• 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

#22
bassnat said:
IMO his lines were great because he was a song writer first. He always played musical lines around the song, making it work. It was always about the song.
Click to expand...

I agree completely, and I believe it applies to all of the Beatles. The song was foremost and they all played musical parts that made the song what it was.

I first fell in love with the bass when I heard Paul's notes coming out of my modest hi-fi record player. The bass just hit me in the gut. Still does.

You may remember their first albums didn't say much about who played what. I assumed George was the bass player because his guitar was the biggest. Hey, I was a kid :)
 
#26
Indeed, it can be difficult to learn McCartney bass lines because they are hard to hear. Hard to distinguish from the rest of the song.
Click to expand...

This applies to only early Beatles songs. After 1965 Paul's bass was mixed up front.

Let me just say that I'd listen to a single note played by Paul rather than 1 million notes played by Wooten :hiding:
 
#27
Shakin-Slim said:
I agree with most of this, except I would say the best 'pop' band. That's not to belittle pop music, it is important, and I absolutely love The Beatles. I was taught to read by using their lyrics as a child. They've been a part of almost every day of my life, but it gets impossible to decide who's the greatest band when you're comparing such different things. E.g The Beatles and Art Blakey & The Jazz Messengers. Comparison becomes redundant.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call them pop at all. Maybe by today's standards, but you have to take their music within the context of the era in which they were recording. There has never been a band that has had as much success or relevance as The Beatles. The fact that they did so much in such a short period of time and are still influencing musicians today speaks for itself.
 
#28
Old Fart said:
I do not mean to insult. That being said, flashy bass playing is not my cup of tea. Nor was it McCartney's. To each, his own. If one attempts to judge Mr. McCartney's bass playing by a flash-bass standard, he will fail. And yet, there are many of us who regard his bass contributions as.....well, as genius.

And BTW, again in my humble opinion (something tells me I am not alone here), McCartney and Lennon were not just good composers. Unless you think Gretsky was a "good hockey player" and MJ was a "good basketball player." In a period of about eight years, those guys cranked out about three albums per year that were packed to the brim with music you will hear (at least in elevators) for the rest of your lives.

Ahem. I wish I had your ear, Sactobass. I think you and Tangentmusic and myself might have similar observations. When I do finally piece together Paul's bass lines, I am commonly impressed.

And while we're at it, I also do not subscribe to the fairly common perception that Mr. Starr was a poor drummer. Okay, he was no Neil Peart. He was the right drummer for the Beatles. When someone asks what was the greatest rock and roll band of all time, I assume they mean 'besides the Beatles.' They were in a class by themselves. To suggest their rhythm section was weak......doesn't pass the Straight Face Test.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of this was well. Gretzky was a great offensive player. He was not a great all around hockey player. In my opinion Bobby Orr was the greatest ever but I get your point.

I agree with what you said about Ringo. I read an article a few years ago where Paul said Ringo wasn't flashy but he as the best time keeper that he had ever played with.
 
#30
Have to agree with most of the comments, Paul McCartney was probably the most influential players of the last 48 yrs and for the younger guys listen to Penny Lane what a great bass line, I never get tired of listening to it, a genius I had the honor of seeing him live and for a man hitting 70 he can rock with the best of them, if you get a chance to go to one of his go you wont be disappointed, the mans a legend.
 
#31
It's almost cliche to mention Macca as an influence or name him as One Of The Grea Bass Players, but I'm in that school myself.

He has always been one of my all-time favorites.

To me, he did exactly what a bass player should in a song. Not flashy, but tight as can be. He rode that line between rhythm and melody perhaps better than anyone before or since.

He played for the song, sure, but within that he was able to divide up beats and intersperse some interesting counter-melodies and just help weave together the song as a whole.

He's a master. Some might disagree, but I recommend taking a sampling of, say, 10 or 12tracks from throughout The Beatles work, and then another 10-12 from his solo/Wings work and learn them.

It's not that what he played was always so terribly complex or impossible for a decent bass player to work out--on the contrary--but it's WHAT he played, and when, and even what he did NOT play that is so interesting.
 
#32
For me, Paul's the man. He's one of those individuals who's a total natural for music. Of course he did his wood shedding when he was younger, but he just seemed to grasp it all much quicker because of the gift he was given. George Martin, Elvis Costello and others who've worked with him have said that he's a very intuative player who finds that missing part with next to no fuss.

He's no fluke. He just hears it.
 
#33
I love McCartney's style. He wasn't content to just play roots as many players might have done. Instead, he came up with many interesting walking lines. I'd rather listen to someone who tries to embellish the song as a whole instead of hitting as many notes as they can in a few seconds, which often sounds muddy on a bass anyway.

Although I appreciate the skill of those who can play fast, there's a point at which it starts becoming less musical and more like watching a fast typist - the manual dexterity is impressive, but emotionally it doesn't move me as much as a well-composed melodic line. And now that I'm older, I can't even listen as fast as some guys play. :)
 
#34
I'm always amused by the notion that "for a simple bass player, McCartney's great." :p
As an old guy who remembers seeing the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan Show, etc., etc., I can attest to the fact that his lines were trailblazing. In interviews, he's often correctly mentioned that, in the early 60s, he, James Jamerson and Brian Wilson were THE three guys who were experimenting with making the bass steer the music more, by being more forceful and melodic (especially in Jamerson's case) and by using inversions (Brian Wilson, a fellow composer, influenced McCartney in that way).

McCartney has chops, imagination and taste. His lines are often surprising AND they serve the song perfectly. That combination hardly ever happens. ("How did he ever come up with THAT? It's perfect!") Usually, it's one or the other.

And about Ringo... even after playing with people like Jim Keltner and Jim Gordon, George Harrison was quoted as saying that "Ringo has the best backbeat in the business." George Martin said that they never needed to record with a click because Ringo's time was impeccable. And Ringo ALSO had some of Paul's knack for coming up with odd ideas that fit perfectly. Listen to what he plays on "In My Life", for example. 99% of all drummers would play a soft backbeat through the whole thing.
 
#35
dougjwray said:
I'm always amused by the notion that "for a simple bass player, McCartney's great." :p
As an old guy who remembers seeing the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan Show, etc., etc., I can attest to the fact that his lines were trailblazing. In interviews, he's often correctly mentioned that, in the early 60s, he, James Jamerson and Brian Wilson were THE three guys who were experimenting with making the bass steer the music more, by being more forceful and melodic (especially in Jamerson's case) and by using inversions (Brian Wilson, a fellow composer, influenced McCartney in that way).

McCartney has chops, imagination and taste. His lines are often surprising AND they serve the song perfectly. That combination hardly ever happens. ("How did he ever come up with THAT? It's perfect!") Usually, it's one or the other.

And about Ringo... even after playing with people like Jim Keltner and Jim Gordon, George Harrison was quoted as saying that "Ringo has the best backbeat in the business." George Martin said that they never needed to record with a click because Ringo's time was impeccable. And Ringo ALSO had some of Paul's knack for coming up with odd ideas that fit perfectly. Listen to what he plays on "In My Life", for example. 99% of all drummers would play a soft backbeat through the whole thing.
Click to expand...

+1

Ringo is one of my all time fave drummers. One of the jobs of a drummer is to help determine the FEEL of a song, Ringo is an expert at this. Listen to RAIN he smokes on that song!

Same with McCartney, his bass playing is NOT simple or simplistic, though could be when needed. McCartney is GREAT, one of the best!
 
#36
Rob Martinez said:
+1

Ringo is one of my all time fave drummers. One of the jobs of a drummer is to help determine the FEEL of a song, Ringo is an expert at this. Listen to RAIN he smokes on that song!

Same with McCartney, his bass playing is NOT simple or simplistic, though could be when needed. McCartney is GREAT, one of the best!
Click to expand...

+2
 
#37
Just registered today. Hello everyone. I always felt that Paul was a team player who's particular style served the song he was playing. If I may, two songs stand out to me in regards to his versatility. "Thank you girl" and " Hey Bulldog". I've heard people say that some of his earlier lines sounded like a Tuba. To each there own I guess. Put me down as a fan of his regardless. Something that I read, or heard from an interview he did, was that he realized shortly after he took over the Bass duties how much control he had to push the rest of the band with tempo. A closer, more detailed, listen might show this to be evident. This is my humble opinion.
 
#38
Tony2011 said:
Just registered today. Hello everyone. I always felt that Paul was a team player who's particular style served the song he was playing. If I may, two songs stand out to me in regards to his versatility. "Thank you girl" and " Hey Bulldog". I've heard people say that some of his earlier lines sounded like a Tuba. To each there own I guess. Put me down as a fan of his regardless. Something that I read, or heard from an interview he did, was that he realized shortly after he took over the Bass duties how much control he had to push the rest of the band with tempo. A closer, more detailed, listen might show this to be evident. This is my humble opinion.
Click to expand...

Welcome!
I think the tuba thing comes from his young exposure to British music hall and brass band music. It's not so much that his instrument sounded like a tuba, as that some of his parts were tuba-like.
I've seen him talk about affecting the music via inversions, but never tempo. Interesting, and believable.
 
#39
doujwray- Thanks for the clarification. His parts being Tuba like is how it was intended to come out. From what I can see, it was some of those Tuba-like parts that got the chicks "butts" moving. I started playing bass when I found their catalogue of music. I've always considered myself an " oldie moldie" sort anyway. I told myself that if I could learn just one song, I would be elated. I never turned back.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back