Paul McCartney

[Coypu]

Originally posted by moley
They've tried, and failed. There are plenty of people with Ricks that don't sound like McCartney. It ain't gear, it's him.

It has to do with so many factors, equipment, handshape, recording tools, room acoustic, settings etc. There are however plenty of beatles cover bands who do a good job. Ask any of thoose to play Havona and you'll see that most of them would end up failing due to lack of skill.

 

[Coypu]

Originally posted by Bassin'
Oh, I see. Fast=Advanced. Hmmm, sounds like a whole lot of wankin' to me.

And by the way, that 178thing mp3 sure makes a good scale excersize. I'm still not sure what makes it advanced, though.

Well if you can say that Spastic Ink is not advanced in composition and playing and back it up then sure go ahead but I bet that you can't. That was a short clip, listen Mosquito Brain Surgery and get back to me. I'm sure that you will be struggling with a severe headache and some wish that you could play and write music like that.

 

[moley]

Originally posted by Coypu


It has to do with so many factors, equipment, handshape, recording tools, room acoustic, settings etc.

How does room acoustic affect the sound of a bass being recorded direct inject, eh?

As for recording tools, basically, it amounts to the bass, the DI box, the mixer, and the tape.

And from my experience, those don't really account for a tone like McCartney's.

 

[moley]

I'm with Bassin', What is this fast=advanced thing? I do listen to advanced music, but speed has nothing to do with it.

 

[Coypu]

Originally posted by moley
But I don't wanna listen to that! It sounded pretty horrible to me. What is the point of playing fast, when it doesn't do anything for you? Playing fast is not an end in itself, it is a means to an end. Playing fast for the sake of it is pointless.

And, I think, by any reasonable standards of what constitutes fast playing, the bridge to taxman is quite fast playing.

If you're placing silly requirements on bass players, and saying that they need to be able to play as fast as that example you gave (what the heck is that?) in order to be good, then... well, you're missing out!

Again, like I said before - what is your thing about how many notes you can play in a bar?

And, do you really think the Beatles songs would have benefited from that crazy fast playing? I think perhaps not. Like we've all said here - McCartney's playing was perfect for the songs. So what if he can't play as fast as that? Obviously, he didn't need to play as fast as that. Being able to play fast is attendant to the greater function of getting the music out from within you. McCartney could play as fast as he needed to for those bass lines he composed.

If you wish to beleive that then I guess there isn't much to do about it. But if you look at bassplayers who actually have some serious skill you will find that they can play exceptionally well even in simple music in a way that Paul cannot. But atleast we finally agree that Paul isn't that great when it comes to playing fast. Its a good start.

 

[Coypu]

Originally posted by moley
How does room acoustic affect the sound of a bass being recorded direct inject, eh?

As for recording tools, basically, it amounts to the bass, the DI box, the mixer, and the tape.

And from my experience, those don't really account for a tone like McCartney's.

Well if you mic the amp it does count. But sure if you choose to direct line it then that is not an issue.

So McCartney played in some magic way that no one can copy right?

I'm with Bassin', What is this fast=advanced thing? I do listen to advanced music, but speed has nothing to do with it.

Sure not all fast stuff is advanced but guys like Gould and bands like Spastic Ink are both advanced and fast. Beatles never wrote or played anything advanced at all.

 

[Coypu]

Since you asked about compositions by Glenn Gould I thought that I would post one song by him :

Link Removed

lyrics :

So you want to write a fugue.
You got the urge to write a fugue.
You got the nerve to write a fugue.
So go ahead, so go ahead and write a fugue.
Go ahead and write a fugue that we can sing.

Pay no heed, Pay no mind.
Pay no heed to what we tell you,
Pay no mind to what we tell you.
Cast away all that you were told
And the theory that you read.
As we said come and write one,
Oh do come and write one,
Write a fugue that we can sing.

Now the only way to write one
Is to plunge right in and write one.
Just forget the rules and write one,
Just ignore the rules and try.

And the fun of it will get you.
And the joy of it will fetch you.
Its a pleasure that is bound to satisfy.
When you decide that John Sebastian must have been a very personable guy.

Never be clever
for the sake of being clever,
for the sake of showing off.

For a canon in inversion is a dangerous diversion,
And a bit of augmentation is a serious temptation,
While a stretto diminution is an obvious allusion.

For to try to write a fugue that we can sing.

And when you finish writing it
I think you will find a great joy in it.

or so...
Nothing ventured, nothing gained they say
But still it is rather hard to start.

Well let us try right now.
Now we are going to write a fugue.
We are going to write a good one.
We are going to write a fugue ... right now.

 

[geezer316]

is this still going on ? every-one has an opinion and you cant make some-one see yours who DOES'NT want to see it.there have been close minded statements on alot of threads here, but they are our opinion's and we think ours are always correct(i am using me in these statements)we can argue about IF we like so and so's bass lines, but how can i tell you if i dont like it "it means it sucks". i despise many musicians out there but i still respect what they do musically speaking(not song-wise).like for instance i hate JAZZ. no 2 ways about it! BUT i love what JACO can do w/it. i dont love all the beatles but i know that though they did'nt have the incredible musicianship that ZEP had they were any less influential or time honered band(and i am a die hard ZEP head)for a long time while i was drumming i always believed that BONHAM was the best drummer HANDS DOWN ! but as i got older i realized that there are others out there that are just as skilled at there drum set as BONHAM was to his(and it took alot of growth to make me realize this)BUT I STILL BELIEVE HE WAS THE BEST DRUMMER FOR THAT PERTICULAR BAND !remember when PHIL COLLIN'S filled in at LIVE AID?he did'nt play those songs the way BONHAM did,does that mean he's less of a drummer than BONZO ? no ,he's just not the best one for that perticuler sound/style/song what-ever you choose to use. my point being is PAUL did what I and many millions of others believe the best bass lines possible/melodically for those perticular songs .who's to say someone could of thought of something better? I KNOW I COULD'NT OF ! i think he deserve's respect for what he did for the music ind. i know he has warmed my blackened heart many times with some pretty classy lines so before you pass your opinion ask yourself "could i of done what he did ? PROBABLY NOT !and i'm not saying your a crappy player at all,for all i know you could be the next JACO. my father used to tell me "LISTEN TO THE MESSAGE,NOT TO THE MESSENGER"

 

[chris griffiths]

You know I don't like Paul Mcartney. I don't really like his songs I find them kinda quaint and I don't care for the beatles unless george harrison wrote the tune. At the same time I really have an issue with coypu picking on Paul. Paul is a fine player. You know it takes more skill to play a whole note then it does a 16th note don't you? you know I'm 21 and frankly you are giving our generation a bad name as far as your understanding of music goes. You'd fit in real good hear at Berklee as a guitarist. I suggest you sit down with the white album or abbey Road and transcribe some of the bass lines like I did. Maybe there will be some beautiful stuff in there you had never heard before. I know when I transcribed an Emperor song my funk playing was never the same

Just because you don't care for someone doesn't mean they are sloppy or anything. He's not sloppy he's decent. Fieldy's sloppy. You know I've had Glenn Gould pushed on me a hundred times and I gotta say I don't know what he'd do in the capacity of a beatles song because He never brings himself to that circumstance of music. Maybe he can't play pop rock You know Michael manring freely admitted he wouldn't be the guy for that kind of music, that it's best to call him when you want the weird detuning s***. I just think you should give paul some more credit Copy cop. I know I do and I can't stand them so if I can do it you can do it. Also I feel strongly you need to listen to MIchael Anthony.

 

[Coypu]

Originally posted by chris griffiths You know I don't like Paul Mcartney. I don't really like his songs I find them kinda quaint and I don't care for the beatles unless george harrison wrote the tune. At the same time I really have an issue with coypu picking on Paul. Paul is a fine player. You know it takes more skill to play a whole note then it does a 16th note don't you? you know I'm 21 and frankly you are giving our generation a bad name as far as your understanding of music goes. You'd fit in real good hear at Berklee as a guitarist. I suggest you sit down with the white album or abbey Road and transcribe some of the bass lines like I did. Maybe there will be some beautiful stuff in there you had never heard before. I know when I transcribed an Emperor song my funk playing was never the same

Just because you don't care for someone doesn't mean they are sloppy or anything. He's not sloppy he's decent. Fieldy's sloppy. You know I've had Glenn Gould pushed on me a hundred times and I gotta say I don't know what he'd do in the capacity of a beatles song because He never brings himself to that circumstance of music. Maybe he can't play pop rock You know Michael manring freely admitted he wouldn't be the guy for that kind of music, that it's best to call him when you want the weird detuning s***. I just think you should give paul some more credit Copy cop. I know I do and I can't stand them so if I can do it you can do it. Also I feel strongly you need to listen to MIchael Anthony.

Paul is a fine player. You know it takes more skill to play a whole note then it does a 16th note don't you?

Try and play a 16th note bass solo by Gary Willis and get back to me then. I'm sure that it will change your mind..

Since I never called him sloppy or a bad player I don't really see what you are getting at. I myself think that he is a decent bassplayer. He is not good but ok. So what are you complaining about???

 

[moley]

Originally posted by Coypu


Well if you mic the amp it does count.

Yes, but for one, I'm not sure how often they did that with Paul's bass. I think they mostly did it DI.

Anyhow, this is a silly point, because the room acoustics will not account for his tone.

But sure if you choose to direct line it then that is not an issue.

So McCartney played in some magic way that no one can copy right?

That is true of everyone. No two musicians are alike. You can't sound like McCartney, and McCartney can't sound like you. Similarly, you can't sound like Jaco, and Jaco can't sound like you.

The tone is in the hands. Do you not believe this is true?

Beatles never wrote or played anything advanced at all.

They did, it's just (apparently) not advanced in a way that you can dig. Apparently, for you to consider something advanced, it has to be really fast, and have lots of notes. Shame.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Originally posted by Coypu


Try and play a 16th note bass solo by Gary Willis and get back to me then. I'm sure that it will change your mind..

Your attitude has surely landed you a lot of gigs, right?

 

[Coypu]

Originally posted by Kid Charlemagne Your attitude has surely landed you a lot of gigs, right?

Yes, being able to play fast is essential in the music I usually play so I would be doomed if I went in with a "slow is best" attitude.

 

[Coypu]

That is true of everyone. No two musicians are alike. You can't sound like McCartney, and McCartney can't sound like you. Similarly, you can't sound like Jaco, and Jaco can't sound like you.

The tone is in the hands. Do you not believe this is true?

Well sure thats true.

They did, it's just (apparently) not advanced in a way that you can dig. Apparently, for you to consider something advanced, it has to be really fast, and have lots of notes. Shame.

Advanced as in a complex theoretical idea or some complex rhythmns or such. They never did that, their music is pretty primitive so eventhough you can be advanced and slow Beatles never where.

 

[moley]

Originally posted by Coypu
Advanced as in a complex theoretical idea or some complex rhythmns or such. They never did that, their music is pretty primitive so eventhough you can be advanced and slow Beatles never where.

Uh-huh, well there is where we have the problem. You seem to be saying that advanced=complex.

And you seem to advocating advanced music over and above music that you don't perceive to be advanced.

So, what you're saying here, is complex=good, simple=bad, no?

 

[Coypu]

Originally posted by moley
Uh-huh, well there is where we have the problem. You seem to be saying that advanced=complex.

And you seem to advocating advanced music over and above music that you don't perceive to be advanced.

So, what you're saying here, is complex=good, simple=bad, no?

Maybe some is lost in the translation, just give me your definition of advanced and we'll go from there.

Not necessarily, 90% of my favorite bands are fairly technical, advanced, complex or whatever you call it. But as long as the bands have emotional depth all is good.

Bands that don't:

Beatles
Cannibal Corpse
Avril Lavigne

Bands that do :

Burzum
Immolation
Beethoven

If you have heard theese bands you should be able to see a pattern and understand why each band where put in a certain category.

 

[moley]

Originally posted by Coypu


Maybe some is lost in the translation, just give me your definition of advanced and we'll go from there.

Actually, I think it's rather difficult to define. It has to do with the spirit of the music, though, rather than how many notes it has.

Bands that don't:

Beatles
Cannibal Corpse

I've no idea who Cannibal Corpse are.

Avril Lavigne

Bands that do :

Burzum

Who?

Immolation

Who?

Beethoven

Well sure. But I wasn't aware he was a band

If you have heard theese bands you should be able to see a pattern and understand why each band where put in a certain category.

Well I haven't heard the bands, but obviously I have heard Beethoven. But what categories are these? Are you talking about emotional depth?

If so, how you can have the audacity to sit there and say that The Beatles don't have emotional depth, simply because you don't perceive it, is beyond me.

How can you claim to know what emotional depth that music has, and claim that your perception is fact?

Again, a lot of people are moved by The Beatles. Are we all *wrong* or what?

There's opinion, and there's fact. Learn the difference.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Originally posted by Coypu


Yes, being able to play fast is essential in the music I usually play so I would be doomed if I went in with a "slow is best" attitude.

Well, that is not what I ment. I was thinking more of your lack of recognition of other kinds of music than your favourite, and your disrespect against other musicians.
If you never find a way to respect other peoples' opinions and thoughts you'll have a tough time in the music business. And in life.

That said, I recognise your right not to like Paul McCartneys music and bassplaying. What I oppose against is your attempts to scientifically "prove" your thesis and your attitude whilst doing it.

Finally, I certainly hope that you some day will be moved by some kind of music - ANY kind - the way millions of people have been moved by the Beatles. You need it.

 

[Coypu]

Actually, I think it's rather difficult to define. It has to do with the spirit of the music, though, rather than how many notes it has.

I always thought that it had to do with how advanced theory you apply in your music. If someone is playing all powerchords it is less advanced than someone playing a fugue. And it doesn't matter how fast he plays thoose chords, the fugue is more advanced (as an example).

I've no idea who Cannibal Corpse are.
+Burzum
+Immolation

Well here are a song from each band, you should check them out to gain better understanding of my views :
Link Removed
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/10/cannibal_corpse.html
Link Removed

Well I haven't heard the bands, but obviously I have heard Beethoven. But what categories are these? Are you talking about emotional depth?

Yes, The categorie with beatles are bands who provide good entertainment but lack in depth. The second categorie is bands/composers that provide more emotional depth but have less entertainment value.

If so, how you can have the audacity to sit there and say that The Beatles don't have emotional depth, simply because you don't perceive it, is beyond me.

Its an easy observation to make, let me assume that you say that Britney Spears isn't the greatest artist of all time right? It is very obvious that she is merely there to entertain (and to make some cash), beatles is also a pop band who hasn't shown any hints of being something else. Cannibal Corpse themselves openly admit that they play what they like and they do it to have fun and to entertain their fans. They do a good job and deserve respect for that and so does beatles but to claim that any of them provide musical depth it rediculous.

How can you claim to know what emotional depth that music has, and claim that your perception is fact?

The same way I know that milk is sour, except that in this case I listen instead of taste.

Again, a lot of people are moved by The Beatles. Are we all *wrong* or what?

No, you are being entertained and there is nothing wrong with that. I myself can enjoy a movie for mere entertainment for example, but in the end I know that I'm better off with the stuff that is a true work of art. Maybe you people haven't realised it yet but atleast I'm trying.

There's opinion, and there's fact. Learn the difference.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

 

[Coypu]

Originally posted by Kid Charlemagne Well, that is not what I ment. I was thinking more of your lack of recognition of other kinds of music than your favourite, and your disrespect against other musicians.
If you never find a way to respect other peoples' opinions and thoughts you'll have a tough time in the music business. And in life.

That said, I recognise your right not to like Paul McCartneys music and bassplaying. What I oppose against is your attempts to scientifically "prove" your thesis and your attitude whilst doing it.

Finally, I certainly hope that you some day will be moved by some kind of music - ANY kind - the way millions of people have been moved by the Beatles. You need it.

I never disrespected Paul, I merely pointed out that he isn't a great bassplayer in terms of skill. I respect his creative sides eventhough I think that he could have gone alot further if he had a better mentality towards music and the creation of music.

I'm being moved by lots of music but instead of the short bliss you might experience from beatles I get so much more. Something that will last my entire life. You should try it too.