Did you see Paul McCartney and his Koa Taylor on SNL special last night?

[BobSol]

In fairness, I suspect he was invited to perform and raised a lot of money for charity. Limited rehearsal with sound engineers and a few songs to keep the audience happy, and I'm sure they were. Go see him when he's touring and, trust me, he still rocks with the best of them. His latest album is pretty good too. The man is simply a legend and has EARNED his place as one of the finest musicians ever to walk this planet.   

[DennisG]

Harley,

I don't understand why you think he should consider retirement.  Because his performance on the SNL reunion made YOU wince?  If he still loves playing in front of people, if he can still fill arenas, and if those audiences leave his shows totally stoked ... why should he retire?  I've seen other recent performances of his on TV, and I thought the guy was great.  I'm willing to believe he just had a bad night on SNL.

[Harley]

In fairness, I suspect he was invited to perform and raised a lot of money for charity. Limited rehearsal with sound engineers and a few songs to keep the audience happy, and I'm sure they were. Go see him when he's touring and, trust me, he still rocks with the best of them. His latest album is pretty good too. The man is simply a legend and has EARNED his place as one of the finest musicians ever to walk this planet.   

I was unaware of any charity component.

I've seen him several times over the years and, in fact, the last time was this past October, so I'd say that's pretty recent.

It was evident that his voice was straining. Sure, he can rock when it comes to playing guitar or piano, but he's a shadow of the vocalist he used to be. Being a legend doesn't trump being old. Age does some negative things to us, and one's "legend" status is never enough to curtail those negative things.

And, to be clear, I like the guy. I like him a lot. It just pains me to see him get out there and not be 100%. He's Paul McCartney. He should want to be 100%. If he's not, he shouldn't want to get out there.

[Harley]

Harley, I don't understand why you think he should consider retirement.   Because his performance on the SNL reunion made YOU wince?  If he still loves playing in front of people, if he can still fill arenas, and if those audiences leave his shows totally stoked ... why should he retire?  I've seen other recent performances of his on TV, and I thought the guy was great.  I'm willing to believe he just had a bad night on SNL.

I saw him in October in Jacksonville, and it was tough to watch. He just doesn't bring it like he used to.

One very big reason people go to see him is because he's a Beatle. I've heard more than a few people make a similar comment over the years. It's not his music or his voice or his stage show. They want to see him because he's a Beatle. He could get on stage and read the phone book, and people would pay big money to watch him do it.

[DennisG]

Harley, I don't understand why you think he should consider retirement.   Because his performance on the SNL reunion made YOU wince?  If he still loves playing in front of people, if he can still fill arenas, and if those audiences leave his shows totally stoked ... why should he retire?  I've seen other recent performances of his on TV, and I thought the guy was great.  I'm willing to believe he just had a bad night on SNL.

I saw him in October in Jacksonville, and it was tough to watch. He just doesn't bring it like he used to.

One very big reason people go to see him is because he's a Beatle. I've heard more than a few people make a similar comment over the years. It's not his music or his voice or his stage show. They want to see him because he's a Beatle. He could get on stage and read the phone book, and people would pay big money to watch him do it.

Well, let's agree to disagree.  I'm not much of a McCartney fan in the sense that I'd ever go to see him in concert or buy his albums.  But I sure know a lot of people who still think he's great.  Yeah, they'll admit he's 70 percent of what he once was, but that 70 percent seems to still thrill them.  And I know you're making a joke when you say that people would pay to watch him read the phone book, but there's some sneering behind that sarcasm.  The fact is, a lot of people still think he's great, but you seem to want to cast those who do as sycophants.  Sinatra wasn't as good at the end of his life.  Neither was Elvis.  And neither are the Rollings Stones.  But I'm glad they gave it everything they had for as long as they could.

[Harley]

But I sure know a lot of people who still think he's great.  Yeah, they'll admit he's 70 percent of what he once was, but that 70 percent seems to still thrill them.

And if he wasn't a Beatle, he wouldn't be selling out arenas.

And I know you're making a joke when you say that people would pay to watch him read the phone book, but there's some sneering behind that sarcasm.

Sneering?

No, not really. 

If Paul McCartney were going to be in town to read the Jacksonville phone book, the show would sell out. I absolutely believe that.

The fact is, a lot of people still think he's great, but you seem to want to cast those who do as sycophants.

Well, if the shoe fits, right?

McCartney is great because of his past achievements, and I applaud him for that. He's not "great" for what he's doing now, however. But his performance on SNL was light years from "great". To be great you have to nail it. Period. Every single time. No mistakes. That's what you expect from someone who's been performing for over 50 years and, more importantly, from someone who commands the ticket prices McCartney does. Let's face it, if he wasn't a Beatle, the quality of his performance would not warrant the ticket prices.

I would just like to see him bow out gracefully, that's all. He's chosen not to do that and, with every performance, it becomes more and more evident that he should.

Sinatra wasn't as good at the end of his life.  Neither was Elvis.  And neither are the Rollings Stones.  But I'm glad they gave it everything they had for as long as they could.

Yeah, I can't agree with that.

Sinatra got to a point where he was speaking the lyrics, not singing them. I don't know how someone can be glad about that. Elvis? He got fat and slow and, combined with his drug use, it killed him.

And, at this point, the Rolling Stones are a science project.

I just think it's tragic when someone tries to prolong the inevitable. Why not go out on top? Why insist on taking your ever-diminishing show on the road?

[cedarkoa599]

Paul also played that guitar on the Grammy's! I would LOVE one just like it! I have a KOA back and sides with a cedar top and my KOA is AMAZING but I would LOVE one with a KOA TOP and all the wood to be MASTER GRADE! I have not been playing much but if that were to change then...... that will be my next guitar I'm going to order!

[Moosedog]

I have no problem with aging stars still performing, but I would like to see them reinvent themselves to better suit their level of ability.  The Stones trying to do the same shows they did 50 years ago is a joke.  Paul McCartney trying to sing a song that's way out of his range on a world wide televised event is just sad (I cringed the whole time too).  There's no shame in designing a set list or rework songs that will allow you to perform to  your best, rather than your worst.  If people are true fans they will embrace the change.  When Rod Stewart was dealing with voice/throat issues he came back slow and released a series of cd's of standards and ballads.  They were brilliant and not only saved his career but took it to a different level.  Paul is so supremely talented he could rework many of his hits and they would be brilliant.  A couple of years ago I tuned down a 1/2 step and the difference is amazing.  The voice holds up much better now and can do songs that previously were too much of a stretch.  Little things like this can make a big difference.

[mgap]

Ian Anderson had voice problems back in 1984 and it almost stopped him from continuing his preforming career.  So he changed how they play the songs, changed from the original key of the song to one he could sing it in.  If you can't hit the high notes anymore well you better not try.  Of course Ian is still out there writing, recording, and performing in 2015.  He will start a 25 concert date tour in Europe starting in April.

[mavr]

But I sure know a lot of people who still think he's great.  Yeah, they'll admit he's 70 percent of what he once was, but that 70 percent seems to still thrill them.

And if he wasn't a Beatle, he wouldn't be selling out arenas.

And I know you're making a joke when you say that people would pay to watch him read the phone book, but there's some sneering behind that sarcasm.

Sneering?

No, not really. 

If Paul McCartney were going to be in town to read the Jacksonville phone book, the show would sell out. I absolutely believe that.

The fact is, a lot of people still think he's great, but you seem to want to cast those who do as sycophants.

Well, if the shoe fits, right?

McCartney is great because of his past achievements, and I applaud him for that. He's not "great" for what he's doing now, however. But his performance on SNL was light years from "great". To be great you have to nail it. Period. Every single time. No mistakes. That's what you expect from someone who's been performing for over 50 years and, more importantly, from someone who commands the ticket prices McCartney does. Let's face it, if he wasn't a Beatle, the quality of his performance would not warrant the ticket prices.

I would just like to see him bow out gracefully, that's all. He's chosen not to do that and, with every performance, it becomes more and more evident that he should.

Sinatra wasn't as good at the end of his life.  Neither was Elvis.  And neither are the Rollings Stones.  But I'm glad they gave it everything they had for as long as they could.

Yeah, I can't agree with that.

Sinatra got to a point where he was speaking the lyrics, not singing them. I don't know how someone can be glad about that. Elvis? He got fat and slow and, combined with his drug use, it killed him.

And, at this point, the Rolling Stones are a science project.

I just think it's tragic when someone tries to prolong the inevitable. Why not go out on top? Why insist on taking your ever-diminishing show on the road?

Harley, Paul has a long way to go,...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-vWnJW8fkE

 

[Harley]

Harley, Paul has a long way to go,...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-vWnJW8fkE

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

Is it that Sir Paul should keep going until he sucks that bad?

[mavr]

I was only amused by your ability on judging other's work,... but never mind, I am sure that you, the person nicknamed Harley, have given (should I say "is giving") us more than Paul or Chuck are capable,.... 

[Louis]

This post in a lot of ways turned out good , i'm a strong vocalist but now i'm 66 and finding i have to change my style to suit my voice , and i really have to agree with Moon dawg on what he said about Rod Stewart changing his style, Rod has got class and he did a bang up job on adapting his voice . I'm having a real hard time to accept that  i have to change also .Out of 650 singers  i came out 2 best overall in a contest and used 'My Way which has one hell of a high "C" note to hit at the end ---well now even though i have a   3 octave range,  i find i cant hit  it like i used to and it's very hard to accept. I'm always trying to look on the internet to see what guys like Al Martino  are doing to keep the vocals in shape . I'm sure a lot of you know Michelle Wright the country singer , well her sister in law is my voice trainer, in fact i'm going to see her today .

[Harley]

I was only amused by your ability on judging other's work,... but never mind, I am sure that you, the person nicknamed Harley, have given (should I say "is giving") us more than Paul or Chuck are capable,.... 

That's really a pretty mindless comment.

At this stage of my life, I am quite confident that I can play circles around what Chuck Berry is currently doing. But that has zero to do with whether or not I can offer a valid opinion on his playing. Did you even watch that video? It was horrible. At the very least, I know I'd hit that E chord where he hit a... well, I don't know exactly what chord Chuck played.

But whether or not someone has "given more" or "is giving more" isn't pertinent t the conversation at all. Following that mindset, you should be lauding the artistic mastery of Kanye West, simply because you're not "giving us" more than he is.

Paul McCartney is a master of his craft. But his craft, at this stage in his life, isn't as much in the performing area as it used to be. It's just not. He's slipped, and not just a little bit. No objective person could conclude otherwise, and no subjective person would.

It's like my kid brother used to swear up and down that Ted Nugent was the finest musician on the planet. Now, I enjoy Ted's playing, but I know countless guitarists who are finer musicians. But my brother will go to his grave swearing that Ted Nugent is the Second Coming.

Subjective.

I love McCartney's music; I really do. But his performance on SNL, of "Maybe I'm Amazed", was horribly lackluster, and not what we've come to expect from Paul McCartney. I don't understand why so many are taking offense to the suggestion that his best days are behind him. They are. I don't even understand how that can be debated. It has zero to do with whether or not I like his music, and it has zero to do with whether or not I'm "giving" more than he.

It simply has to do with the fact that the guy is in his 70's and, accordingly, abilities start to deteriorate a bit.

[DennisG]

I was only amused by your ability on judging other's work,... but never mind, I am sure that you, the person nicknamed Harley, have given (should I say "is giving") us more than Paul or Chuck are capable,.... 

That's really a pretty mindless comment.

At this stage of my life, I am quite confident that I can play circles around what Chuck Berry is currently doing. But that has zero to do with whether or not I can offer a valid opinion on his playing. Did you even watch that video? It was horrible. At the very least, I know I'd hit that E chord where he hit a... well, I don't know exactly what chord Chuck played.

But whether or not someone has "given more" or "is giving more" isn't pertinent t the conversation at all. Following that mindset, you should be lauding the artistic mastery of Kanye West, simply because you're not "giving us" more than he is.

Paul McCartney is a master of his craft. But his craft, at this stage in his life, isn't as much in the performing area as it used to be. It's just not. He's slipped, and not just a little bit. No objective person could conclude otherwise, and no subjective person would.

It's like my kid brother used to swear up and down that Ted Nugent was the finest musician on the planet. Now, I enjoy Ted's playing, but I know countless guitarists who are finer musicians. But my brother will go to his grave swearing that Ted Nugent is the Second Coming.

Subjective.

I love McCartney's music; I really do. But his performance on SNL, of "Maybe I'm Amazed", was horribly lackluster, and not what we've come to expect from Paul McCartney. I don't understand why so many are taking offense to the suggestion that his best days are behind him. They are. I don't even understand how that can be debated. It has zero to do with whether or not I like his music, and it has zero to do with whether or not I'm "giving" more than he.

It simply has to do with the fact that the guy is in his 70's and, accordingly, abilities start to deteriorate a bit.

So many are taking offense?  I don't see much offense taken in this thread, but I see some disagreement -- and not about whether or not his best days are behind him.  Most sane people would agree with that.  Where I disagree with you is in your assertion that his skills have deteriorated to such a degree, he should retire while he's still ahead.  I think he still has the capacity to make a lot of people happy, and that's worth a lot in my book.  You're quick to attribute that to sycophantic Beatlemania, but the fact is, some people just disagree with you.

I will also say that the quickest path to getting booted from this site is to make personal comments like "That's really a pretty mindless comment."  I think you're a bright guy, Harley, and I appreciate the fact that you've got an opinion and are willing to share it.  But there's no need to refer to anything another poster says as mindless.