Paul Mc Cartney.
Living legend.
Paul Mc Cartney could release an album tomorrow and it would be in the Top 10 even after all these years.
Paul Mc Cartney is 64 years old and doesn't try to play younger.
He owns his master, except for the ones he sold to Michael Jackson for mucho $$$.


Don't you think Prince and Paul should get together for dinner some time and have a long talk?

(forgive my spelling)
[Edited 6/24/06 18:39pm]

littlemissG said:

I think the last thing on pauls mind is a dinner evening with Prince lol

No.

littlemissG said:

Probably a better idea that you learn his name is not 'McCarty' - it's 'McCartney' - and the last solo studio album he released - 'Chaos and Creation in the Backyard' (12 September 2005) reached #10 in the UK and #6 in the United States. Meanwhile, Prince's '3121' reached #9 in the UK and #1 in the States.

Moreover, McCartney didn't sell his masters to Michael Jackson.

The rights purchased by Jackson were not those to the use of master recordings of Lennon and McCartney compositions, but rather the publishing rights which vested in ATV entirely back in 1973. McCartney had sold his stake in this business entity relinquishing his rights. He attempted to purchase them back again in 1985 but was outbid by Michael Jackson.

.

McCarty you know your subject well.

littlemissG said:

I think Paul and his now ex wife were at one of the Musicology concerts.

Like Langebleau said, publishing rights and master recordings are two different issues.

Secondly, people have roundly criticized McCartney for having plastic surgery and dyeing his hair.

nOPE! wHY SHOULD HE?

REDBABY said:

You ARE talking about PAUL McCARTNEY??? cos I havent heard of a Paul McCARTY?
[Edited 6/24/06 17:11pm]

That would be cool. But you know, Prince...it aint happening.

Just out of curiosity...does somebody know what does Paul Mc Cartney thinks of Prince as a musician/songwriter?

gustavo pail maccartney was on one of the musicology concerts so he probably digs prince,
on the other side paul hates slap pop tehniq of playing bass so he maybe dont like prince as a bass player.

kape said:

U must mean the last thing on Prince's mind is a dinner evening with Paul!!

JellyBean said:

Paul McCartney is a huge Prince fan, he is one of the few artists he would make time to go see in concert. He said so in an interview in 1994, and on the radio that year he repeated that in a live interview.

It's also in one of his concert programs.

I'm surprised they've never met at some PETA benefit or something.

Didn't Paul McCartney admit at one point he used to bootleg artists when he'd get to see them live from backstage? And he said he'd done it with Prince? Only reason I remember is it struck peeps here on the org as quite amusing!

I think Paul also called Prince 'The Musicians Musician'.

SUPPOSEDLY, i think it was a rumour someone here started, but supposedly when 9/11 happened paul was at paisley park jamming with prince. Thing is, I've never heard anything about it before or after so I think its false.

Prince actually spent sometime with Paul at his farm on the Mull of Kintyre.Apparently they used to go out riding,Paul on a clydesdale and Prince on a Shetland pony.
oh happy days.

muirdo said:

softandwet said:

McCartney was in a plane that was grounded in NYC when that was happeing. they had of course stopped all flights from taking off. I read this in an interview with him at the time.

ufoclub said:

He was asked who was his favorite guitar player and Paul said it was prince.

and George said once that Prince could have been the 5th beatles but he was terrific live and the Beatles weren't anymore once they became famous.

wow...Paul really said so many nice things about Prince? You all read it? That´s cool, because Paul is one of the most respected musician/songwriters of the 20th century.
If this George Harrison quote is true, it´s real good also.
Or are u all being ironic? hehe

GustavoRibas said:

Why the fuck should Prince be honored to be a "fifth Beetle".
Please name a musically not commercially significant Beetle's song.
Come on.....just one

I have nothing against Paul or Sir Paul as he is now called...we're both avid weed smokers....but what has he done to be considered "one of the most respected MUSICIANS of the 20th century"
Come on.....tell me
[Edited 6/25/06 18:13pm]

thebanishedone said:

Really? where/when did he say that?

dseann said:

I'll tell you! He composed more culturally and artistically influential works of art in the form of produced and recorded pop music then most anyone else. quite simply he has made music (a musician) that has helped shaped trends of pop music and is more prolific than many others. His particular melodies and structures resonate in the world psyche with formidible strength. It's actually qite magical.

I've noticed that most classically/technically trained musicians are usually horrible at coming up with anything remotely interesting as far as a composition. I've worked with self taught "ear" creative types, and musicians that have gone to college for an instrument/theory. And it's always the "educated" "musicians" that LACK any ability in creatively coming up with anything someone would WANT to hear.

dseann said:

Not that I necessarily want to get dragged into another Beatles debate, but what you've said seems to indicate an ignorance of both rock history of the beatles. In terms of musical signifance and influence, the Beatles absolutely tower over Prince, and in terms of actual proficiency in terms of playing multiple instruments to a high standard and skill at all levels of music making Paul himself is at least Prince's rival; the man was recording one man albums while Prince was still a little kid. Here's a reiteration of my assessment of the Beatles' musical significance as stated in another thread:

The Beatles were more or less the first act in rock music (or arguably popular music as a whole) to A."grow" artistically and make it acceptable, even expected for a band to expand and progress rather than keep rehashing the same songs over and over again. B. they were among the first bands to exclusively write their own material and not be beholden to outside songwriters, again making it expected for artists in popular music to write their own stuff. C. Were among the first groups to embrace all kinds of styles and influences. Revolver may not have been the first place where orchestral strings were used in rock music, or the first place a rock artist made forays into eastern music, or the first place a musician used tape loops to craft collage/soundscape, but it was the first record where all those things were done in the same place. D. Made the biggest contribution towards making rock music, and "popular" music as a whole, respectable and held on the same level as "Serious" art, not just disposable fluff that wouldn't have any relevance beyond it's time of release. I bet you the term "classic rock" would have never existed if not for them E. They just wrote dozens and dozens of excellent songs, both lyrically and musically, in almost every style and pioneered in some direct or indirect way just about every "hyphen rock" sub-genre that would come into existence in the next decades.

and as another person pointed out, they also did the most towards making the album format the primary means of artistic expression in rock music, eventually causing albums to outsell singles. In terms of technical innovations, well they may not have been the absolute originators of any technical innovation (but then again who is) but they were among the first to be incorporate all manner of technical innovations into their music in a way that was accessible to a large audience without dumbing them down: sitar, fuzztone, tape loops, orchestral strings, exotic instrumentation, styles hitherto not in the vocabulary of rock, again they may not have been the first to do ANY of these things, but they were the first to do ALL of these things.

paul was on a vh1 programme a few years ago and he was asked to pick his ten favourite songs and he choose mostly old rock n roll songs from the 50s and sixties and the only song he choose from the last 30 years was little red corvette and he said that prince was a true original!

jacktheimprovident said:

You did everything but name a song.

By the way, you don't have to belittle Prince (or anybody else) to defend the Beatles. Besides, you know damned well McCartney is no rival of Prince's on any instrument. Now McCartney could come up with a catchy melody with the best of them.... and yes, the Beatles pushed the envelope with rock and practically invented pop music as we know it. However, that very same envelope was pushed well beyond the scope of the Beatles long ago.

dseann said:

Way to prove yourself as completely ignorant