smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | Mike Vancha <mvancha@sasktel.net> |
| Subject | Lefsetz on McCartney |
| Date | Sat, 23 Jun 2007 15:28:41 -0600 |
[Part 1 text/plain US-ASCII (9.1 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Keep in mind that Lefsetz thinks that the new Keith Urban album is the best
thing happening in music right now. I guess you have to look at who it's
coming from.
Bob has some good things to say about the music industry but I think if he
were judging McCartney's new music as if it were from a new artist, he might
like it. If he expects some of the greatest pop music ever written again to
appear on this album, he is disappointed.
Is this album worse than a Keith Urban album though?
Mike V.
on 6/22/07 6:20 PM, Alan Haber at zoogang@cox.net wrote:
> Well, that's the most abhorrent load of trash I have had the displeasure to
> read in a very long time.
>
> I don't know what else to say.
>
> Alan
> http://www.purepopradio.com
> http://www.buhdge.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: audities-owner@smoe.org [mailto:audities-owner@smoe.org] On Behalf Of
> bob
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 5:36 PM
> To: audities
> Subject: Well, this should keep the McCartney Thread alive for another 1200
> posts...
>
> From Bob Lefset'z Newsletter...
>
> bob
>
>
>
> Bob Lefsetz <bob@lefsetz.com> wrote:
>
> This record is positively AWFUL! I'm surprised there aren't SUICIDES at
> Starbucks. That baristas haven't offed themselves rather than endure this
> piece of crap all day long.
>
> Anybody who says this album is good has no ears. Maybe literally. Certainly
> was never exposed to Paul's previous solo work.
>
> Have you revisited "McCartney"? Famous for "Maybe I'm Amazed", even the
> MINOR tunes contain magic. Really, all these years later, listen to "Teddy
> Boy", even "Kreen-Akrore", never mind "Every Night". Seen as slight at the
> time, minor in comparison to the Beatles' work, it's Paul's second best solo
> album, after "Band On The Run".
>
> It's not like Paul hasn't misfired before. Did you buy "Wild Life"? That was
> just about as bad as "Memory Almost Full". And to say "Ram" was spotty would
> be charitable. Ditto with "Red Rose Speedway", with the saccharine monster
> hit "My Love" yet the infectious "Big Barn Bed".
>
> "Venus and Mars" was a disappointing follow-up to "Band On The Run", but it
> was playable throughout. "At The Speed Of Sound"...that heralded the great
> decline. Paul lost it. Oh, he regained the magic occasionally, with such
> sublime work as the title cut of "London Town". But then paying attention
> was too depressing. The disappointment made one reevaluate Paul's great
> prior work, and you didn't want to allow yourself to feel that way. Oh, he
> still killed live, but his albums? Not exactly dreck, but UNMEMORABLE!
>
> So now we've got this piece of crap.
>
> Paul's entitled to work, Paul's entitled to sully his career. But it's not
> necessary for us to laud him, give him a pass on everything he does now
> BECAUSE OF WHAT HE DID BEFORE!
>
> I'd only sampled the CD previously. Yup, that's enough. Not only for me, but
> you. If you need to live with a record that long to get it, then you just
> want to be BRAINWASHED into digging it. And for those albums that revealed
> themselves over time, at least they had some intriguing elements to begin
> with, that made you want to spin them again, like Roxy Music's "Avalon". One
> listen to "Memory Almost Full" and you feel like you're in Guantanamo Bay,
> being tortured. You'll do ANYTHING to get off the island. That's how I felt
> when I sat down tonight and really tried to listen.
>
> This is the emperor's new clothes. Nobody had the balls to tell Paul
> McCartney "Memory Almost Full" sucked. That he was polishing a turd. Maybe
> Paul's too fucked up to listen. But I'll tell you, when you approach a
> legendary artist or businessman and just kiss his ass, your sycophantic ways
> are dismissed. But if you engage them in a substantive discussion, engage
> their reasoning in discussions, they come alive, because they're confronted
> with adulation ALL DAY LONG!
>
> All those bigwigs you abhor for failing to pay attention to your substandard
> work, you'd be shocked at the intellectual discussions you can get them
> involved in. I've only met one label head who wasn't a deep thinker, if you
> got them on that path. You can imagine who...
>
> Point is, everybody treats Paul like a Beatle. Which he IS! But that's got
> nothing to do with the entertainment business, where it's WHAT HAVE YOU DONE
> FOR ME LATELY? Hell, would people even give George Lucas cash to make a
> movie? After not only the abortion of "Howard The Duck", but the three new
> forgettable "Star Wars" flicks? No, he's lost touch, he seems to be done.
> And, unfortunately, Paul McCartney seems to be too. Can he be persuaded to
> recapture the magic? Maybe not. But he made it by either being sweet or
> rockin'. That sweetness is absent here. And there are only moments of
> rocking. Play a Little Richard album and then listen to THIS!
>
> And I don't give a shit that this album sucks. It's what it represents that
> interests me. This Paul McCartney album is the biggest hype of the year.
> Imagine if you BOUGHT IT!
>
> Yup, imagine taking this turkey home and spinning it. You might NEVER BUY A
> CD AGAIN!
>
> This is one of the reasons we got into this mess. Overpriced albums with
> only one good track. But there's not even that ONE GOOD TRACK ON THIS CD!
>
> Really, buy "Memory Almost Full" and you'll GIVE UP ON MUSIC! Think ALL NEW
> MUSIC SUCKS!
>
> The guy's all over the media. Everybody says it's a return to form. But
> you...you think otherwise. So, are you going to trust the media in the
> future?
>
> This business self-immolates. It's about smoke and mirrors and ripping
> people off. People have been burned by the music business so many times that
> they've stopped paying attention. Paul McCartney GETS attention because he's
> a Beatle, but then he fumbles the ball.
>
> Howard Schultz...you're not making ENOUGH money at Starbucks? If "Memory
> Almost Full" was coffee beans, you wouldn't even GRIND them. How come you
> insist on serving quality coffee, but when it comes to music, you're willing
> to foist third rate crap upon your customers? Oh, because he's a BEATLE!
>
> That's what's wrong with this whole campaign. That's not just enough. Give
> Paul an award at the Kennedy Center. A lifetime achievement Grammy. But
> don't promote his crap and tell us it's good.
>
> A Starbucks record label. Yup, it's American business. Just another way to
> make money. Or, a way to hang with the rich and famous. Howard Schultz, in a
> boring business, now gets to hang with Hollywood royalty. He's a starfucker,
> just like in that Rolling Stones song. Like every rich businessman you get
> to invest in your crap. Really, only someone completely out of the
> entertainment mainstream, who wants in, lays down money for this unwanted
> junk. If Paul had gone to a traditional label, the employees there, the ones
> left anyway, would just go through the motions, because they wouldn't be
> able to get excited about the music. Able to get excited about Paul, but not
> what he's purveying.
>
> Rather than go back to Capitol, Paul just found a mark to sell his shit.
>
> And don't tell me about sales. In two weeks they've moved a scant 267,414.
> Yup, scant compared to the number of people traipsing through Starbucks,
> never mind traditional music retail. Scant compared to the number of people
> in AMERICA!
>
> Just like "Survivor" exploded out of nowhere, and then "American Idol",
> we're gonna have an act/record that's gonna be owned by tens of millions
> sometime in the future. It will be SO good people will be driven to the Web
> to acquire it. Yup, that's where they'll do it, they won't pay even 99 cents
> per track, but they'll want it nonetheless. There will be mania. Just like
> we had all those years ago.
>
> Why couldn't Paul have called Don Henley, famous for releasing no music
> before its time. Laboring over it until he believes it's not only beyond
> satisfactory, but GREAT! Sure, the Eagles might have made a deal with
> Wal-Mart, their Starbucks, but Henley and company are not going to blow
> their chance. They're not going to release something subpar like "Memory
> Almost Full". They wouldn't do that to their fans. They went on tour without
> new music. Why put out an album that people don't want to buy and don't want
> to hear live. Make something so good that people WILL embrace it like your
> old stuff, OR DON'T MAKE ANYTHING AT ALL!
>
> Don't be blind, don't tell me it's Paul McCartney. Don't show me the reviews
> on Amazon. Just play this album, from beginning to end. You'll be looking
> for magazines. Thinking about going to the bathroom. Looking at your watch.
> Anything but listening. Because you're a professional, you're a fan, and you
> know it's crap. If you don't know this is crap, then I don't care about your
> opinion. Have you listened to "Let Me Roll It"? Even "Mamunia"? Secondary
> tracks off of "Band On The Run"? There's nothing even in the same
> NEIGHBORHOOD on "Memory Almost Full".
>
> I'm sick and tired of people saying to root for the business. Fuck the
> business, I'm rooting for MUSIC! People who make stuff I'm dying to hear.
> And "Memory Almost Full" IS NOT IT!
>
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.