|
Post by sallyg on Aug 10, 2016 18:05:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Aug 10, 2016 22:43:39 GMT -5
So, Paul's band talked him into "re-claiming" Being For The Benefit? Hmmm? How does that fit into the whole "Paul is manically trying to claim the whole Beatle's genius for himself" thing?
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Aug 10, 2016 23:17:19 GMT -5
From the RS Interview; Q. Are there people you can turn to now for advice about a new song or album? Paul; "In music, no. I rely on the experience and knowledge of what would have happened if I'd brought it to the Beatles. That is the best gauge." Q. What about life in general? Paul; "I have some very good friends. Lorne Michaels and I are pretty close. I can always go for a drink with him – we can talk pretty genuinely. I have relatives, my brother and my wife. Nancy is very strong that way. But music, no. It's very difficult. You can't top John. And John couldn't top Paul."
So there it is; He relies only on ghosts now for musical advice. That implies he will never quit until he drops. And he takes advice from no one. His ego runs his musical life. He's incapable of knowing when it will be time to step down from performing. Probably sagging ticket sales will dictate that. We are all human and not infallible. He makes a mistake in not having someone he trusts tell him his limitations. Linda probably could have. John cannot do the job as a ghost. He is a prisoner of his own ego. Mistake Paul. For all your talents and contributions....it's a mistake Paul. That is what spending too much time at the top of the pecking order does to someone...
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Aug 11, 2016 11:52:28 GMT -5
So there it is; He relies only on ghosts now for musical advice. That implies he will never quit until he drops. And he takes advice from no one. His ego runs his musical life. He's incapable of knowing when it will be time to step down from performing. Probably sagging ticket sales will dictate that. We are all human and not infallible. He makes a mistake in not having someone he trusts tell him his limitations. Linda probably could have. John cannot do the job as a ghost. He is a prisoner of his own ego. Mistake Paul. For all your talents and contributions....it's a mistake Paul. That is what spending too much time at the top of the pecking order does to someone... "Sagging ticket sales"? You do know Paul's show is one of the biggest selling tours there is. Most, if not all, of the reviews of his shows are raves. I would and everyone who buys his tickets are, advising him to keep going.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Aug 11, 2016 14:52:19 GMT -5
So, Paul's band talked him into "re-claiming" Being For The Benefit? Hmmm? How does that fit into the whole "Paul is manically trying to claim the whole Beatle's genius for himself" thing? His band apparently talked him into playing it, "re-claim" is Paul's word and Paul's word alone. Apparently Paul doesn't listen to anyone musically(and that has been sorely apparent in the past) but that is only if it is critical, even mildly so and constructive. When his band fawns and begs him to play a certain song that shows how great he is then he will listen.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Aug 11, 2016 15:14:15 GMT -5
Paul comes across rather bitter about the democracy at Apple and sarcastically says, "The two girls are Beatles," referring to Yoko and Olivia. He does not say it lovingly but rather put out that they each get a vote. Sorry Paul that just you and Ringo don't get to vote(Paul would then probably argue that Ringo's vote was not equal to his). Where are our feminist supporters of Paul and bashers of John Lennon? If Hillary Clinton is elected President will Paul say, "That girl is President?" LOL, Paul might but he would get bashed for it and by old Hillary herself. And look at this typical headline as other media outlets pick up on this RS interview: "Paul McCartney gets candid about his relationship with Yoko Ono, says Beatles were 'kind of threatened' by her." www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/paul-mccartney-gets-candid-about-his-relationship-with-yoko-ono-says-beatles-were-kind-of-threatened-by-her/ar-BBvw5PW?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhpWhat bullshit about Paul now getting candid. This is nothing new, Paul has been saying this since the early 1970's and John was saying it in 1970. The RS writer is a clever man and I can't believe he went there other than he knows that Yoko questions yanks Paul's chain and Paul will always be pissy under that fake pronouncement that he and Yoko, "are good." Paul cannot help himself but get digs in at Yoko even while seemingly praising her! "She's so Yoko." And we are no closer to learning the fate of LIB. At least we can ascertain that Paul wants it released! Man, I wish Paul would stop talking Beatles and just talk about the present or even Wings if he wanted to talk history. Paul was Wings so he can't revise anything with them and do harm! But the more Paul talks Beatles the less endearing the story becomes to me!
|
|
markc
Very Clean
Posts: 447
|
Post by markc on Aug 11, 2016 15:29:46 GMT -5
I just wish he'd explain that "the movement you need is on your shoulder" lyric once and for all.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Aug 11, 2016 15:42:54 GMT -5
So, Paul's band talked him into "re-claiming" Being For The Benefit? Hmmm? How does that fit into the whole "Paul is manically trying to claim the whole Beatle's genius for himself" thing? His band apparently talked him into playing it, "re-claim" is Paul's word and Paul's word alone. Apparently Paul doesn't listen to anyone musically(and that has been sorely apparent in the past) but that is only if it is critical, even mildly so and constructive. When his band fawns and begs him to play a certain song that shows how great he is then he will listen. "..."re-claim" is Paul's word and Paul's word alone." Right. He reclaimed it as a song he co-wrote and therefore can sing too. "Apparently Paul doesn't listen to anyone musically(and that has been sorely apparent in the past) but that is only if it is critical, even mildly so and constructive. When his band fawns and begs him to play a certain song that shows how great he is then he will listen. " I didn't read that in the article. Or anywhere else other than on this site.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Aug 11, 2016 15:49:57 GMT -5
Paul comes across rather bitter about the democracy at Apple and sarcastically says, "The two girls are Beatles," referring to Yoko and Olivia. He does not say it lovingly but rather put out that they each get a vote. Sorry Paul that just you and Ringo don't get to vote(Paul would then probably argue that Ringo's vote was not equal to his). Where are our feminist supporters of Paul and bashers of John Lennon? If Hillary Clinton is elected President will Paul say, "That girl is President?" LOL, Paul might but he would get bashed for it and by old Hillary herself. And look at this typical headline as other media outlets pick up on this RS interview: "Paul McCartney gets candid about his relationship with Yoko Ono, says Beatles were 'kind of threatened' by her." www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/paul-mccartney-gets-candid-about-his-relationship-with-yoko-ono-says-beatles-were-kind-of-threatened-by-her/ar-BBvw5PW?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhpWhat bullshit about Paul now getting candid. This is nothing new, Paul has been saying this since the early 1970's and John was saying it in 1970. The RS writer is a clever man and I can't believe he went there other than he knows that Yoko questions yanks Paul's chain and Paul will always be pissy under that fake pronouncement that he and Yoko, "are good." Paul cannot help himself but get digs in at Yoko even while seemingly praising her! "She's so Yoko." And we are no closer to learning the fate of LIB. At least we can ascertain that Paul wants it released! Man, I wish Paul would stop talking Beatles and just talk about the present or even Wings if he wanted to talk history. Paul was Wings so he can't revise anything with them and do harm! But the more Paul talks Beatles the less endearing the story becomes to me! Again, I didn't read any bitterness in the Rolling Stone article. He's just telling it like it is. There's a touch of irony in his saying "the girls", i.e. "the girls are equals". More Beatle stories Paul. More! That's what I want to read about from Paul.
|
|
markc
Very Clean
Posts: 447
|
Post by markc on Aug 11, 2016 16:14:21 GMT -5
It was a pretty good interview. It didn't take away any bitterness from it.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Aug 11, 2016 17:24:50 GMT -5
" I didn't read that in the article. Or anywhere else other than on this site. Maybe we read different interviews.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Aug 11, 2016 20:57:25 GMT -5
So there it is; He relies only on ghosts now for musical advice. That implies he will never quit until he drops. And he takes advice from no one. His ego runs his musical life. He's incapable of knowing when it will be time to step down from performing. Probably sagging ticket sales will dictate that. We are all human and not infallible. He makes a mistake in not having someone he trusts tell him his limitations. Linda probably could have. John cannot do the job as a ghost. He is a prisoner of his own ego. Mistake Paul. For all your talents and contributions....it's a mistake Paul. That is what spending too much time at the top of the pecking order does to someone... "Sagging ticket sales"? You do know Paul's show is one of the biggest selling tours there is. Most, if not all, of the reviews of his shows are raves. I would and everyone who buys his tickets are, advising him to keep going. His voice is giving out. It will only get worse the longer he insists on doing 3 hour concerts without breaks and singing songs in keys far beyond his capabilities. I said the reason he will quit will most likely be sagging ticket sales not Paul thinking "I am not able to do this well anymore, so I will walk away before I embarrass myself." He is 74 years old. He cannot sustain the demands he is making on his vocal abilities much longer. If he alters his format to small venues with accoustic repertoire in lower keys, maybe he can sustain his performances a bit more, but he has begun to falter whether you hear it or not. No one beats Father Time. Rock singers just don't carry on much past their mid-70's. I'd love to see him continue, but paying $200 to hear him in his present condition? No thanks. I don't care what the critics say. When you've been to the top of the mountain, why let people see you in decline? There is nothing left to prove. You were the best ever. Your music will live forever. Walk away before you become a caricature of what you once were.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Aug 11, 2016 23:20:32 GMT -5
John: "There's only one way to go out!" George: "How's that?" John: "Singing!"
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Aug 12, 2016 0:50:08 GMT -5
It was a pretty good interview. It didn't take away any bitterness from it. I agree with you. I enjoyed the interview. I didn't pick up on any bad vibes or innuendos or snarkiness about Yoko. I liked how he spoke about his feelings about not selling a lot of records. I didn't mind what he said about how he works with others today. I'm sure he's collaborative, but someone has to be the "musical director." In fact, I believe Wix plays a very very important role. I thought Paul came out well. Me thinks, as a testiment to the times we live, we micro-analyze every little word people say.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Aug 12, 2016 5:50:41 GMT -5
"Sagging ticket sales"? You do know Paul's show is one of the biggest selling tours there is. Most, if not all, of the reviews of his shows are raves. I would and everyone who buys his tickets are, advising him to keep going. His voice is giving out. It will only get worse the longer he insists on doing 3 hour concerts without breaks and singing songs in keys far beyond his capabilities. I said the reason he will quit will most likely be sagging ticket sales not Paul thinking "I am not able to do this well anymore, so I will walk away before I embarrass myself." He is 74 years old. He cannot sustain the demands he is making on his vocal abilities much longer. If he alters his format to small venues with accoustic repertoire in lower keys, maybe he can sustain his performances a bit more, but he has begun to falter whether you hear it or not. No one beats Father Time. Rock singers just don't carry on much past their mid-70's. I'd love to see him continue, but paying $200 to hear him in his present condition? No thanks. I don't care what the critics say. When you've been to the top of the mountain, why let people see you in decline? There is nothing left to prove. You were the best ever. Your music will live forever. Walk away before you become a caricature of what you once were. I think you worded this very well, lowbasso. I couldn't have said it better myself... and yet, I have something else to say. I have been meaning to praise Paul for his concert which I just attended at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey this past Sunday. It was a great show, and Paul again demonstrated an incredible endurance and endless energy for a man who's 74 years old. His vocals on this particular night were better than I had heard in various YouTube clips, with the exception of "Maybe I'm Amazed" (a song everyone is saying he definitely needs to drop). I don't know if he tried extra hard and rested more beforehand because this was "The New York Area" gig. All I can say is, I walked out in 2005 and 2011 thinking that this guy could keep going and going, and here I exited the show in 2016 thinking I could see Paul doing this at 80 (based on that one show, I mean). Everyone had a great time, and I saw many, many, many young kids, teens, and college youngsters in attendance (I'm always looking to see if they're there). I think they were all blown away just to be able to be in the same arena with their hero, and to actually see a Beatle. Paul did not embarrass himself at all during this particular venue, and I am just amazed that he is still up there on stage carrying that torch as the one link to keeping The Beatles alive and somewhat current for new generations. But tomorrow my trepidations may return in full alarm, if I hear his voice croak on a TV performance or something, again. It's really a hit-and-miss affair these days and you don't know what you're going to get. I don't believe that "no one beats Father Time", however. There are exceptions... just look at Ringo Starr's appearance, his stamina, and his voice (which has not changed at all). And look at Paul's boundless physical energy onstage. I think some people weather the storm of the aging process and some don't fare as well. Even look at Mick Jagger. These guys are pretty youthful for men in their 70's (I'm not saying it will definitely sustain into their 80's!) . So I'm kind of in the middle on this. I agree with what you wrote for the most part (he still should probably consider this his last tour), and at the same time after witnessing Sunday's concert for myself, I am completely at a loss for words when it comes to telling Paul he'd better give it up already. I'm sorry for this wavering back and forth POV I have one day to the next on Paul's voice, but it does vary for me. When Paul yelled out his trademark "See Ya Next Time!!" at the end of the concert, I noticed he said it more intently and defiantly, or so I thought. So it will be interesting to see just where he goes with this ongoing situation. The one criticism I can give of the concert was that I'm tired of Paul sticking to his script with his usual between-song dialogue about reading people's signs, drinking the crowd in, remembering Jimi Hendrix, etc. But of course there are always first-timers in the audience who've not seen him before, and who do not follow the man's career to the letter as we here do -- so for them I'm sure it was a thrill.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Aug 12, 2016 7:44:26 GMT -5
His voice is giving out. It will only get worse the longer he insists on doing 3 hour concerts without breaks and singing songs in keys far beyond his capabilities. I said the reason he will quit will most likely be sagging ticket sales not Paul thinking "I am not able to do this well anymore, so I will walk away before I embarrass myself." He is 74 years old. He cannot sustain the demands he is making on his vocal abilities much longer. If he alters his format to small venues with accoustic repertoire in lower keys, maybe he can sustain his performances a bit more, but he has begun to falter whether you hear it or not. No one beats Father Time. Rock singers just don't carry on much past their mid-70's. I'd love to see him continue, but paying $200 to hear him in his present condition? No thanks. I don't care what the critics say. When you've been to the top of the mountain, why let people see you in decline? There is nothing left to prove. You were the best ever. Your music will live forever. Walk away before you become a caricature of what you once were. I think you worded this very well, lowbasso. I couldn't have said it better myself... and yet, I have something else to say. I have been meaning to praise Paul for his concert which I just attended at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey this past Sunday. It was a great show, and Paul again demonstrated an incredible endurance and endless energy for a man who's 74 years old. His vocals on this particular night were better than I had heard in various YouTube clips, with the exception of "Maybe I'm Amazed" (a song everyone is saying he definitely needs to drop). I don't know if he tried extra hard and rested more beforehand because this was "The New York Area" gig. All I can say is, I walked out in 2005 and 2011 thinking that this guy could keep going and going, and here I exited the show in 2016 thinking I could see Paul doing this at 80 (based on that one show, I mean). Everyone had a great time, and I saw many, many, many young kids, teens, and college youngsters in attendance (I'm always looking to see if they're there). I think they were all blown away just to be able to be in the same arena with their hero, and to actually see a Beatle. Paul did not embarrass himself at all during this particular venue, and I am just amazed that he is still up there on stage carrying that torch as the one link to keeping The Beatles alive and somewhat current for new generations. But tomorrow my trepidations may return in full alarm, if I hear his voice croak on a TV performance or something, again. It's really a hit-and-miss affair these days and you don't know what you're going to get. I don't believe that "no one beats Father Time", however. There are exceptions... just look at Ringo Starr's appearance, his stamina, and his voice (which has not changed at all). And look at Paul's boundless physical energy onstage. I think some people weather the storm of the aging process and some don't fare as well. Even look at Mick Jagger. These guys are pretty youthful for men in their 70's (I'm not saying it will definitely sustain into their 80's!) . So I'm kind of in the middle on this. I agree with what you wrote for the most part (he still should probably consider this his last tour), and at the same time after witnessing Sunday's concert for myself, I am completely at a loss for words when it comes to telling Paul he'd better give it up already. I'm sorry for this wavering back and forth POV I have one day to the next on Paul's voice, but it does vary for me. When Paul yelled out his trademark "See Ya Next Time!!" at the end of the concert, I noticed he said it more intently and defiantly, or so I thought. So it will be interesting to see just where he goes with this ongoing situation. The one criticism I can give of the concert was that I'm tired of Paul sticking to his script with his usual between-song dialogue about reading people's signs, drinking the crowd in, remembering Jimi Hendrix, etc. But of course there are always first-timers in the audience who've not seen him before, and who do not follow the man's career to the letter as we here do -- so for them I'm sure it was a thrill. I am with you 100% Joe. It sounds like Paul was well rested and made it through this concert well. Is he transposing the keys in his songs down to be more comfortable for his 74 year old voice? Can't say since I didn't hear it. Should he stop touring? Not if he doesn't want to. Will he continue to have consistently strong three hour marathons where his voice holds out well? I think that is questionable in the next few years. Will he cut back on the frequency of concerts to get more rest between concerts? Good idea imo. My point of what will finally make him decide to pull back on his performances is valid. He says he takes no musical advice from anyone. His ego is insatiable. So either health issues or a drop off in quality in the concerts will determine his "retirement." I hope he decides to throttle back and give us some nice accoustic concerts in small venues more sporadically. Much like Tony Bennett now does at age 90. That will be his best option over the next few years. It is new territory coming for him as the world's greatest rock star as he approaches age 80. Look at Jerry Lee Lewis and Chuck Berry who are older and what they sound like. Singing rock music at their ages is not all that easy. Everything I say is based purely on how voices age. I love that Paul still wants to do it. But no one has ever beat Father Time. No one.
|
|
|
Post by sallyg on Aug 12, 2016 12:34:54 GMT -5
His voice is giving out. It will only get worse the longer he insists on doing 3 hour concerts without breaks and singing songs in keys far beyond his capabilities. I said the reason he will quit will most likely be sagging ticket sales not Paul thinking "I am not able to do this well anymore, so I will walk away before I embarrass myself." He is 74 years old. He cannot sustain the demands he is making on his vocal abilities much longer. If he alters his format to small venues with accoustic repertoire in lower keys, maybe he can sustain his performances a bit more, but he has begun to falter whether you hear it or not. No one beats Father Time. Rock singers just don't carry on much past their mid-70's. I'd love to see him continue, but paying $200 to hear him in his present condition? No thanks. I don't care what the critics say. When you've been to the top of the mountain, why let people see you in decline? There is nothing left to prove. You were the best ever. Your music will live forever. Walk away before you become a caricature of what you once were. I think you worded this very well, lowbasso. I couldn't have said it better myself... and yet, I have something else to say. I have been meaning to praise Paul for his concert which I just attended at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey this past Sunday. It was a great show, and Paul again demonstrated an incredible endurance and endless energy for a man who's 74 years old. His vocals on this particular night were better than I had heard in various YouTube clips, with the exception of "Maybe I'm Amazed" (a song everyone is saying he definitely needs to drop). I don't know if he tried extra hard and rested more beforehand because this was "The New York Area" gig. All I can say is, I walked out in 2005 and 2011 thinking that this guy could keep going and going, and here I exited the show in 2016 thinking I could see Paul doing this at 80 (based on that one show, I mean). Everyone had a great time, and I saw many, many, many young kids, teens, and college youngsters in attendance (I'm always looking to see if they're there). I think they were all blown away just to be able to be in the same arena with their hero, and to actually see a Beatle. Paul did not embarrass himself at all during this particular venue, and I am just amazed that he is still up there on stage carrying that torch as the one link to keeping The Beatles alive and somewhat current for new generations. But tomorrow my trepidations may return in full alarm, if I hear his voice croak on a TV performance or something, again. It's really a hit-and-miss affair these days and you don't know what you're going to get. I don't believe that "no one beats Father Time", however. There are exceptions... just look at Ringo Starr's appearance, his stamina, and his voice (which has not changed at all). And look at Paul's boundless physical energy onstage. I think some people weather the storm of the aging process and some don't fare as well. Even look at Mick Jagger. These guys are pretty youthful for men in their 70's (I'm not saying it will definitely sustain into their 80's!) . So I'm kind of in the middle on this. I agree with what you wrote for the most part (he still should probably consider this his last tour), and at the same time after witnessing Sunday's concert for myself, I am completely at a loss for words when it comes to telling Paul he'd better give it up already. I'm sorry for this wavering back and forth POV I have one day to the next on Paul's voice, but it does vary for me. When Paul yelled out his trademark "See Ya Next Time!!" at the end of the concert, I noticed he said it more intently and defiantly, or so I thought. So it will be interesting to see just where he goes with this ongoing situation. The one criticism I can give of the concert was that I'm tired of Paul sticking to his script with his usual between-song dialogue about reading people's signs, drinking the crowd in, remembering Jimi Hendrix, etc. But of course there are always first-timers in the audience who've not seen him before, and who do not follow the man's career to the letter as we here do -- so for them I'm sure it was a thrill. Happy to hear that you enjoyed the show and thanks for the review of his Metlife cocert. Paul sounded good when I saw him in Philly July 12. I watched some of the videos of the Metlife concert and I agree that Paul did sound good.
|
|
|
Post by sallyg on Aug 12, 2016 12:45:11 GMT -5
I think you worded this very well, lowbasso. I couldn't have said it better myself... and yet, I have something else to say. I have been meaning to praise Paul for his concert which I just attended at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey this past Sunday. It was a great show, and Paul again demonstrated an incredible endurance and endless energy for a man who's 74 years old. His vocals on this particular night were better than I had heard in various YouTube clips, with the exception of "Maybe I'm Amazed" (a song everyone is saying he definitely needs to drop). I don't know if he tried extra hard and rested more beforehand because this was "The New York Area" gig. All I can say is, I walked out in 2005 and 2011 thinking that this guy could keep going and going, and here I exited the show in 2016 thinking I could see Paul doing this at 80 (based on that one show, I mean). Everyone had a great time, and I saw many, many, many young kids, teens, and college youngsters in attendance (I'm always looking to see if they're there). I think they were all blown away just to be able to be in the same arena with their hero, and to actually see a Beatle. Paul did not embarrass himself at all during this particular venue, and I am just amazed that he is still up there on stage carrying that torch as the one link to keeping The Beatles alive and somewhat current for new generations. But tomorrow my trepidations may return in full alarm, if I hear his voice croak on a TV performance or something, again. It's really a hit-and-miss affair these days and you don't know what you're going to get. I don't believe that "no one beats Father Time", however. There are exceptions... just look at Ringo Starr's appearance, his stamina, and his voice (which has not changed at all). And look at Paul's boundless physical energy onstage. I think some people weather the storm of the aging process and some don't fare as well. Even look at Mick Jagger. These guys are pretty youthful for men in their 70's (I'm not saying it will definitely sustain into their 80's!) . So I'm kind of in the middle on this. I agree with what you wrote for the most part (he still should probably consider this his last tour), and at the same time after witnessing Sunday's concert for myself, I am completely at a loss for words when it comes to telling Paul he'd better give it up already. I'm sorry for this wavering back and forth POV I have one day to the next on Paul's voice, but it does vary for me. When Paul yelled out his trademark "See Ya Next Time!!" at the end of the concert, I noticed he said it more intently and defiantly, or so I thought. So it will be interesting to see just where he goes with this ongoing situation. The one criticism I can give of the concert was that I'm tired of Paul sticking to his script with his usual between-song dialogue about reading people's signs, drinking the crowd in, remembering Jimi Hendrix, etc. But of course there are always first-timers in the audience who've not seen him before, and who do not follow the man's career to the letter as we here do -- so for them I'm sure it was a thrill. I am with you 100% Joe. It sounds like Paul was well rested and made it through this concert well. Is he transposing the keys in his songs down to be more comfortable for his 74 year old voice? Can't say since I didn't hear it. Should he stop touring? Not if he doesn't want to. Will he continue to have consistently strong three hour marathons where his voice holds out well? I think that is questionable in the next few years. Will he cut back on the frequency of concerts to get more rest between concerts? Good idea imo. My point of what will finally make him decide to pull back on his performances is valid. He says he takes no musical advice from anyone. His ego is insatiable. So either health issues or a drop off in quality in the concerts will determine his "retirement." I hope he decides to throttle back and give us some nice accoustic concerts in small venues more sporadically. Much like Tony Bennett now does at age 90. That will be his best option over the next few years. It is new territory coming for him as the world's greatest rock star as he approaches age 80. Look at Jerry Lee Lewis and Chuck Berry who are older and what they sound like. Singing rock music at their ages is not all that easy. Everything I say is based purely on how voices age. I love that Paul still wants to do it. But no one has ever beat Father Time. No one. I believe the biggest thing that will determine how much longer Paul tours is how long his health holds up. It is my opinion that Paul will tour until something happens to him health wise which would effect his singing/speaking ability, quality of musicianship and stanima. We will just have to see what unfolds in the next 3-6 years. I think it's great that he currently has the stanima and health to put on a 3 hour show.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2016 17:41:00 GMT -5
I quite liked that interview, i think some of the opinions above mine are written Purely to stir the forum pot. It's a fairly tame read. He's a good writer David Fricke.
|
|
|
Post by sallyg on Aug 12, 2016 20:36:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Aug 13, 2016 15:53:10 GMT -5
I quite liked that interview, i think some of the opinions above mine are written Purely to stir the forum pot. It's a fairly tame read. He's a good writer David Fricke. Yes I didn't really see any barbed comments. I think Paul was saying that no one could replace John as his collaborator. I read it as nothing more than a tribute to the memory of John Lennon.
|
|