• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Paul McCartney vs Gene Simmons

#22
Gene a better business man? I don't think so. Sir Paul's net worth isaround a billion dollars. That's after a divorce, a life of kindess and charity to others and dealing with Yoko. Remember when he wanted to partner with John and buy the Lennon Mac Cartney cataloge back? Loco, I mean Yoko put the stop to that right away.

Gene isn't worth near that much.

And as far as a show everyone, as in EVERYONE who I've talked to that has seen one of Paul's shows come away in awe.



curbowkid said:
I'm gonna toss my 2 cents in. I've never seen gene Simmons play a REAL stand out bass line or anything special at all. Paul is a better musician in my opinion, and gene is a better business man. I think that's basically all it is.
Click to expand...
 
#24
BawanaRik said:
Gene a better business man? I don't think so. Sir Paul's net worth isaround a billion dollars.
Click to expand...

It's not really an Apples to apples (pardon the pun) comparison, as just about anyone could make that money if they were in The Beatles. I can't claim to have extensive knowledge of Paul McCartney's business dealings, but I would assume that he pays other people to do the marketing work that Gene Simmons does himself.
 
#25
Harper said:
It's not really an Apples to apples (pardon the pun) comparison, as just about anyone could make that money if they were in The Beatles. I can't claim to have extensive knowledge of Paul McCartney's business dealings, but I would assume that he pays other people to do the marketing work that Gene Simmons does himself.
Click to expand...

That
 
#26
Ringo isn't making Paul money. Neither did John or George. Paul's money came well after the Beatles and is mostly centered around the giant catalogs of songs he owns. Not that the Beatles were going broke or anything, of course ;) but Paul parlayed his money into stupid huge money.
 
#28
McCartney:

Funny, creative, talented, whimsical; one of the all time greatest names in the history of rock and roll.

Simmons:

Attention whore with a very small degree of musical talent he managed to market very well.

Terrible actor; annoying media personality; decent/good bass player; mediocre singer; terrible songwriter, with a willingness to sell on hooks alone.
 
#33
I think Mccartney and his fellow bandmates were better songwriters/composers and he's the better player - OTOH for me Gene and Kiss were far more interesting and inspiring, the first time I saw them was on ABC's "In Concert" as a 15 year old beginning bass player they left a far greater impression than Sir Paul.
 
#35
TBird1958 said:
OTOH for me Gene and Kiss were far more interesting and inspiring, the first time I saw them was on ABC's "In Concert" as a 15 year old beginning bass player they left a far greater impression than Sir Paul.
Click to expand...

I was introduced to the Beatles before I learned of KISS, but it was Gene and Geezer who made me want to be a bass player. As I became a better musician I developed a great appreciation for Macca's musicianship and songwriting.

Still though, I'd rather see a KISS show. YMMV.
 
#36
BawanaRik said:
Gene a better business man? I don't think so. Sir Paul's net worth isaround a billion dollars. That's after a divorce, a life of kindess and charity to others and dealing with Yoko. Remember when he wanted to partner with John and buy the Lennon Mac Cartney cataloge back? Loco, I mean Yoko put the stop to that right away.

Gene isn't worth near that much.

And as far as a show everyone, as in EVERYONE who I've talked to that has seen one of Paul's shows come away in awe.
Click to expand...

Well in all fairness, Paul's net worth is from the explosion of the Beatles which was kinda by chance. Gene Simmons marketed kiss as a brand and as a band to get too where he is now. Hell, I found kiss cologne at a Kmart. They are both famous for different reasons. I think McCartney is a better bassist over all though.
 
#37
Peepaleep said:
I was introduced to the Beatles before I learned of KISS, but it was Gene and Geezer who made me want to be a bass player. As I became a better musician I developed a great appreciation for Macca's musicianship and songwriting.

Still though, I'd rather see a KISS show. YMMV.
Click to expand...


Yup!

I only saw them once at the Paramount theater (seats 3000) here in Seattle about the time "Kiss Alive" came out and they were great - Rush was the other band on the bill that night!
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back