Print

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

[DaveRam]

How do you think Wings compare to other 70's bands ?
Are they as good as Queen , ABBA , The Eagles ,Fleetwood Mac or ELO ?
Did Wings make better  Singles & Albums , than the above ?
Who was best Live ?
 

[JimmyMcCullochFan]

As a live band, the 1976 lineup of Wings was top notch.

[tkitna]

'Wings' is just a subtitle to me as I look at it all as Paul McCartney music and not a proper band. Anyways, I like Pauls stuff better than the bands mentioned above, but I hardly think the majority of the public would see it that way.

[Almighty Doer of Stuff]

I'd say they're better than ABBA and The Eagles by far, but they're far behind Queen, Fleetwood Mac and ELO, in my opinion. I can't stand ABBA and The Eagles are just sort of okay, so I can easily put Wings ahead of them, but Wings, like all of Paul's post-Beatles work, is fairly inconsistent in quality in my opinion, whereas Queen, FM, and ELO are fairly consistently top-notch. Note that when I say Fleetwood Mac, I mean their five classic-lineup albums. I haven't heard the rest. Of those five, Tusk is the weakest, but really just in Buckingham's songwriting. C. McVie's songs are just as top-notch as ever, as are Nicks's. [/ramble]

[DaveRam]

I understand the point made that Wings were just a vehical for Paul to produce his music .
But i also think they were a fully functioning band with their own identity and sound , you don't record 7 albums and 20 odd singles if your not serious about your group and Paul clearly wanted a band to play with .
I think on the singles front Wings were as good as any of the big 70's bands , think Paul was still very competitive with other groups on that front .
In the UK in the 70's i would say Paul's big competiton group wise was Queen, ELO and ABBA these acts were every bit a hit's machine as Paul .
It was Wings who produced the best selling single of the 70's in the UK and not the other groups .
All Wings American singles made the Billboard top 40 which is a rare feet in it's self .
They had five US albums that went to # 1 and sell out concerts , not bad for a vanity project 
I think the Wings albums Band On The Run ,Venus and Mars and London Town hold up pretty well with the other groups efforts , although they do fall short of Fleetwood Mac's Rumours and ELO's Out Of The Blue .
Think Wings held their own quite well really a big band of the day who should be better thought of today ?

[tkitna]

Wings as a band? People were going in and out of that group faster than a whorehouse at war time. Seriously, the members seemed to always be changing and thats why I dont give them the identity of a real band sometimes. A vehicle for Paul is a perfect summarization in my opinion. Another thing that kills them in this comparison is their actual, true identity. What were they? A pop group? A rock band? Nobody could really seem to narrow it down one way or the other. Paul wrote songs all over the place genre speaking as he still does today. Wings would have a great rocker and then the next song would be a ballad followed up by a ragtime number. The other bands were way more consistent.

Actually, i'm surprsied Wings were as big and successful as they were after reading the numbers you posted. I didnt realize or remember that. 'Rumours' and 'Hotel California' are remebered more so than any Wings album though. 'Out Of The Blue' is awesome, but it doesnt seem to hold the same clout here in america as the other two or even 'Band On The Run' for that matter.

I dont know. I think the other bands mentioned were more consistent and thats why Wings isnt mentioned in the same vein. Again, not my opinion, but seemingly the publics.

[tkitna]

Speaking of just the singles, I think Wings stand out or surpasses the other bands (except for maybe ABBA) for sure.

[Kevin]

I know there's a trend afoot to view Wings as a bone fide band, but I have to agree with TK that at the time they were regarded as nothing more than McCartney's backing band. Love the whore house analogy, they were all paid a wage and Linda's presence destroyed any hint of credibility. If you wanted to destroy your career you joined Wings.
But that aside, that's the name he traded under, and looking at the numbers then there is no denying how successful they were.
But I think people forget now the utter contempt with which McCartney/Wings were regarded. They may have had the biggest selling single of the decade, but in NZ at least some radio stations refused to play it (I assume we're talking about Mull of Kintyre here.) It was the same position that Cliff Richard finds himself today. He is not regarded as a legitimate rock act and rock stations refuse to play his stuff, regardless of how well it sells.
Band On The Run caused a stir, as did Wings Over America. But I don't remember that being anything compared to the fuss made over The Eagles Hotel California or Fleetwood Macs Rumours.
I can't say whether Wings were "as good" as the others, because that depends on what you like to listen to. But they were definately as successful. But there is no denying that in the 70's Macca, for all sorts of reasons, was generally loathed by "serious" music fans.

[Kevin]

How do you think Wings compare to other 70's bands ?
Are they as good as Queen , ABBA , The Eagles ,Fleetwood Mac or ELO ?
Did Wings make better  Singles & Albums , than the above ?
Who was best Live ?
 

I have to mention that at the time I was in my late teens hanging out with dope smoking, acid taking hippies who regarded themselves as serious and true music fans, and to have confessed to liking any of these acts, including Wings, would have brought instant and plentiful ridicule. They were all regarded as purveyors of bland, faceless, corporate, FM friendly radio music that your uncool older sister might like.
Cool bands were Pink Floyd, Yes, King Crimson, Supertramp (bizarrely), Amon Duul and the like. Lennon, Harrison and Starr were cool. McCartney definately was not. His was regarded as Dad Music.

[DaveRam]

Agree tkitna the band changes were ridiculous the McCartney underpants were changed less frequently 
Having said that the core three Paul Linda and Denny remained constent throughout the bands history and in many respects Wings were a trio with some brilliant geust musicians .
Fleetwood Mac have had their fair share of changing band personal they too had a solid core of three members like Wings .
I think Wings were Pop/Rock like The Beatles but i think Wings were slightly more Rock than The Beatles ?
In terms of style of music i agree Wings music was all over the place Rock ,Pop, Disco , Glam Rock , Folk very similar to ABBA on that front who also had a diverse musical style .
I would say Wings identity was seen as mildly kooky the UK press had a fascination with their country veggie lifestyle , Paul & Linda inparticular were seen as eccentric types .
I think The Beatles identity is so strong that it's almost impossible to see them as solo artists it's a bit like been the Queen or the Pope the image of who they are gets fixed in your mind .
Wings should be as big in peoples minds as ABBA ,Queen or Fleetwood Mac they certainly were as successful as the other groups , but i suppose the long shadow of The Beatles means Wings will always be seen as hobby for Paul and not a serious band .

[nyfan(41)]

for me wings is ok - but by that point paul is a wealthy businessman/near legend and there's no one in the group to balance him out.
almost like a benelovent dictatorship or a vanity project
for a 70's 'group' i would rate led zepplin or earth wind and fire etc
.......
....
...
.
i guess what i do like about wings is that they're more r+b than the beatles
----
(thinks of the opening to let em in . . . )
nahhh, i take it back - wings is awesome ! !

[DaveRam]

Agree Kevin Paul & Wings were uncool as were ABBA but they were very successful both of them , ABBA less so in America but everywhere else in the world they were mega .
I think Wings were patchy in places especially on their albums but much less so on their singles which i do think have stood the test of time and can be considerd as classic Pop/Rock of the era ?
 C Moon/ Hi Hi Hi , My Love , Live & Let Die , Band On The Run , Jet, Listen To What The Man Said , Let 'Em In , Silly Love Songs , Mull Of Kintyre/Girl's 'School , With A Little Luck and Goodnight Tonight , thats a great bakers dozen of songs when you look at it , and they were successful singles throughout the world also , they should put all 13 on a Wings Geatest Hits album with Juniors Farm as a bonus 
I think Wings could be better marketed especially their singles , they are everybit as good as ABBA & Queen and both these acts have had very successful selling greatest hits albums , Paul needs to get a Best Of Wings Singles  out and only Wings no Ram stuff or early solo stuff , he should big up the band esspecially on the singles front ?

[DaveRam]

Forgot Wings Coming Up (Live ) thats a solid 15 track Wings Greatest Hits album , you could maybe fit the full length songs onto 15 track CD ?

[nyfan(41)]

Having said that the core three Paul Linda and Denny remained constent throughout the bands history and in many respects Wings were a trio . . . . . the long shadow of The Beatles means Wings will always be seen as hobby for Paul and not a serious band .

.
.
.
it's not just because of the beatles legacy or that paul had prior fame -
wings looked like a hobby or vanity project to some people because paul put his wife in the band and she's not a musician

[Kevin]

.
.
.
it's not just because of the beatles legacy or that paul had prior fame -
wings looked like a hobby or vanity project to some people because paul put his wife in the band and she's not a musician

Yes. In Retrospect it could be regarded as the greatest mistake of his career. It prompted unfortunate comparisons to John and Yoko and severley damaged his credibility as a serious artist. Stupid, stupid thing to do.

[DaveRam]

True nyfan(41) Paul did put Linda in the band and i agree she was'nt much of a singer or musician , but she did get better as time went on .
And she was pretty when made up she looks lovely in some of the Wings Video's especially on Goodnight Tonight ? and her warm personality did show through and she had a brain and was passionate about Animal Welfare and been veggie .
She did help out on lyrics too Live & Let Die as input from her .
It maybe would have been better to not have her in the band , but she was and i find it hard to think of Wings without her now , she's integral to that core trio and they would have never eaten if she had'nt been there  

[tkitna]

Lets not forget also that even Linda was against the idea. She knew her limitations and thought it was an awful idea. She knew the comparisons with John and Yoko would start flying around and of course, they did.

Ironically, I cant imagine Wings without her backing harmonies though. I count myself lucky to have seen her with Paul before she passed away.

[DaveRam]

^^^^ Wings harmonies are'nt bad London Town as some lovely examples .

[An Apple Beatle]

Yes. In Retrospect it could be regarded as the greatest mistake of his career. It prompted unfortunate comparisons to John and Yoko and severley damaged his credibility as a serious artist. Stupid, stupid thing to do.

Even as a youngster it was a turn-off factor. Now this was Partridge Family stuff. lol

[DaveRam]

Even as a youngster it was a turn-off factor. Now this was Partridge Family stuff. lol

  cruel but true

http://

Partridge Family mini concert 2 enjoy!

http://

Paul McCartney and Wings - With a little luck