Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Frightwolf]

Personally I find Abbey Road too inconsistent to be in a class with most Beatles albums, but I fail to see how it is Mcartneys first solo album.

[Ydoll Gwyn]

The push to do an album comes from McCartney. The medley idea comes from McCartney. The structure of many songs (arrangement, instruments, etc) comes from McCartney.

Lennon had lost interest, as all know, in the Beatles as a group. Only two GOOD songs for Road, the rest are fragments or Yoko-penned.

George has many good songs on offer, but Paul doesn't commit to anything except Sun, and the McCartney-like sugary Something.

Not a Macca album - come on!

[Ydoll Gwyn]

Revolver is more of a solo album for Paul than Abbey Road will ever be.

Truly one of the more ignorant statements made on this board. If any album was a group effort, with them all totally committed, it was REVOLVER!

I'm sorry to be harsh Frightwolf, but ya gotta face facts man!

[An Apple Beatle]

Abbey RD. laregely was constructed from a lot of old material The Beatles had lying around unfinished. Which tracks were Yoko Penned?

[Sondra]

Not even trying to hide the bias against McCartney now. Making things up just to make Paul look bad. They all agreed to do the album because they knew Let It Be was not a fitting ending to their career as Beatles. They say this on the Anthology documentary as well as in several interviews.

McCartney commiting only to certain George songs? Right. We all know he wasn't too keen on George getting more than 2 songs on an album, but where is the proof that HE had the last say about what George songs ended up on an album. Proof, not just conjecture. BTW, they are both great songs. More than worthy of being there.

And I think it's news to ALL of us to find out that Yoko, wrote any of John's songs. Partly because I'm thinking it didn't happen. But again, proof.

Oh, and Something a McCartney like sugary song??? This is one of George's great accomplishments. It's a beautiful song and it's a put down to George the way YOUR comparing it to McCartney. Although I think most would agree that comparing it to McCartney's writing in his Beatle days is HARDLY a put down and more of a compliment.

Oh well, everyone has their theories. Mostly based on years of rumors and misinformation. Not to mention how our personal biases effect what we believe to be fact. I know I have mine too.

[In Blue Hawaii]

The push to do an album comes from McCartney. The medley idea comes from McCartney. The structure of many songs (arrangement, instruments, etc) comes from McCartney.

Lennon had lost interest, as all know, in the Beatles as a group.

I agree, but even Paul and George were losing interest in the Beatles as a group at that time. Klein's lawyer's coming in, Paul's lawyers coming in, it was a war zone. But judging what I hear on the record, the guys are having a ball!

[In Blue Hawaii]

At the moment it's 'in' to class Pepper as overrated.

At the moment it's "in" to say that it's "in" to class Pepper as overrated.

 

[Frightwolf]

Truly one of the more ignorant statements made on this board. If any album was a group effort, with them all totally committed, it was REVOLVER!

I'm sorry to be harsh Frightwolf, but ya gotta face facts man!

They may have been committed to the album, but the album certainly SOUNDS like it's a Macca album.

[Ydoll Gwyn]

Not even trying to hide the bias against McCartney now. Making things up just to make Paul look bad. They all agreed to do the album because they knew Let It Be was not a fitting ending to their career as Beatles. They say this on the Anthology documentary as well as in several interviews.

McCartney commiting only to certain George songs? Right. We all know he wasn't too keen on George getting more than 2 songs on an album, but where is the proof that HE had the last say about what George songs ended up on an album. Proof, not just conjecture. BTW, they are both great songs. More than worthy of being there.

And I think it's news to ALL of us to find out that Yoko, wrote any of John's songs. Partly because I'm thinking it didn't happen. But again, proof.

Oh, and Something a McCartney like sugary song??? This is one of George's great accomplishments. It's a beautiful song and it's a put down to George the way YOUR comparing it to McCartney. Although I think most would agree that comparing it to McCartney's writing in his Beatle days is HARDLY a put down and more of a compliment.

Oh well, everyone has their theories. Mostly based on years of rumors and misinformation. Not to mention how our personal biases effect what we believe to be fact. I know I have mine too.

And all this from someone who used to call herself Maccalvr.

Just a few things: they didn't all "agree" to do the album. They didn't know it was to be their last. They were pushed and bullied by McCartney. What they may say today is colored by hindsight (or Macca revisionism in his case).

SOMETHING: well overrated, as I've said before. Naff lyrics for a start. It's pleasant enough, but the fact that YOU (Sandra) think it's one of his great accomplishments shows how Macca-sugary it is!

Your comment about Yoko and Apple Beatle's asking which song by Yoko shows a sore lack of understanding of the joko thing.

Because is the Yoko-penned thing (or at the very least, huge input). The goofy "because the sky is blue, it turns me on" stuff brands it Yoko straight off. And you do know  the cliches in Imagine come largely from the Ono brain? No? You didn't know that? Go read Grapefruit.

I don't know why, but I'm still amazed at what the macca-lovers will say the moment their lad gets criticised! Kind of makes me want to stir things up even more ...

[Ydoll Gwyn]

They may have been committed to the album, but the album certainly SOUNDS like it's a Macca album.

[Frightwolf]

I think that rave is so wide of reality, so far off the mark, that I blush for you. I don't think you understand the Beatles at all. But that's OK. No one's gonna die because of that!

The minute you can refute George's, "We thought we should do one better for Abbey Road," comment he made on the Anthology, I'll accept your premature opening.

[Frightwolf]

I don't know why, but I'm still amazed at what the macca-lovers will say the moment their lad gets criticised! Kind of makes me want to stir things up even more ...

In a sense, trolling.  No wait, it is trolling.  Watch yourself, Maria.

[Fried_Chicken]

I think that rave is so wide of reality, so far off the mark, that I blush for you. I don't think you understand the Beatles at all. But that's OK. No one's gonna die because of that!

PAul is the best. Shut up

[Sondra]

Ydoll, there really is no talking to you. You're very rude and never, ever give anyone else the benefit of the doubt. I've had debates before with people who have very strong convictions, but all had the guts to admit when they were wrong. You cannot. So it's useless. Think what you want. You have some sort of God complex for Lennon and think McCartney is trite. Okay. I called myself Maccalvr because that's who got me into the Beatles when I was 6. I'm not blind to Lennon's genius, and I'm well aware of accomplishments. I wasn't sticking up for Paul in my post, I was debating your statements as I do not believer them to be facts. Tell me to go read Grapefruit when your the one who says JOhn speaks out of his ass half the time? Good one. You think Yoko's any better? Did you actaully believe she was playing keyboards on stage with John too? Anyway, I think you have a lot of knowledge of the Beatles, and post great things when you are not being condescending. I think there's a way to debate without throwing in that sort of attitude which obviously doesn't fly well with most people.

[lennonlemon]

something, a bad song?

that's like saying the beatles were a bad band.

[Frightwolf]

Ydoll, there really is no talking to you. You're very rude and never, ever give anyone else the benefit of the doubt. I've had debates before with people who have very strong convictions, but all had the guts to admit when they were wrong. You cannot. So it's useless. Think what you want. You have some sort of God complex for Lennon and think McCartney is trite. Okay. I called myself Maccalvr because that's who got me into the Beatles when I was 6. I'm not blind to Lennon's genius, and I'm well aware of accomplishments. I wasn't sticking up for Paul in my post, I was debating your statements as I do not believer them to be facts. Tell me to go read Grapefruit when your the one who says JOhn speaks out of his ass half the time? Good one. You think Yoko's any better? Did you actaully believe she was playing keyboards on stage with John too? Anyway, I think you have a lot of knowledge of the Beatles, and post great things when you are not being condescending. I think there's a way to debate without throwing in that sort of attitude which obviously doesn't fly well with most people.

What's amazing with Ydoll is that he/she (Maria, Ydoll, whichever gender he/she wants to be) tells us that we're off-base, wrong, this that this that, but who's agreeing with YDoll? He/she is agreeing with him/herself, and that's it.  So who's off-base? Ydoll.

[Bruno]

SOMETHING: well overrated, as I've said before. Naff lyrics for a start. It's pleasant enough, but the fact that YOU (Sandra) think it's one of his great accomplishments shows how Macca-sugary it is!

 ...

I don't think you have a clue of what you're talking about!!!!!!!!!!!!!



!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!

!!!

[Bruno]

!!!!

[Frightwolf]

!!!!

LMAO  

I've been talking about those Maria-like exclamation marks for the longest time.  Gawd, they're so stupid.

[Sondra]

I love the fact that because I(Sandra) think Something is one of George's greatest accomplishments means that it MUST be Maccalike. Hey, maybe that's why it was such a hit. I didn't know I had that much power in my musical tastes for someone to come to THAT conclusion. And nevermind all the music critics, fellow musicians, and tons of Beatles and non Beatles fans alike that made it the only number 1 off of Abbey Road, all think the song is outstanding. Or the fact that it always earns a place on any 100 greatest songs list. No, they're all wrong because I(Sandra) happen to think it's a great song. There's no logic to that AT ALL. Jeez, I have such horrible musical taste because I like Paul McCartney's Beatles songs. What's wrong with me? If you follow that logic, then the fact that I love A Day in the Life, then it must be sugary and Paul like. Or any other song for that matter. It just makes NO sense at all.

 :

Here's one critics review of the song, the same sentiment you'll find in probably ALL reviews of this song. Done by people who are qualified that is.

One of the pluses of the