Is McCartney III Relevant? |
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 вер 2024
- Paul McCartney's McCartney III has hit the top of several album charts with the help of a robust marketing campaign. Does this marketing style so prevalent in the industry affect the music's relevance?
SUPPORT Pop Goes the 60s on PATREON: rb.gy/nhcy3
I just want to comment on the general tone of this thread. Most of the comments here (contradictory opinions aside) are well considered, thoughtfully written and respectful. That’s very refreshing to see. That said, I didn’t make it to the very bottom. 😊
I am very happy to see that many people can respectfully disagree and articulate it without malice. It's astonishing at how many get offended at the criticism of a market campaign! Criticizing a Beatle spells a death of sorts for youtubers which is why many now stay away from voicing opinions like this. I'm pleased that you noticed the overall tone! Thanks for taking the time to let viewers of this channel aware of it.
Pop Goes the 60s Perhaps it comes down to the difference between creating an intelligent argument and ill informed, petty criticism. There are very few figures as beloved as Macca, so it takes some cajones to fly in the face of the majority. You set the tone here by making your point specific, clear and without malice. It’s good to see that the great bulk of your contributors are capable of the same. It could be because you open the floor to discussion, that people actually do “discuss”. You have created a monster with courtesy and a good attitude sir. Thanks for that. 🙏
@@mchaggis622 Thank you, sir! Entering the Beatle space on UA-cam is certainly not easy if you actually want to give honest opinion. I am heartened by the grace of some of the commenters here who disagree with respect and often teach me something in the process. Much appreciated!
Pop Goes the 60s Agreed. My pleasure.
Yeah yeah yeah.
We ain't a bad bunch, the old Macca appreciation sobriety
Look, I agree overall. But I don’t care about how many copies Macca sells. I’m just happy to see him continuing to make good music and be happy. I have one copy of each of the last two albums, and I think any true fan should be happy with one copy and a few bonus tracks. There’s no point in buying a record or CD if you aren’t going to use it.
I completely agree with your take. I'm happy with one copy, but I'm sure a lot of other collector fans bought all of them. I just didn't think Macca's ego was so big that it was that important to make #1 on the charts using any means possible.
I agree. I'm gonna get mine sometime. I heard a few tracks and I'm glad he's still making music. I enjoy taking out my acoustic and strumming along to tracks like Deep Down and such.
It’s not good music it’s terrible. Just because Macca has his name on it doesn’t mean it’s good.
@@ijeff2005 so you don't know him at all.
@@MICKEYDELFINO Who said that? Lol.
Man, I don't care for marketing plans and chart positions... All I know is that I've been enjoying this album one hell of a lot and I thank Paul for keeping up the good work.
I'm a McCartney fan. It didn't matter to me where it placed on the charts. I also like the album. And I only bought one cd and no vinyl.
@Bijan Mehrpour Paul McCartney Passes Gas. I'd buy that album just for the name and god knows what the cover would look like!
It’s a brilliant album. That’s the bottom line. I can sit and listen to the whole thing repeatedly. It has immediate appeal but also grows on you. It will stand the test of time. Many noted reviewers agree as do music lovers in general. He wrote, performed, and produced it. It sounds contemporary, varied but not at all compromised. I couldn’t disagree more with this-I thought-shallow review. He’s older and doing a lot of different things with his voice naturally. The auto-tuning is very sparse but creative and it works. Very impressed.
Thank you for the honest review. Many really like it and perhaps tying the marketing to "relevance" was a bit of a stretch. I appreciate you taking the time to rate the album.
Agree ! Just like those Wings and Beatles albums - you can listen to the whole thing over and over and not get tired.
Like a lot of his solo albums, half of the music is pretty damn good and half is filler. If it was the Beatles, the other half would be Lennon songs and one or two Harrison songs. THATS why they were the Beatles, folks. Having said that, Macca shows why he was the engine of the Beatles, he continues to create and produce, and at his age and status, he is a MARVEL, no doubt.
McCartney wasn't 'the' engine of the Beatles. He was part of that high-performance, fine-running engine...calling him 'the' engine is to displace the vital role of Lennon, to say nothing of Harrison and Starr.
The other Beatles were great and would've been stars in their own right but "Paul the Great" would have been just as great without them. George was the ultimate professional and "team player".- so was Ringo - an excellent, unselfish, "team player". John at times was great but - mostly in interviews - he disparaged the ability of the others. Paraphrasing John - (About McCartney) "His songs are nursery rhymes." - (about George) I like my [guitar] playing better." - (about Ringo) "He isn't even the best drummer in the group." Lennon was an ASS.
I agree he was "the engine" and his solo career bares that out. McCartney DID NOT need John Lennon and after "Yesterday" - the true leader of the Beatles WAS -------- McCartney.
@@91dodgespiritrt John also described Paul as "extraordinary," and "one of the most innovative bass players ever" which Paul is. In the interest of fairness, perhaps we should balance quotations or paraphrases from any of them about the others; all four of them voiced differing opinions of the others over the years. I'm really skeptical that Paul or any of them would have gone on to the popular and critical acclaim they achieved together. Remember, John had a bit of a struggle to get Paul outside Jim McCartney's influence, and I think without John and Paul meeting, Paul would have settled into a career of some kind and have been a popular local musician, along with many many others of whom we'll never know anything. Look at the condition of the recording industry in Britain at the time, and how so very close The Beatles came to not getting a recording contract and then simply giving up on the band and going off to individual lives. The idea that someone like Paul, who didn't have a dominant, forceful, f-you personaity, would have overcome the guitar-groups-are out inertia of the recording industry at the time is, I think, so unlikely as to have been impossible. John, as he suggested in Miles, would have gone down to London and been a poet, and he, too, would have been a popular local performer; recall that John was performing in public well before Paul.
John and George couldn't continue to create since they, well, died. Nothing to take away from Paul - always a pleasure listening to what he has to say
Rumor has it that "McCartney IV" will have 4,444 variations.
Yeah, Fuh You was right up there with Eleanor Rigby
@@TheCheermeister "Fuh You" was right there with "Love Me Do" for sure, or other silly stuff like "Thank You Girl" or "Another Girl".
"Eleanor Rigby" is more comparable to "The Kiss Of Venus" off the new album. Or "Dominoes" from Egypt Station.
There's always been these two opposites (the sublime and the ridiculous) in his music (Beatles included).
@@TheCheermeister This made me laugh so hard lol and I like Fuh you
We will see in 2030
@@watchingthewheels9314 That is a good point. It's mediocre at best and I doubt people will be that enamored with it in 5 years time.
I always ask myself: If it weren't Paul McCartney, would it still be that highly regarded? if I think about whether something is beyond good.
In this case, my answer is a resounding NO!
I took my daughter to see Paul McCartney 7 times, last time we saw him in Philly and asked my daughter why do you want to see him so much? She said his music makes me happy, new music isn't that good! She's 27 years old.
That's relevant isn't it?
I would agree. Thanks for sharing.
You can't really expect someone who's almost 80 to be cutting edge.If anything he shouldn't lower his standards to fit into a music world dominated by the likes of Cardi B.
Gotta agree with you here. The "relevant" music of now may be a joke even next year! McCartney is always relevant. An artisan. A legend. And will people be talking Cardi B or whomever is out now in 60 years? NOPE.
@@allenf.5907 exactly!
I’m young at 18 and loved this album. Songs like deep deep feeling, deep down and pretty boys were great.
Man, that was heavy. You earned my subscription for being honest. We don't get much of this on YT these days.
I agree totally! I dig this channel for its unabashed honesty.
I'm a McCartney/Beatles fan, but I agree with every word of this piece. He's got lots of money and lots of time, he likes to make records, so that's what he does. Who knows, he might not even care too-too much if anyone likes them, but that's how he likes to pass his time. I'd do the same if I could. But I think it's a good long time since his music had any relevance.
This album is relevant to me.
All I care about is the music. It’s a damned fine album.
I appreciate the quick review, Tim. Thanks for commenting.
Paul McCartney & The Beatles will ALWAYS be relevant...
Damn f'king right my friend
The Beatles, yes. A McCartney album released in 2021? Not really. I’m a huge Beatles fan and didn’t even know he released one
Relevant to whom? Like all music ever made, it is relevant to some but not to others.
Taylor Swift is utterly irrelevant to me. I think that she's trying to buy credibility by being seen with a real songwriter like Paul.
The fact that he's still active and doing more than coasting on his incredible past is something to celebrate. Whether or not these past two albums capture him at his best, I would still take them over anything else being recorded nowadays.
Couldn't agree more, Eric.
Yeah. "Relevant" is vague and sounds like something by which a "hipster" might gauge albums
Taylor Swift is fantastic!! What are you on about!!
Danny
@@TheWalrusWasDanny : Taylor Swift fantastic ? You know nothing about music !!!
@@jeanmenard3060 There is nothing to know about music. Listen to what you like; music is, like all art, subjective.
McIII is a gift to me. I’m still listening today
I’m happy the 2 remaining Beatles are still here and making music. Paul may not have the smooth vocals anymore but so what. I love him.
To me, this is his best album since "Chaos & Creation In The Backyard".
My takeaway? McCartney III is more relevant than people talking about McCartney III.
Burn :D but true. He maybe dead in a few years time and I wonder if people will be proud of shitting on the releases he gave us in his last years, when lets face it he really doesnt need to...
Let's put it this way : Take the same music/record and release it under the name of an unknown artist. Do you think it would sell?
Definitely. There would be a huge amount of excitement over a new album such as this by a newcomer. He would be hailed as the next Paul McCartney. Duh!
@@musicfun2606 I Saw Her Standing There, Can't buy Me Love, Michelle, For No One, Blackbird, Let It Be, Maybe I'm Amazed, Band On The Run, some of the best songs ever written, IMO. Created over 50 years ago and you can still hear them playing on the radio and they'll still be playing them 50 years from now. As for Mc3, fast forward 20 years from now. It will just be in the heap of musical oblivion and nada/niente/null/rien/nothing from this album is going to be played on the radio. Just a few diehard fans will bother listening. Not horrible music, but just average, nothing more.
I would say no, but not because I think the songs are bad, or even mediocre. I like the album, but release anything at all without having an established fanbase, and it's almost guaranteed not to sell. Even if its a masterpiece, if you don't have people ready to listen, it's almost definitely not going anywhere. Getting a chart topper as an unknown act is extremely unlikely, no matter how good you are.
I made this comment earlier in the thread about Fuh You but it is relevant to the entire album:
"I always ask myself: If it weren't Paul McCartney, would it still be that highly regarded? if I think about whether something is beyond good.
In this case, my answer is a resounding NO!"
I don't think it would sell that many copies, but I think it would sell some as it is not terrible. I think in general it is a good album.
@@2bobaf I like Paul very, very much, but in this album I don't hear any great, creative guitar, piano or bass. Not one standout song, neither. I just don't see any point going back and listening to this, when I can listen to great Beatles material instead.
Rolling Stone magazine is a fossil. Only thing it had going for it was a collection of top tier writers, recently they started a program where anyone can write for the mag if you pay them money, moving them into some form of Vanity Press.
I never subscribed to RS, but used to regularly browse through it at the magazine stand in bookstores (especially in the pre-internet days, I'd look at the news section about forthcoming releases). Once in a while I'd buy a copy if it had a cover story about someone such as Paul. I abandoned it in the early 90s when I noticed they had to resort to phone sex ads and the like.
You're a brave man , Matt. Shortly after the album was released I posted a 34 second video featuring a photo-shopped image of an igloo appearing to be made up of the McCartney III Bundles that were issued. That's all I said about it on my channel. It was a satirical look at the marketing strategy. Most of my commenters "got it" and saw the humor in it. One popular UA-camr took offense and accused me of saying people were wasting their money by getting sucked into the marketing strategy, which was the farthest thing from my mind. He then degenerated into a passive aggressive attack on the type of videos I'm known for and the things I collect. You are bang-on in your assessment of this. I've played the album twice since it came out and don't feel all that compelled to play too much more in future. McCartney III was all about getting a product, any product, out there to capture the #1 spot for the second consecutive album. If marketing and hype equate to relevance then McCartney III is a more important album than Abbey Road.
Well stated. I’m a huge fan of McCartney 1 and 2 and was excited to hear 3. Not having an excess of expendable income I only purchased the CD. Needless to say I’m glad I didn’t get sucked into purchasing one of the many deluxe versions on vinyl.
Hey Paul! Yes, I certainly stepped into a hostile circus ring. Of course I am being taken to the woodshed because I dared to step out of line with the mighty McCartney an his foot soldiers. It does surprise me how even criticizing a marketing campaign draws the ire of the unhinged Beatlemaniac. I also had a quasi popular youtuber see fit to do a response video 8 hours after I posted it - ready to defend! I have officially arrived as a youtuber! I love your _Abbey Road_ comparison. Thanks for the support, man.
@@popgoesthe60s52 Don't back down from your position (I know you won't, just wanted to support publicly). There's no bigger Beatles fan than me, but the truth is the truth, and one truth is that Paul McCartney is not The Beatles. This latest marketing scheme was shameless. By the way, the individual you mention is the same one I mentioned. No surprises there.
@@popgoesthe60s52 If ever the old saw "More than the sum of its parts" was true, is with the Beatles. Whether it was John needed Paul's musicality or Paul needed John's bite (or George needed to hang around those two guys) it is a fact that none came close in their careers following to what they did as a band. And to bear that out, I will posit that the BEST of their solo careers were their very first offers shortly after the breakup. "McCartney", "All Things Must Pass" and "Plastic Ono Band". Oh some fine shots later down the road, but not near as good as when they still had the magic blush after just leaving the greatest band ever.
One of Paul mccartney's biggest weaknesses throughout his career is also one of his biggest attributes as well. The need to be relevant and appreciated led to a burning desire to never stop working, as well as to become a keen business man. We have to take one for the other.
I think you’re being too harsh. Yes, perhaps 11 versions is a bit much, and perhaps it creates a convoluted #1, but do we really care about #1’s? He’s Paul McCartney, and that alone makes him “relevant,” even if he makes no more music. His influence on music is unmatched by any living person, perhaps by ANY musician, living or dead. I would like a review from you on the album itself - hope that’s on your docket.
I agree that his legendary status is secure. He is certainly historically relevant, so no argument from me on that one. Marketing is my profession and I probably view his advertising efforts more critically than most. Thanks for the comment, Carl.
@@popgoesthe60s52 the thing about 11 colors of vinyl or whatever it is. its not mccartney plotting its also retailers who want an exclusive version. if every store has the standard black then what is the point of a chain having a copy that is available anywhere else. many of these retailers are not 'record shops' they sell clothes or whatever and have a limited vinyl collection. the arrangement now is retailers get an exclusive color, so they can say we have the red copy and so on. its happened for a long time now. you right, that there are mccartney collectors who get every version, but a lot of the sales are to resellers. some versions like the purple one are already selling for a lot more than retail (going by discogs).
@@varsityathlete9927 That's a good point about the retailers having exclusivity. I just checked and some of the prices being asked for the Yellow with Black Dots version is at $3,800-$5,000. on ebay. Thanks for that info.
@@varsityathlete9927 I don't you have a good point! But I do smell a professional, well funded marketing ploy. They have really smart people thinking about these things that makes me feel it was the "label" itself that made the decision and not the individual stores.
@@MoneyCrespin Maybe once, but limited color to retailer isn't new its about 15 years old now. I actually happen to own a business selling vinyl records to the public, I deal with collectors, resellers etc. I've been offered limited color stuff before. 'Very smart' and music industry people very much an oxymoron if you know the industry.
1. Paul is hardly the only artist that issues physical product in a variety of formats in order to, erm, sell more product. It’s a common practice these days, when even the top pop artists don’t sell much in the way of physical stuff.
2. Relevant to whom? Relevant to current pop trends? Who cares? I mean, Paul might because he wants to have hits, but it’s just music. Buy it or don’t. In 50 years, people will still talk about Paul McCartney. He is a man with utterly nothing left to prove. Unlike most artists, he is a man who can single-handedly pack stadiums. In the big picture, the issue of relevance… Well, it just isn’t relevant.
This album is damn relevant to me. I like it a lot. All I bought was the CD and that's it. Not a fan of Egypt Station, but a big fan of this one.
It’s not the question if it is relevant to you or any individual, but to the general public.
@@THomasHH But who makes up the general population? Ppl like Day Tripper, you, me.
Exactly, Carl. And this video fails to address the relevancy of the most important aspect..the music.
@@grievousangel09 That's all I was trying to say, it's about the music.
The first track was awesome and I was highly entertained. The rest sucked but who cares. Since John abandoned Paul, Paul has given us diamonds in a lot of rough.
I thought Egypt station was amazing
It had some great tracks, I'll admit that. But still fairly weak.
I honestly liked this album, it's good to listen to the whole thing. Don't really care how many sold. 🤷♂️
Fair enough. I do believe he can still produce music people appreciate. I appreciate the comment.
Just listen to SLIDIN'. To think a 78 year old produced this rocker all by himself is mind boggling to me. One of his best songs ever in my opinion.
Sorry, unlistenable
@@mikeberg5003 why's that?
i cant see what age has to do with music making
@@whitehorses460 a lot of musicians ideas dry up as they get older, they lose the ability to play instruments, need help from outsiders.. Im just pointing out how impressive I find it that Paul could write, arrange, record, produce a song like Slidin' at the grand old age of 78 and you'd never know he was pushing 80.
I know right! Such a good song!
Who cares about 'relevance'? I am grew up with his music as a core part of my life. I want to hear where he is at; he's a comforting old friend or relative. I will be so sad when we can't hear more new music from him. He's probably not going to grow a new audience now, but for those who love him he is absolutely relevant because we love his voice, melodies and arrangements in our ears. I love that we've heard him age through his whole life. It's been a special joy to have shared life with him. For the record (see what I did there!) I bought one copy of the vinyl. Long may he keep releasing music, and long may he keep wanting the chart placements. Who cares?
I'm with you. Same for Neil Young.
ABSOBLOODYLUTELY@@timmy707707 And WHAT a catalogue he has! love him!
A little hard on Paul, he's always been a pop song writer from day one, he's just doing what he's always done. Different from John who was the tortured artist writing music for it's own sake, spilling out his guts for all to see.
I’m a McCartney fan. I got the standard vinyl only. The music is average for McCartney. Special edition albums should be reserved for exceptional works, it’s cheeky to do what he did but it won’t affect his legacy. This is essentially an album he made because he was bored in quarantine, it should be viewed in that context.
I think “McCartney” as a brand will always be relevant from The Beatles to Wings, but the stuff he’s come out with in the last Twenty years or so is really only for the absolute die hard fans who would buy a compilation album of Paul taking a shit. Really if it wasn’t for his back catalog of the best songs ever written, his new stuff wouldn’t even make it on a Spotify playlist.
@Tyler Thompson. Excellent points you made and I’ll probably get “verbally beaten up by die hard fans” but I’ll take it a step further; his really last great ( and by great I mean “Beatleesq”) work as a solo artist was Ram. IMHO. Everything else was okay, he’s had some nice songs with Wings just nothing earthshaking.. I know it’s a subjective thing but let’s be honest: the only reason most people pack his concerts today is to see Paul McCartney “ the Beatle legend” not the musician. Like you said he’s a “brand” . Not saying this with disrespect just a point of fact . If he did a concert today and did not do any of his Beatles songs, I’m willing to bet he’d be booed off the stage. Just my take.
@@vanillacreem816 Interesting thoughts! In The Beatles he only ever had to come up with his share of the songs & even then they were not all classics. He didn't do any of his Beatle compositions when he toured with the first Wings line-up & to my knowledge was never booed off stage!
@@graniterhythm53 Good point and if I am wrong about that , I’m wrong but I will say this : when he first formed wings, I don’t think he carried the same nostalgic “ mystique “ that he carries today because the Beatles had not been disbanded that long at the time so people were eager to hear his solo stuff. If he did a concert today and didn’t play at least a few Beatles songs I don’t think his long time fans would be too happy but it’s just my humble opinion. Certainly I have nothing against Paul McCartney he’s a legend and an incredible talent
@@vanillacreem816 don’t forget about “Venus and mars” ‘75.
Sad but true, the album sucks.
McCartney 3 is a good album, Paul's vocals may not be what they were 10-20 years ago. He is 78 now and like everyone our voices are not what they were when we were younger. I still think his music is relevant today and he has influenced many different artists over the years.
I think your view on the discussion about whether Paul's music is still good or interesting would make for a good video.
A true McCartney fan here...Not as important to the younger generation in his last 20 years. However, ( my humble opinion) the album..... it's okay. The man is pushing 80, who cares if his voice isn't as great, still dam good, .Has spent 60 years ( abouts) in the spot light, is a successful living legend, and is quite personable for being Paul McCartney. He does have 10's of millions of fans world wide. I saw him last in 2019, almost 3 hours in a sold out NFL football stadium. Puts on a great show, sounds great, the atmosphere with the patrons around you is also great. Seen him about 10 times live dating back to Wings. A living legend. Rock on and God bless you Sir Paul
I'm less concerned about the marketing, especially when talking about small print runs of vinyl, than I am about the music itself. How does this album compare to other recent releases by other artists? Are people actually listening and appreciating McCartney's music in 2021?
I agree. The marketing does irritate me to a small degree, but only because I’m not convinced the music lives up to the hype any more. Anyway, I gave up being a completist Beatles collector a long, long time ago. I have listened to McCartney III several times now, and while there are definitely some decent tunes on it, it doesn’t pull me back again and again the way The Beatles and his Wings stuff do. If I’m being completely honest, I think Chaos & Creation in the Backyard was his last truly excellent album, and even then, I haven’t listened to it in years. The stuff from McCartney up through Tug of War is what I go to when I’m in the mood for a Macca LP.
Being a huge Beatles and solo fan, Paul's last great album was the Chaos album, produced by the guy who produced Radiohead. Paul has the best talent of making a song on the spot. But he is at the spot of a good song coming rarely, not enough to buy a whole album. He's a workaholic. He can't stop and chill. What he needs is a band, having a type like John Lennon or Danny Laine to compete against. His best work comes from conflict, having John tell him Paul That's crap.
Oh for sure! Without the constant competition in the Beatles, would they have been so prolific or would they have desired to improve so much so quickly? Resting on Paul's laurels, without Lennon and the upcoming George to test his songwriting ability, he may have just declined into mediocrity.
Paul’s last great album was Flaming Pie when he could still sing and had something to say.
I think that used to be true. I love Paul, but he’s long past having the ability to write truly great music. He could’ve used the John filter in the early-mid 80s. Maybe we would’ve been spared from hearing Spies Like Us. He’s at the age where he can make perfectly nice music, but only his die hard fans will truly enjoy it. To be fair, rock music creativity most often peaks when someone is in their 20s and 30s. Not always (of course there’s some exceptions) but most rock stars don’t continue to make great and/or relevant stuff when they’re 50+ years old. Springsteen is another example. He is still making new music, but only his most diehard fans claim to enjoy it. Otherwise, it’s forgettable and feels more like a disposable product to push on his big fans instead of something truly inspired or great. It’s been a long long long time since Macca made anything that I had a desire to seek out after hearing for the first time.
I don't think he is a workaholic anymore. He even stated that he only makes music when he is in the mood for it. If he was still a workhorse he would be coming up with an album every year instead of every 5 years and his music would be much better. That said, I still like his new album. Not a great album, but certainly good.
Denny Laine was never good enough to “compete against.” Chaos was stellar, and the producer wouldn’t let Paul do songs he (the producer) didn’t like. But I enjoyed “New” quite a bit, although his voice was showing definite signs of weakening. “Egypt Station” was beautifully written, but even more, the singing was getting weaker. On “Mc3,” it mainly the singing I don’t like. The songs are all well-written and imaginative (except “Pretty Boys” yuck). I picture a time when he’ll mostly write for younger artists and do instrumentals.
Good, thoughtful video. No one looks at things from such interesting angles as you do. Thanks!
Spot on take. A big thumbs up!
When I was younger, I very much wanted to be a Beatles completist. I had the vinyl of my youth (still), and cassettes for my car. I bought the CDs in the 80s when they came out. I invested in bootlegs, and even downloaded the NAGRA tapes of the Get Back project. I eagerly bought the Anthology recordings, and the various Live at the BBC tapes. The 2009 remasters but sometime around the 50th anniversaries of Pepper and the "White Album, " I stopped caring. I am not going to drop hundreds of dollars for 6 CDs of the Pepper sessions, the 6 CDs of the "White Album", or however many CDs the Abbey Road sessions contain. The Beatles have given me decades of joy, but I have given them quite a bit of my disposable income. Not bootlegs of course, but think DVDs of their films. Heck I even own a book of their official musical scores.
As for Rolling Stone magazine, I ended my subscription back in 1986. I am fifty-six, and I had older neighbors who turned me on to the original run from the sixties, so I lost patience with their commodification of counterculture long before I ended the subscription. Another analogy, McCartney at this stage is like Saturday Night Live, a corporate zombie living on reflected glory of days gone by. I say that as a fan and not as some hater.
For me McCartney 3 is all about the music, I love it. I don’t give a shit about the sales campaign ( I only have one copy on record ).
Relevant? McCartney will be relevant for eternity!
Loved seeing the cameo by your dog
I just love the album; he's a genius and still relevant for us and the industry at this age, 78 man!!
I actually like this album. Compared to the stuff of today, it is decent, good taste music. Especially my favorite Deep deep Feeling. Great song1
A few have mentioned that song as a highlight. Thank you for the comment!
McCartney has hardcore fans and he's relevant for that reason. As far as I'm concerned, he's a tribute to his younger self when he was very creative and relevant.
Ever since I was old enough to drive, I have gone out on the day of a McCartney album release and bought the latest. For me, this goes all the way back to GIVE MY REGARDS TO BROAD STREET. He hasn’t been “relevant” for decades, but I don’t need charts to reflect what I learn as a musician from listening to his latest music.
His ability to create unique melodies and play all the instruments with a degree of competence is a marvel in and of itself- and he is a genetic marvel in and of himself to still be able to do it at his age, with gusto.
I’m thinking the “relevant” people who are in the unforgiving music industry who want to have longevity themselves learn a lot from him as well.
I think that's exactly right. It's a long time since it's been "relevant", but sure people can like it, or buy it, for whatever reason they want.
I really appreciate your 1st day of release ritual. That has value for you and many would agree that he still provides musical enjoyment. Thanks for the comment.
Unfortunately Matt I think everything you said is correct...& I wish it wasnt.
McCartney often mentions that Elvis was not the same after going into the army. Paul did not go into the army, however, for me I started l started losing interest in Paul's new music post Flaming Pie. In addition I have found the multiple format release tactics to be tedious and disingenuous/ cynical toward the fans.
Linda's death had a deeper impact on Macca than even he appreciates, I think. He has done some good stuff since, but his music has lost that consistent quality it had while she was his muse. That's my brief thought.
@@colin_d_smith I agree with you. Linda's passing affected Paul more than we may know.
Agreed as well
Agree... Flaming Pie last one I bought too
WHAT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA WISHES: That the buying public have memories that forget everything so they could sell an album sold in the millions as brand new. And the same with old and new TV shows.
It's kind of disturbing that the corporate companies control what music succeeds and sells to the point it's all the same but then add the fact it's all sold in multiply formats?
"The fans have been played". No one had a gun to their head to buy the product. There was a market for it. So product was created to satisfy the market demands. Isn't that what capitalism is all about? I would guess Paul put quite a bit of effort into creating this album and he is proud of the music on the album. He wants people to listen to it as that is the goal of creating and selling music. To believe he had some devious plan to be awarded a #1 album seems to be a stretch. There is no artist alive who needs his ego stroked less than Sir Paul McCartney.
The old argument of "no one put a gun on their head to buy X". When a group of people in charge of the directions and options available decide to push this or that, they are manipultating the circumstances, narrowing the options towards what they want. Most of the public does not have a deep thinking proccess about it, and just buy. An album or a download is not a lot of money for many people, so they go like "whatever, I'll put a coin into it". The same can be said about clothes made of plastic, and everything else that is so standardized (to the lowest standards) today. That to me is almost equivalent to putting a gun to someones head.
@@rafaelzengo5534 Right. I think the point was missed. McCartney and his team obviously didn’t threaten anybody. It’s more manipulation. They know that there are die-hard fans out there. They seemed to want to take advantage of them with a “they’ll buy anything and everything McCartney” by packing the same product (of questionable quality) a hundred different ways. From a marketing standpoint, it a smart move, but not so much from an artistic integrity standpoint.
@@pts5217 All marketing these days is just a disguised robbery. I'm a fan of Macca but I agree with the last statement in this video - it looks like a cheap move, and a bad way to approach the end of such a brilliant career and life. McCartney always seemed a bit of a cheapskate to me, and it's not like he is in financial trouble.
@@rafaelzengo5534 - "That to me is ALMOST equivalent to putting a gun to someones head". So you moved from a conversation of entertainment purchases to necessity purchases like clothing. And then use the word "almost". In other words, your response was completely irrelevant and actually supports my original post even further.
@@shyman99 It's all the same industry. What's wrong with the word almost? Are you angry?
I think you're correct on the marketing strategy of this album, but I found the music to be McCartney's best since 1997's "Flaming Pie". Having not found a single track of interest on the uninspired "Egypt Station", I was stunned to find such energy, craft, and musicianship in his one-for-all multi-dubbed new album.
Albums have always been marketed since day one.
I’m glad Paul went for it with this release insofar as it drew attention to the music. As a skeptical Beatles fan I approached it with skepticism. I actually loved the record and it’s not one of those “great a new record listen once and put it in the shelf” kind of things. It’s solid, it’s tuneful, and it’s passionate, as passionate as one can be when one is the king of the world.
Let’s not lose sight of the greatness of his past two records, marketing gimmicks notwithstanding.
Yes, the music can certainly be redeeming and loved. Glad to hear that you liked both records.
This album was the first newly released guitar based music I could listen to in years. Aside from hiphop, I cannot name a better album from start finish in almost 20 years. I base this mostly on the amount of coldshivers it induced alone. The market and the numbers mean nothing to me. I am pretty confident it does not mean much to him either and he knows he has his best album in decades. There isn’t one weak track. Dylan also has a great album this year. Faith in the music universe restored!
Thank you for the review, most appreciated!
I'm a huge Macca fan but it makes me cringe to hear his crackly old voice. Everyone has their preferences, I prefer the McCartney to Wings to McCartney II era. Everything else , eh? I'd rather listen to his alter ego Vivian Stanshall, his lyrics are ironically truthful...
Although I do like Egypt Station, I agree with you. In recent years I often thought Paul McCartney paid Rolling Stone for positive reviews, because throughout the 70's and 80's Rolling Stone rarely said anything positive about him. McCartney is my favorite musician of all time, but I am not a kiss ass fan. He's capable of making a better album.
Rolling Stone had nothing good to say about McCartney during the 70s and 80s purely because of Jann Wenner. When McCartney released Ram, a reviewer for RS, turned in a positive review of the album and Wenner told them to make it negative. Wenner was a Lennon fan boi and I believe that he also blamed McCartney for splitting up the Beatles, but anyway, that is why Macca didn't get good reviews from RS.
@@catherinewilson3880 That much is true. On the album, I didn't like McCartney III (will listen again) but then, I didn't particularly like the first two in the trilogy either. Egypt Station was a much better offering with a few really decent tracks that were relevant, mixed in with a garbled political message, and a few stinkers, Egypt Station was just like having an old friend around. I knew it would disappoint in places, astound in places, and have me saying "Come on Macca, really?" in others. McCartney III just didn't feel right. I will listen again, as I say but I won't be buying it as a vinyl or a cd. It felt pretty disposable when I heard it. I love McCartney, the guy is a genius, but lately a lot of his stuff sounds like he's working hard to create a sound that is relevant when there is still a lot of "relevant" music that is, in essence, based on and influenced by McCartney anyway. The funny thing is, I still reckon that there is a one more really good album to come out of him. Would it make it easier if he got someone else to actually sing 12-15 songs that he wrote? Is his music restricted by his, pretty much, lack of vocal range?
@@adrianhughes7515 It must be tough when you once had one of the best voices in rock, to accept your age related limitations. I'm in my sixties and I hate the fact that I'm getting old and can no longer do things I once took for granted, and McCartney has almost twenty years on me. There's also the fact that the guy just loves performing, so I don't think he'd accept someone singing for him. Personally, I think he should have given up trying so hard years ago and perhaps released one great album per decade, but it's his life and his legacy, so I suppose he's entitled to do as he wishes.
@@catherinewilson3880 One of the things that made he and John exponentially better were their voices and that's really the only thing that's missing now
Well said - I’m also a lifelong fan - but not a kiss ass either. Much as I enjoyed Egypt Station and Macca III, I’d love to think that McCartney III represents the end of a cycle, in the same way that I and II were. Sadly, that cycle should be touring........much as I love Macca, I can’t listen to him strangling his classic songs anymore.
This is sort of a mean spirited video.
Likely the greatest living musician, I really don't give a damn how many different versions of his album he sells, I'm so thankful that he's still alive & well & making music.
The album also got good reviews for it's music.
One should be able to critique the marketing of the greatest living musician without being called "sort of mean spirited."
@@popgoesthe60s52 But you didn't make any good points, he's nearly 80 years old & still making music, and his music is still good.
What purpose does a video critiquing marketing have when you ignore the content's of the album; the music? That's the entire purpose of releasing an album.
If you had reviewed the music along with your marketing critiques, they may not have come off so brashly dismissive & skeletal to the overall picture.
Not to say I'm not a fan of your videos, I am, but I disagree with you on this one. You are absolutely able to critique his marketing, but that's not why Paul McCartney is famous, he's famous for his music.
@@SgtPeppersLonelyHeartsClubBand Yes, you're right. I could have critiqued his music which is a normal thing to review. My profession is marketing and thought that focus would be interesting. I guess it's not for everyone and that's ok too. I appreciate the comments even if we disagree.
@@popgoesthe60s52 Well I'm not saying his marketing is perfect either I don't disagree with your points on his marketing really, I'm neutral on them, I just deny those categorizations, that he's "washed up" or "irrelevant" or he is fading, because I think Paul McCartney really needs to be celebrated now more than ever.
It's a miracle he still is alive & healthy, let alone making decent music, so I wished you hadn't given into a couple of those categorizations, because I think Paul McCartney is beyond categorization due to all the great work he has put out, at this point no one can ever ask of him to be at his peak of popularity or of relevancy, nor his music even.
I don’t care how he generated interest for his album! Awesome job team McCartney! In the end, if it sucked, people would catch on and stop buying. Ads and marketing deals accomplish the same initial results for big movie releases. In the end, word of mouth will kill a project if it sucks. I am fascinated by all of his music. There isn’t a single Paul album that lacks melody. I am also fascinated by his one man band projects. They have a special homespun quality that fans enjoy. Do you really think Paul invented the human practice of collecting crap? Please! I bought one green vinyl copy at Target. There are big time collectors that went all out. So what. Music, especially rock, sells like crap. It’s smart to come up with ideas to put a project out. He doesn’t need money and I doubt this made him much if any. Money is made on tours. He’s just a musician who wants people to still listen to his new music even at the age of 78. Everyone has a need to feel useful. Even a former Beatle.
McCartney III is well worth it. But my one copy from Target was quite enough for me to enjoy
The McCartney series 1-3 is experimental music. I think the 3rd installment is EXCELLENT
Being a vinyl collector myself and having multiple copies of one particular album (example, Dark Side of The Moon), your video is a double edge sword to watch. I agree, McCartney's latest album is a great example of marketing to his diehard, faithful fans out there...which in turn brings him high numbers on the charts and in the bank. However, if those diehard, faithful fans WANT to go out and buy all 11 different varients of this album and it's not hurting them financially, then that's a perfect example of a COLLECTOR.....it brings that fan joy and happiness in being able to obtain all the varients and it makes McCartney even MORE richer!!
I wanted to touch upon Paul appearing with Michael Jackson. Their first duet "The Girl Is Mine," was the lead-of single to Michael's "Thriller," album and even in Michael's autobiography, he says it was put out first because it was a duet between two huge names. The single got to #2 on the Billboard Pop Chart here in the U.S. but the critical response (and even the opinion of some of the musicians on the record) seemed to be that it was a cute idea but kind-of corny. I would argue that the rest of the album was better, but still an example of the cross-section between marketing and art, as the three videos for the album were genuinely great videos for great songs; but historically, the music video is nothing if not a type of commercial.
Paul probably hadn't been outshined like that before. Despite this, he knew that he was reaching a new and younger audience and, for his part, Michael continued to acknowledge the Beatles as an influence. And so as Paul got older, it seemed to make sense that he would be the official "Cool Old Guy" of the music industry. He poses with someone, they talk about his impact on them. The dance continues.
Now, this isn't so bad in the grand scheme of things, but it's a bit telling especially when it comes to the fact that one of the greatest musicians of our time (or of all time) seems to falter into a kind-of need for approval.
I really like this post of yours. What I think, in all honesty, is that McCartney has always been seeking approval. Especially as a solo artist. He has spoken about a song he wrote for Sinatra that was turned down "Suicide", and I think that slightly rankled with him. Despite being a superior song writer and performer to Lennon, I think he has always felt as though he was always trying to prove he was at least the equal to Lennon (like I say, he was far superior to Lennon in all aspects). Maybe his strive for approval is his main form of motivation? Who knows.
@@adrianhughes7515 I think he is indeed better than Lennon from a technical point of view, and a much more constant person. But he lacked that raw school boy naughty thing that made Lennon write brilliant pieces without even trying much. Which is not to say that Lennon wasn't a song craftsman too. After all we are talking about the world of music in 1960, where even if you were a raw person you still needed to sharpen a few knives and know a few tricks. Lennon was a pretty neat songwriter per se in the first half of the Beatles. He dominated in A Hard Days Night like a champ. He makes Macca look like a hack in that album. Lennon was just the more troubled, unstable guy, and Macca eventually got the upper hand by being constant and having a more chill spirit.
@@rafaelzengo5534 John's output circa '62-66' contains some of the Beatles strongest song's, no doubt and he had the majority of the A-sides during this period BUT, 'And I Love Her', 'Thing's We Said Today' & 'Can't Buy Me Love' from 'A.H.D.N.' are hardly the work of a 'Hack'.
Paul never 'got' the upper hand, John just started to lose interest after 'Pepper' and took he's foot off the gas, he was just looking for something new.
Paul's a musical genius without question but John was something special, mercurial for sure yet he always had the edge especially when he was on fire.
Paul's always been more 'safe' and conscious of 'The Brand' and how he is perceived and this has been to his detriment as it makes him look cold and calculated which I don't think is he's intention. He's a brilliant ideas man and enjoys being clever ( Standing Stone, 'Oratorio' etc yawn!)
John just wanted music to 'move' you, he couldn't be arsed to do another 'Pepper' concept album, its ok for a one off peice of creativity but he wanted to be more immediate and direct. Therein lies the magic of The Beatles, that push-pull bond between them kept them way out in front in the 60's.
Sadly for me Paul started to wane after 'Pipes of Peace' album wise although he still had the occasional gem singles wise 'No more lonely nights', 'Only love Remains', ''Once Upon a long Ago' and more recently 'Save Us' , but by 'Flowers in the Dirt' he looks like he's trying to rewrite former glories obviously missing he's former sparring partner by hooking up with E.Costello and even saying he'd like to write with a certain Mr. Harrison much to George's amusement..... " I've always been here, why now!"
Desperation ? lost he's way ? It's more important to Paul to be 'On Top' he could never 'disappear' like John did for 5 years,
It's sad, someone else on here said everyone has a shelf life I think thats true they all only have so many good songs in them. Elton John's a prime example : 70's & 80's so prolific then after 'The Lion King' Zilch. you know maybe thats a factor, writing a musical /
soundtrack changes the way you write, perhaps it kills the magic?
Phil Collins, Paul Simon and Sting, same thing.
Anyway I love Macca but the songs have dried up and now that once brilliant voice has gone too. You almost hope someone close could say something before he marrs too much of a brillant career or is it a case of 'Emperors new Clothes'.
@@simonlaing7646 Lennon reasserted himself on the White Album with superior output.
@@ginigang The result of Rishikesh, I remember a Lennon interview where he spoke about that trip and the benefits of being away from it all and cleaner living, no substances etc. He said hadn't felt so healthy before and of course what else was there to do apart from meditate and write songs!
The other thing there was he had other musicians from outside the Beatles to intrigue him and Donovan in particular, who taught him a new technique , fingerstyle guitar.
He took to this so well it spawned many great songs including 'Dear Prudence', 'Julia' and later on 'Look at me' off 'Plastic Ono Band'. Once he felt a spark from something new he was off like a dog down a rabbit hole.
Unfortunately for The Beatles he met another spark in Yoko Ono and that one led him away into other intrigues beyond the band
McCartney III is the first album - vinyl, cd, download, or otherwise - of his that I have ever owned. Was more of a Harrison and Lennon fan, really. I think it is as relevant and musically appealing - if not more so- than most offerings today. I’ve been listening to it in my car nonstop since its release.
I shouldn't have let this review color my appreciation of this album. Revisiting this album a year later, I was pleasantly surprised how well it's holding up. In the last 20 years McCartney has made some of his best records since the 70s. This is one of those. Modern McCartney doing what he has always done, with taste and style. No surprise really.
John Lennon ‘Paul is probably the best P.R. man in the business’. Rolling Stone interview 1970
John should have known because he made him a millionaire the he took his lucky break and broke it in two,
So Sergeant Pepper took you by surprise
@@scottm882 ‘The only thing you done was Yesterday, and since you’ve gone you’re just Another Day.’
@@BigSky1 those freaks was right when they said "..."
"and whats wrong with that?" -Paul McCartney
I agree with heavy heart
Hmm..a cynical music critic focusing on every aspect other than the music. Now that’s something new.
Paul McCartney will always be relevant to me. I love the fact that he still putting out music that I enjoy. McCartney III is a good album in my opinion. I also know that there will come a time when he will no longer be able to create new music. So I’m thankful he still can.
As with the marketing, I didn’t even know there were multiple versions of the album. Now that I know, it still doesn’t matter much to me. I only bought one copy. I like the album and everything that came with it.
Appreciate your take on how the album is marketed. We all are entitled to our opinion. Although I have to admit, bringing up potentially only 3,000 people bought the album is a bit cynical. I know half a dozen people who bought the album. None of them bought more than one copy. I know my sample size is very small but I think people buying one or two copies is more common than avid collectors who bought eleven copies.
Thanks for watching Caleb. I was setting up a hypothetical with the 3,007 buyers and stated that obviously many more individuals bought than that. I appreciate your comment!
Your reviews are always very detailed, and well presented. No filler. You really nailed this one. As Lennon said, of McCartney, " He's a real salesman, good at marketing." While he's always done this to degrees, he's now an outright marketing monster. He was at his most persistent, and annoying at marketing this album, by far. It was relentless. He put out all these little teaser promos on his web site, and did countless interviews. The Taylor Swift "interview" was such an embarrassingly obvious JOINT marketing endeavor. That was nauseating. Any artist should do SOME marketing, and SOME interviews, but his time it was so overboard, it made him look obviously insecure, and desperate. The countless colored vinyl is also an obvious desperate gimmick to garner sales. If he creates a truly great album, it will sell itself. Everyone will still check in, to see if he's done that, and buy it, if he pulls that off. He should stand on that, and calm down a bit. Or, perhaps, having made "number one" perhaps this last time, he chooses to go out on top.
"He announced the split of The Beatles to sell a record" - John. He was right then about him being about the best PR man in the biz. Not saying that McCartney I or III are bad albums but its all about the marketing.
Regardless of gimmick, this review failed on the most fundamental level in it did not present any detail of the actual music created. That should be the deciding factor of whether McCartney III is relevant, or not.
@@grievousangel09 Hey, he made clear, he wasn;t trying to do that.
Also, it seems a bunch of commenters here are equating "relevance" with "I personally love it". That's not what it's about, and that's not what this opinion piece is about.
@@cajunqueen5125 Thanks, i did in fact watch the entire video and so fully understand it’s premise. An artist’s continued relevance may be attributed to various factors, but the actual created art should always be the main criteria. That IS what it’s about.
Anybody who is stupid enough to buy eleven different versions of the same piece of work deserves to be fleeced.
The sad fact is that Paul's voice is almost completely shot.His vocals can't carry his new music anymore nor can he perform his old classics the way he used to and the way we became accustomed to.
It sounds great to me.
The album is very relevant to me. I've played it over and over and it's been my soundtrack to Christmas and winter over lockdown. I think it's a really strong piece of work, must better than I was expecting. I don't use streaming so sit down and listen to the full LP.
As for all the formats, I thought it was naff at first but it's just marketing with the aim to sell as much as possible, which has always been the job of marketing. You only need to buy it once.
I'm glad to hear you enjoyed it so much, so indeed that speaks to relevancy. Thanks for the comment!
I bought one standard vinyl on Amazon because I thought it would come with a free digital rip. When I found out it didn't, I bought the CD. The music was okay, but didn't especially grab me. But Paul must understand that this music isn't going to catch fire by itself, and I don't blame him for taking advantage of marketing strategies.
I guess I’ll always admire Paul and love that he and the boys existed and enriched my life.
But the last McCartney album I have is one of his Wings albums. I listened to the top three songs on McC iii and was not taken away by them. As far as marketing, do you think he needs the money so much that he personally arranged for the various release media? I hope and figure that he is so rich that he couldn’t possibly spend all he’s amassed already. I’m about 9 years his junior and struggle to have reasons to keep going. Paul, you keep it up, boy and if you’re ever bored check out some of my songs. I compose and record with the goal to one day write something so beautiful that Paul will tell me, “good job, mate!”.
I'm a huge McCartney fan, and yet I only bought the CD and I loved it. I couldn't care less about vinyl records in all the colours of the rainbow.
I think he still writes music that people enjoy. Thank you for the comment.
@@conphuze I did say people can enjoy the music in the video. Plus the "over the hill, be thankfull, old guy" comments were made by other UA-camrs, who I am responding to. I did say a #1 album was a big accomplishment. What video are you watching? You are correct, I could do a separate video on a review of the music, which I warned I wasn't going to do in the video. It's a compliment of sorts that you were able to get through it! Humor aside, I do appreciate your comment. I just don't understand why it would bother anyone to critique his marketing efforts.
Welll, there was no auto-tune on Macca III and was lo-fi, rather than overproduced. I liked it for how it represented where he is in his life. In fact, I found it more honest and representative a record than Macca II, which I found sterile and overly un-Macartney-ish. Overthinking it can, as even with 'Pepper,' easily condemn it out of hand. The marketing campaign is a separate issue.
Its not that great. I'd take McCartney II any day over this
Love your vids, but I don’t agree, what is relevant is up to the individual! I am a long term fan, I’ve bought one vinyl copy of this album and I’m happy with that. If I want to get a CD copy, then I will, I also stream music on Spotify! I’m pleased he came out with a new album, one I for me, love! Al that said, I still love your vids, and hearing your take on things, keep it up. 🙂
I appreciate the honest comment, even though we don't agree. Thanks for watching!
I love McCartney III so it is very relevant to me. I do not think it would be #1 if its music was not good.
I actually think you are so completely wrong in your assessment. I think Paul actually wants people of this generation to like his new music. I think his new album is actually something that will be respected and appreciated in about 5 years. Deep deep feeling is nothing short of amazing
I haven't heard the album, so no comment on the music, but my understanding of this vlog wasn't at all the music but the marketing.
Very honest take, & I agree. The Beatles had different apple colours in different countries, but it wasn’t by design to sell records. Different country labels did different things. I also heard the Mc album. Some may like it, but like Springsteen today, it isn’t Darkness or Born to Run these days.
Ridiculous! I own one CD. Have you even listened to the album? It's filled with great tunes and has much relevance.
Matt, I've just discovered your channel and I like what you're doing here. That said, this is the first video I've seen of yours that I take exception to. Of course, you're entitled to your opinion, an obviously provocative one by number of dissenting comments I'm seeing, mine included. During my year of pandemic hibernation and UA-cam splurging, I've had the chance to reevaluate my thinking about Paul McCartney. My opinion on his relevance has done an about-turn. There's a hugely viable role he's playing here and not only for his fans. Paul has become the venerated elder of popular music. As rock and roll royalty, he has used his inherited influence gracefully, without becoming, as I had feared, an over-the-hill has been, barely tolerated by peers and public - although, I'm sure there are those who view him as such. Paul continues to demonstrate his genius in this clever use of marketing and social media to generate creative partnerships with established and up-and-coming luminaries. And he continues to write music and perform and, by the looks of it, is enjoying every moment. And, that, in my book, is a spectacular achievement. It is truly reassuring to see the standard bearer of rock and roll greatness continuing to display the refreshing playfulness and inventiveness that characterized the Beatles career. I say, "Right on, Paul McCartney, keep on shining!
You make some good points that I can't argue with. I do value his writing, craftsmanship and verve. My profession is marketing so perhaps I see this topic through a different lens and I feel it's fair game to critique a marketing campaign. Dissenting comments notwithstanding, the 86% thumbs up rating for this video suggests support for the topic no matter which side viewers may fall on. Though we may not agree, I do appreciate you adding to the discussion. Thank you, Madelyn.
@@popgoesthe60s52 Thank you for responding Matt! Yes, I agree that you've touched a sensitive chord in viewers who disagree with your perspective. But objections have been expressed respectfully. It's refreshing to experience a debate in social media that's conducted with civility, a quality sorely lacking in our public discourse. I think it speaks to the tone you've set and the followers you've attracted. Cheers!
Great album. Yall will never be on this mans level.
You didn't even address the music on the album or the fact McCartney played EVERY instrument.
Correct, I specifically wanted this to be about the marketing only, which I did mention early in the video. Sorry if it was misleading.
I think this is a good way to turn off or turn away casual and some serious collectors. It's hard enough buying just one of these CD's that you only play once, if you can even get all the way thru it. I'd pay for a slightly more expensive version like he did with Flowers in the Dirt, but to know I have to spend well over $100.00 to keep my collection up to date for an album set that doesn't have one song even close to as good as any song on Band on the Run, well...
I think I'll put on Abbey Road or Venus and Mars and finally bury McCartney III in the back of my shelf with Egypt Station, if I can even find it.
I think Paul McCartney will continue to be relevant to those of us who have had his music as the score in the background of our lives. I'm sure he is less than relevant to those who are ignorant of the magnitude of his...and the Beatles accomplishments through out the 1960s and beyond to this day. Having said that, with a few exceptions, I lost interest in his music in 1979-1980. I have just a few of his albums after that. My favorite two as whole collections being Run Devil Run and Flaming Pie. As for the various styles and designs of his latest album, it seems to me that if anyone wants to own multiple copies, go for it. But you do listen to music one song at a time, and hopefully it sounds as good on a green disc as it does on a blue or polka-dotted one. After all, it's about the music.
Great video as always. I definitely concur with your assessment of both McCartney and RS in terms of relevancy and their marketing ploy's. Personally, and I can't speak for everyone else, nor do I want them speaking for me, from about Chaos and Creation in the Backyard, (perhaps the album after that) I had started to become a realist and have properly prepared myself that this huge musical Genius + Icon is starting to walk hand in hand with father time. Although, the fact that he has extremely talented musicians with him on his albums and on tour is a huge benefit mind you. I don't go for the argument that we should all be so thankful and happy that he is making music, touring and making appearances in magazine covers/videos with a lot more younger and questionably relevant stars etc. In show business, there comes a time when the artist must realize when it is time to go. It happens to everybody. I am and always has been a huge Beatles/Solo McCartney fan but I don't want to remember him as someone who was just barely holding on by the tips of his fingers. If people seem to think that McCartney 3 and Egypt Station are awesome then that's great. I enjoyed some of it and I am not bashing people who think they are fantastic albums.
I does take time to give perspective on the quality or relevance so we'll see how these fair in the future. Thanks for the comment!
Boy. I missed this one from a year ago. I could not agree more Matt. Sadly this is what it is and we can applaud Paul's marketing genius which has always been terrific but should not confuse that with musical relevance...100%. Great and gutsy analysis as always.
Thank you, David. I got some grief on this one from people who simply won't even accept mild criticism of a marketing campaign. Gotta love fans!
The last song on Egypt Station (Hunt You Down/Naked/C-Link) is one of his best! I listen to it in rotation with his best
Love that medley!
Sorry but way off. The critics who decry the multiple colored vinyl versions as a marketing gimmick forget one very crucial element: this is Paul McCartney we're talking about here. The man literally has a net worth of over a billion dollars--selling a few more records isn't the point here. Macca is doing this for vinyl collectors like myself, old school folks who don't mind throwing some extra cash knowing they are one of only 1500 or 3000 people in the entire world who hold a particular piece of vinyl. In this streaming era it's nice to hold an actual tangible item and take in the jacket art, it takes me back. Also, saying Paul has to stand next to Taylor Swift and Michael Jackson to stay relevant is absurd. HE'S elevating THEM. And yes, this album is indeed relevant because a Beatle is still out there trying to make things better for all of us during this horrible lockdown, still making music when he can just kick back and retire. He doesn't have to do ANY of this and at least I'm grateful that he is. Most importantly, it's a damn good album if you ask me.
I appreciate your view, Fred. Thanks for the comment.
i've not spend money on McCartney record in decades...he is 78 and his voice is gone, that ok because that's what is supposed to happen...he should have been focusing on writing songs for others to sing...McCartney's post 1990 music has not been on my play list... his music from the 1960s to 1980s is brilliant but he has been fading for decades...
I sadly feel the same way. The last album that I was able to listen to over and over and still can was Flaming Pie, from 1996, I believe. Then I bought Heather and I wanted to like it so much, but I couldn't really. And the main reason was his voice sounding so unlike him, so senile, so done. In fact, I hate listening to his voice now so much, that I can't even enjoy any good songs that came after 1996. He sounds like a granny now and that's how I refer to him, whenever I hear a new song of his: "oh noes, granny Macca is singing again". And this is all coming from a person who loves Macca's singing voice above any other voice in the history of popular music. Damn, you're so right.
I would have to agree and disagree. He’s had some real misses. But he almost always has one or two gems at least per album. These last two albums for me or extremely enjoyable. In fact, almost every song on each album was enjoyable. I would rate both albums as excellent. Certainly miles and miles above anything being put out today.
Here's my nerdy perspective; I did notice you mention the Newbury Comics edition of McCartney III.
So, as a comic book collector myself, I see where you're coming from as an industry perspective- in comics, a "variant" or alternate cover does inflate the number of sales due to multiple variants, but most people can't afford or dont want multiple copies. For instance, I will sometimes prefer the variant cover art to the regular, but that doesn't necessarily mean I will buy both.
THE SAME GOES FOR RECORDS. Record stores are few and far between & not everyone may have access to the few local shops or even FYE, Barnes & Noble, etc but with online exclusives & some retail stores offering a limited "variant" edition of the record, it may very well attract someone who wasn't there to purchase a record.
Also, if you have big box stores like Target, Walmart, etc. cashing in on the vinyl "fad," why shouldn't the artists take full advantage of a wider audience if possible?
Just my 2 cents... Have a great day, really cool videos, very much enjoy watching them. ✌
Love his music,and all past groups he Has been involved with. However, his collaboration with other artists, were brought forth by the other artists. He did not go after them.!
Just be grateful this world had Paul McCartney, the people who criticise his work would be well advised to reflect on his contribution to the world of music. Please note, I do not specify the musical genre to which he so massively contributed, he has been a monumental influence in music in general. I am grateful that I am of a generation which had the great and good fortune to have had the privilege of experiencing his music, which provided the backdrop to my life.
it’s a fall from grace for sure, but i wouldn’t really tell an artist to stop making art... like an artist doesn’t make art till they die.
An analogous tactic-not in use now under the circumstances-is when artists would bundle an album and concert ticket, and the album would count toward rankings. I think album rankings are now largely meaningless.
Sorry, I find this...rant...to be more than a bit offensive: facts are important things - each of the albums McCartney has released pretty much since Flaming Pie (but, really, since 'McCartney') have been put through someone's grinder on his 'relevance'...
Of course, most of those albums, including Egypt Station and McCartney III, have received generally good to great reviews from a wide variety of both fans and critics...doesn't THAT make art relevant ?
You also make several assumptions towards his current 'relevance'...like who he hangs out with...
Yet, as you pointed out, he has ALWAYS done that...maybe you wish to callously and cynically portray that as an unrelevant wash up looking for relevance in others...OR it simply could be an artist, who has always sought to stretch his canvas, seeking newer colors to enhance his palate: why view it, automatically, as a negative ?
...then there's the odd, almost politically disparaging assumption that only 3000 people might have bought all those records...
I, through all my meanderings on the net, find more people who bought ONE than I do odd, small crowds buying ALL of them...
Not to mention that ANY artist, these days, hits #1 with the same low amount of sales because this industry, not just McCartney as a instantaneous best seller, has virtually shriveled up and died.
Truth is...there are NO artists from McCartney long era that are tripping the sales fantastic with each and every new release...but that doesn't make their art bad...or irrelevant.
It's far more indicative of the state of the music industry and their inability to sell anyone's product, no matter how good...or relevant the music may actually be.
Offensive? Is your name Paul Mc Cartney? Relax man it's just discussion.
Paul, chill out. lol
You make a good point that this marketing is a reflection of the music industry today. I'll buy that. That part of the discussion was missing in my argument but I'm not sure why a critique on someone's marketing should be offensive. I appreciate your comment, even though we disagree.
At the beginning....”some you tubers /people talking about Mcartney music still relevant “......dog on left walks out of the room 😂
The album definitely deserved number 1, I'm a 20 year old fan and really enjoyed it. I travelled into the city to buy the album, only bought one copy, just the standard vinyl. I went to 4 record shops to buy it and all of them were playing songs from the album, so I went to 4 shops so I wouldn't hear the songs and get spoiled as I wanted to listen to the album by myself after I bought it. The marketing ploy is being done by every artist, and so what ? I wouldn't call it a scam or say he's letting us down. It's the opposite, it hyped me up and entertained me, something good to come out of the year. Seeing the promotional videos, the 12 days of paul where they released the sheet music, the interviews he did.. hell, he even replied to one of my questions in the reddit QnA, and now I got a story to tell for the rest of my life.
I can see how collectors will appreciate these version. How fortunate that he replied to you. Very nice. Thanks for sharing your comment.
I agree with all you say here. I know people who bought every color and format that became available and at the same time said they were not overly impressed with the album itself. They kept saying "but he is Paul and he is 80". I kept thinking what a clever marketing scheme and it was nice to hear you put it so precisely.
Yes he is a Beatle and that’s all that counts. Nuff said
I love McCartney and I love McCartney III probably more than any album since Flowers in the Dirt, but couldn't agree more with this. A small group of us are talking about this album and loving it, compared to the number of people talking about Taylor Swift whenever something new drops. That's no direct reflection on the quality of either, but this is a #1 album that nobody I know (who isn't already a Paul fan) can name a single song on. I'm fine with that. I think one of the fundamental messages here is, "Like what you like; don't be swayed one way or the other by what corporations or anyone else tell you is good or popular."
You hit on an interesting observation that a niche audience can propel an album to number 1. This used to not happen due to all the competition. Several are pleased with this album and I'm glad to hear you rate it that high. Thanks for the feedback, Keith.