stkman
(Texas) | | Posted: Feb 15, 2009 - 22:57 | |
Yes people lose some of their voices as they get older and studios are much kinder but still this song is Amazing
|
|
nagsheadlocal
(North Carolina, the new New Jersey) | | Posted: Jan 15, 2009 - 05:49 | |
gjeeg wrote:How has this dreadful live version come to define the song over the sweet and perfect original?
I adore Macca, but it is painful to hear him drag himself through this, unable to hit the high notes, amending the melody due to fatigue, delaying the start of lines and finishes for the same reason.
How does this happen?
Sad to hear RP push this corpoarte version I've heard countless times rammed down my throat on car radio culture.
I see what you are saying - I loved the original version, it was one of my favorite songs in college and I can remember sitting in a rehearsal room, playing it and wondering how he managed those notes and that phrasing. But, I like the live version as well. Being a little older (well, a LOT older now) I can understand how his voice has aged and what strikes me is the obvious passion. |
|
rachlan
(nyc) | | Posted: Oct 12, 2008 - 11:33 | |
Zep wrote:Q. When did Paul McCartney write Silly Love Songs? A. 1960-present.
hehehehe, really like that joke. |
|
spiritual76
| | Posted: Oct 12, 2008 - 11:32 | |
|
n4ku
| | Posted: Sep 10, 2008 - 21:03 | |
Zep wrote:Q. When did Paul McCartney write Silly Love Songs? A. 1960-present.
 |
|
apd
(Toronto, On) | | Posted: Aug 10, 2008 - 06:26 | |
gjeeg wrote:
How has this dreadful live version come to define the song over the sweet and perfect original?
I adore Macca, but it is painful to hear him drag himself through this, unable to hit the high notes, amending the melody due to fatigue, delaying the start of lines and finishes for the same reason.
How does this happen?
Sad to hear RP push this corpoarte version I've heard countless times rammed down my throat on car radio culture.
Couldn't disagree more! I see what you're saying, but it's loose, immediate and has some passion. And I like Macca's voice when it's a bit grainy. |
|
gjeeg
(Syracuse, New York) | | Posted: Aug 10, 2008 - 06:17 | |
How has this dreadful live version come to define the song over the sweet and perfect original?
I adore Macca, but it is painful to hear him drag himself through this, unable to hit the high notes, amending the melody due to fatigue, delaying the start of lines and finishes for the same reason.
How does this happen?
Sad to hear RP push this corpoarte version I've heard countless times rammed down my throat on car radio culture.
|
|
Johray63
(The Lowlands) | | Posted: Jul 09, 2008 - 15:46 | |
drews wrote:and what a GREAT band behind him; who's the dude on guitar? keys sound good too, so probably not Linda...
The guitar-player is the late, great Jimmy McCulloch. |
|
rickhoran
(Eastern PA) | | Posted: Jul 09, 2008 - 15:45 | |
wingspan is a good movie. i liked it and it got me interested in OLD mcCartney again.
|
|
buddyweiser
(San Sombrèro) | | Posted: Jul 09, 2008 - 15:42 | |
monquebec2008.sympatico.msn.ca, not to be miss, Sir Paul will be there july 22 2008 for a free concert.
|
|
colleen
(Toronto, Canada) | | Posted: May 07, 2008 - 17:11 | |
dctrpunda wrote:
I think he is trying to enter a bit of newness to an old dog. I mean, a song like this, how many times has this been thrown at your ear, each note explored with headphones, perfect moments attained while on the road with that special someone, heard in the background at KMart or in an elevator, etc.
He's mixing it up giving the ear something new to chew on. I think that's all there is to his preference for live versions.
And for the same song by different artists, too. Which i love and is food for my ears  |
|
drews
(London, Blighty) | | Posted: May 07, 2008 - 17:08 | |
and what a GREAT band behind him; who's the dude on guitar? keys sound good too, so probably not Linda...
|
|
dctrpunda
(the thin line of here) | | Posted: May 07, 2008 - 17:07 | |
RobRyan wrote:It's amazing how often my little rule of thumb works:
If there's a live version and a studio version of a song, Bill prefers the opposite of my preference. There must be at least 10 such examples, this is one of them.
I think he is trying to enter a bit of newness to an old dog. I mean, a song like this, how many times has this been thrown at your ear, each note explored with headphones, perfect moments attained while on the road with that special someone, heard in the background at KMart or in an elevator, etc.
He's mixing it up giving the ear something new to chew on. I think that's all there is to his preference for live versions. |
|
bizon
(Vancouver) | | Posted: May 07, 2008 - 17:05 | |
 Flapjack |
|
colleen
(Toronto, Canada) | | Posted: May 07, 2008 - 17:04 | |
Hands down: a 10. 
I usually wince that a 10 means "godlike" but this song is pretty close for me. |
|
Zep
(Opening Day) | | Posted: Apr 03, 2008 - 09:57 | |
Q. When did Paul McCartney write Silly Love Songs?
A. 1960-present.
|
|
rachlan
(nyc) | | Posted: Mar 05, 2008 - 16:39 | |
Johray63 wrote:It (still) seems to be hip to bash Paul McCartney, but when you ask the people, who do, to mention a Beatles song, probably 9 out of 10 times it's one that was actually written by McCartney and not (or only for a little part) by Lennon.
It was one of Lennon's biggest frustrations that the most popular Beatles songs had his name linked to them, while they were often written by McCartney alone.
Lady Madonna, Blackbird, Hey Jude, Let It Be, Penny Lane, Michelle, Got to Get You into My Life, Good Day, Sunshine and of course Yesterday, to name some. .
Strawberry Fields Forever, In My life, Julia, Norwegian Wood, I'm only Sleeping, Revolution, Dear Prudence, Day Tripper (all by JL) |
|
davin
(Victoria, British Columbia) | | Posted: Mar 05, 2008 - 16:31 | |
Compare this to his newer stuff you'll find in Starbucks. Pretty laughable.
|
|
RobRyan
(Canyon Country, CA) | | Posted: Mar 05, 2008 - 16:30 | |
It's amazing how often my little rule of thumb works:
If there's a live version and a studio version of a song, Bill prefers the opposite of my preference. There must be at least 10 such examples, this is one of them.
|
|
CCinSB
(the west coast) | | Posted: Mar 05, 2008 - 16:29 | |
This is as good as it gets!
|
|
bokey
(I'm up on the tightwire one sides ice and one is fire) | | Posted: Feb 03, 2008 - 06:35 | |
Banaszak wrote:
What are door.rats and why do you need to run them out? Are you a bouncer?
I think I need more sleep.
Those are the Doors Of Perception Rats.They are little imaginary rodents that take up residence in your head and bite you in the ass when you aren't on the right track. I hate 'em! |
|
Johray63
(The Lowlands) | | Posted: Dec 02, 2007 - 10:34 | |
It (still) seems to be hip to bash Paul McCartney, but when you ask the people, who do, to mention a Beatles song, probably 9 out of 10 times it's one that was actually written by McCartney and not (or only for a little part) by Lennon.
It was one of Lennon's biggest frustrations that the most popular Beatles songs had his name linked to them, while they were often written by McCartney alone.
Lady Madonna, Blackbird, Hey Jude, Let It Be, Penny Lane, Michelle, Got to Get You into My Life, Good Day, Sunshine and of course Yesterday, to name some. .
|
|
madaxeman
(Scottish west coast) | | Posted: Dec 02, 2007 - 10:17 | |
Stunning performance. Should be an 11.
|
|
rachlan
(nyc) | | Posted: Sep 30, 2007 - 15:06 | |
dmax wrote:You know, this is just extraordinary. You can wrap it in the McCartney schmaltz criticism all you want and it's still a great song.
Except for the time he was in jail for marijuana, he spent every night with his wife - who was an upstanding person in her own right.
This guy was a Beatle, for goodness' sake. And the Cute One! He could've - literally - had almost any woman in the world.
Instead, he married - stayed married until she died - and wrote tunes like this.
No one can really top that, can they?
True, true, it is wonderful, but then you realize how co-dependent he is when he soon after met an married Heather... what a mess. its like he couldn't be alone for a moment. |
|
jimoore
| | Posted: Sep 30, 2007 - 14:53 | |
Relayer wrote:Funny; for years I thought this song was "BABY I'm Amazed"!
Hey me too. Killer version.  |
|
(former member)
(Shadow Valley Condos) | | Posted: Sep 30, 2007 - 14:50 | |
You know, this is just extraordinary. You can wrap it in the McCartney schmaltz criticism all you want and it's still a great song.
Except for the time he was in jail for marijuana, he spent every night with his wife - who was an upstanding person in her own right.
This guy was a Beatle, for goodness' sake. And the Cute One! He could've - literally - had almost any woman in the world.
Instead, he married - stayed married until she died - and wrote tunes like this.
No one can really top that, can they?
|
|
rachlan
(nyc) | | Posted: Sep 30, 2007 - 14:49 | |
Relayer wrote:Funny; for years I thought this song was "BABY I'm Amazed"!
I think he says baby as much or more than maybe.... |
|
Relayer
(Gainesville, FL) | | Posted: Sep 30, 2007 - 14:46 | |
Funny; for years I thought this song was "BABY I'm Amazed"!
|
|
agnes
(the land of bourbon and horses) | | Posted: Aug 30, 2007 - 04:29 | |
Chills. |
|
Ja300Mes
(North Fork, Long Island) | | Posted: Jul 29, 2007 - 18:00 | |
It's a great song. But if I want to hear it, I'll just turn on WBAB-FM, which plays it every day...this is not what I come to RP for.
|
|
Share this song
Tweet this song
