, it didn't change the world, but it was nice that they did it.

----------


## FLATROCK HILL

> Bing Crosby did a duet with David Bowie in the 70's.  No, it didn't change the world, but it was nice that they did it.


There ya go. Maybe Kanye's next duet should be the Drummer Boy song. "Come dey done tole me... parumpa you know pum".

----------


## Gary Leonard

Paul McCartney (18 June 1942 - 6 February 2012), was an English songwriter, composer and instrumentalist. There is some debate on the songwriter credential in certain circles.  He died the same day as Kisses on the Bottom was released. 

Thankfully, Paul was revived from the dead on 14 October 2013 with his newest release, aptly named New. He is a founding member of the boy band "The Beatles", and band which provided numerous samples for other less talented musicians and rap artists.

----------


## journeybear

> I disagree with those who say it's not music, though. The three basic elements of music are rhythm, melody, and harmony; while rap has virtually no harmony, and precious little melody, it does have rhythm in abundance. It's music, all right, just not very good music.





> I don't get this line of thinking.


It's quite clear that you don't.  :Smile:  First of all, it's not a line of thinking, it's a definition.  :Wink:  But what you missed is that while these are the three elements of music, not all music incorporates all of them. You don't need all of them to produce music, though most music does include all three. They are listed this way because that is the order in which they appear in musical pieces, in order of complexity. For instance, someone playing a drum produces rhythm only. A solo violin produces melody as well as rhythm. A mandolin playing double stops produces rhythm, melody, and harmony.

A single blast on a car horn is a noise, often a harsh one. Hit the horn twice - beep beep! - and you have produced music, through the use of rhythm, and it's a good bit less harsh. That's why I nearly always do this; it's much more pleasant while still sending a message. A case could be made that a single honk is still music - a single note of melody - and I suppose it is, technically. It's just not very pleasant music.  :Wink: 

Going back to the drum - banging one drum repeatedly produces rhythm, banging two or more differently tuned drums successively produces melody, banging two or more differently tuned drums simultaneously produces harmony. You see how each instance is more complex than the previous one.

Perhaps instead of saying "It's music, all right, just not very good music," I should have said, "It's music, all right, just not very complex music."

----------


## M.Marmot

> - his popularity made my liking him less cool
> - his perceived old-fogeyism made me seem more like an old fogey
> - his obvious aging made me more aware of my own mortality


I kinda feel the same about the Cafe when i trawl through threads such as this ...

- their popularity makes my liking the Cafe less cool
- their perceived old-fogeyism made me seem more like an old fogey
- their obvious aging made me more aware of my own mortality

and a happy new year to all.

----------


## Bertram Henze

> A single blast on a car horn is a noise, often a harsh one. Hit the horn twice - beep beep! - and you have produced music, through the use of rhythm, and it's a good bit less harsh. That's why I nearly always do this; it's much more pleasant while still sending a message.


Gershwin in _American in Paris_ - everybody can be an orchestra  :Smile:

----------


## JEStanek

I know this is likely just adding fuel to the fire but, it's funny.



He has, to date, not made a Bluegrass tune.  They are either too complex or the market too small.

Jamie

----------

Jeff Mando, 

journeybear

----------


## journeybear

It's funny, all right - the finished product - but it's also sad - the process, the simplicity of it. This really illustrates how little goes into the music, and why it is so successful. It is so easy and cheap to make -especially compared to music produced by bands, with real people and real instruments, and thus real expenses - and it feeds on familiarity. It's no wonder the market is flooded with these songs. The only difficulty is making something stand out from all the other songs that sound so much the same. That's why so many practitioners work so hard on the non-musical aspects - fashion, dance moves, dancers, stage set-up - and showmanship often becomes more important than the music itself, which is so easily digestible it has no staying power. That doesn't seem to matter, as just like a city bus, another one will be coming right along.

----------


## DavidKOS

> That was the hoax of the last century, this apparently is the hoax of this century although I think the Sony Hack is still better than this one.


Yes, that's right, the hoax of last century....

----------


## Jeff Mando

5 year writing a rap song illustrates many good points about the differences between having fun, being silly, being creative, being artistic, whether it is art, craft, or horsing around!  The grown-up version is identical, just really a matter of intent--if you put on your beret, your sunglasses, and sneer--you MAY be an artist! ....(dunno, do people still wear berets?)

----------


## M.Marmot

> .  They are either too complex or the market too small.
> 
> Jamie


Lets see ... establish a standard beat,  play a simple chord progression, delegate the rest of the composition between strings and bass, and then tell us all about your problems?

Market must be too small.

----------


## Mike Anderson

> A single blast on a car horn is a noise, often a harsh one. Hit the horn twice - beep beep! - and you have produced music


Hmm, I beg your leave to disagree - in the strongest possible terms. What the horn-beeper has done is produce a harsh noise twice. 

It's occurred to me that rap is the logical endpoint of a music-industry culture that has been all about a progressive democratization for the last half-century, to the point that non-musicians and people with no discernible musical ability are encouraged to enter the industry and make noises that, although superficially resembling music, are not music at all. If a tone-deaf person, or a person with no sense of rhythm, or a person who cannot sing on key even if a loaded gun were held to their head and their life threatened makes a recording of noises, that does not make those noises music - witness the many rejectees on American Idol. The fact that many of those encouraged to do this actually become fabulously popular, sell millions of records, and get richer than God does not make it music, either.

Am I saying that democratization of music is bad? That people with no ability should never pursue music? No - but the democratization of the music _industry_ is bad, and that's why most popular music is bad enough to make a vulture retch. Some might say "But I'm a musician, and I love lots of this stuff!" Well then, they might have to consider the possibility that they're a _lousy_ musician with cloth ears and bad pitch, which hardly makes them unique among people calling themselves musicians in the last half-century.

Some might also say "Oh, you're one of those chops snobs, thinks jazz fusion rules!" Nope - I couldn't give a damn about chops except insofar as they do a good job of supporting the music being made, and I hate fusion because it's utterly soulless, the democratization of the once-great art known as jazz. It's really pretty simple: *music that is made for the primary purpose of making money is garbage*. Note please that I didn't say "music that is made professionally, as a career" - again, it's "for the primary purpose." Sorry: I hate it when I have to rewrite, but I can see the out-of-context criticisms coming long before they're committed to type.

There's nothing "cool" about hating rap, either, I think that's a totally spurious argument and am left scratching my head over the whole notion. People hate rap because of exactly the criticisms leveled here: it requires no musical ability to make it, it is formulaic and dull, it is (mostly) ugly and aggressive and much of it extols a barbaric, parasitic, blood-drunk lifestyle and lest we forget, can therefore take the blame for a lot of terrible behavior on the part of the stupid, hormonally driven young males who patronize it and emulate its practitioners. 

YMMV, but I could care less. I could hardly spend 4 decades listening and playing and thinking and obsessing music without coming to some kind of conclusions about how vitally important it is to the human spirit, and above all that life is too short to waste it listening to crap.

----------


## journeybear

> Hmm, I beg your leave to disagree - in the strongest possible terms. What the horn-beeper has done is produce a harsh noise twice.


It's still music, by definition. Very rudimentary, of course, but still music.

----------


## Scott Tichenor

This coffin has a few too many nails in it. Time to move on.

----------

