Who is Paul McCartney?

[skooldem1]

You have to read this article. Kanye West is working with Paul McCartney. This article is about the twitter comments people posted regarding Paul McCartney.

@DuesNice remarked: 'Kanye has a great ear for talent. This Paul McCartney guy gonna be huge.'

@percyBlacksom posted: 'Who is Paul McCartney? He boutta blow up thanks to Kanyer!!!'

@CurvedDaily added: 'This is why i love Kanye for shining light on unknown artists.'

And OVOJosh wrote: 'I don't know who Paul McCartney is, but Kanye is going to give this man a career w/ this new song!!'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2896408/This-Paul-McCartney-guy-gonna-huge-Kanye-West-fans-funny-joke-One-collaboration.html

[ralpht]

Geeeesh!!!!

[timmyfunk]

All of those Twitter responses were goofs. Not serious posts.

[thomas96]

Wow. Ignorance at it's finest.

[marv2]

You have to read this article. Kanye West is working with Paul McCartney. This article is about the twitter comments people posted regarding Paul McCartney.

@DuesNice remarked: 'Kanye has a great ear for talent. This Paul McCartney guy gonna be huge.'

@percyBlacksom posted: 'Who is Paul McCartney? He boutta blow up thanks to Kanyer!!!'

@CurvedDaily added: 'This is why i love Kanye for shining light on unknown artists.'

And OVOJosh wrote: 'I don't know who Paul McCartney is, but Kanye is going to give this man a career w/ this new song!!'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2896408/This-Paul-McCartney-guy-gonna-huge-Kanye-West-fans-funny-joke-One-collaboration.html

More than 3 years ago, right after the Grammys in 2012 Long Island radio station WBAI had live call ins about the show. Several young people that called in wanted to know who was Paul McCartney and why was he so important!! LOL!!!

[marv2]

All of those Twitter responses were goofs. Not serious posts.

Timmy, no, I kid you not. There are lots of people under the age of 35 that have no clue who Paul McCartney is.

[marv2]

Wow. Ignorance at it's finest.

I am sure when I was in High School that there were those who did no know who Count Basie was. All some knew about Duke Ellington was from Stevie's record "Sir Duke".

[glencro]

That's sad but yea, this generation is pretty clueless about a lot of the legends

[soulster]

You have to read this article. Kanye West is working with Paul McCartney. This article is about the twitter comments people posted regarding Paul McCartney.

@DuesNice remarked: 'Kanye has a great ear for talent. This Paul McCartney guy gonna be huge.'

@percyBlacksom posted: 'Who is Paul McCartney? He boutta blow up thanks to Kanyer!!!'

@CurvedDaily added: 'This is why i love Kanye for shining light on unknown artists.'

And OVOJosh wrote: 'I don't know who Paul McCartney is, but Kanye is going to give this man a career w/ this new song!!'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2896408/This-Paul-McCartney-guy-gonna-huge-Kanye-West-fans-funny-joke-One-collaboration.html

Let's face it: we are of a different world, and getting older. I don't expect the youth of today, or even many of our peers, to know who he is. I come from the 60s and 70s, but was raised in a different world than most of you members, so, there are a lot of artists and songs I know that you have never heard of.

[soulster]

All of those Twitter responses were goofs. Not serious posts. Oh no! I'm 100% sure that there are people who don't know who Paul Mccartney is. They may have heard of The Beatles, or even Wings, but they probably don't know the guy in those two bands.

[soulster]

That's sad but yea, this generation is pretty clueless about a lot of the legends
But, a lot of people in our generation are pretty clueless about a lot of their icons, too. To, it goes both ways.

[phil]

But, a lot of people in our generation are pretty clueless about a lot of their icons, too. To, it goes both ways.

So true Soulster. Age is here. ;)

[ralpht]

Good point, Soulster and for the most part, true. But when I was young, and maybe because I was a musician, I was very aware of the musical icons of my parents generation. I may not have liked all of them, but I knew of them. But your point is taken and I get it.

[soulster]

Good point, Soulster and for the most part, true. But when I was young, and maybe because I was a musician, I was very aware of the musical icons of my parents generation. I may not have liked all of them, but I knew of them. But your point is taken and I get it.

And, because I was a musician and a music lover, I also knew of the musical icons of my parents' generation.. But, I was fortunate. There was a lot of cross-appreciation in my home.

[Jerry Oz]

You all know that time eats her children, right? Consider that after a month of eulogizing Michael Jackson on every network's evening news, you don't hear about him any more because we've simply moved along. If Paul McCartney can fall out of the public's awareness, how soon do you think people will forget all of us? We'll hear a lot about Sir Paul when he passes [[hopefully not for a while) but until then, he's not musically relevant to today's typical pop music fan.

[soulster]

Are you not aware that Paul Just released a new album? he had been releasing albums every year, and doing concerts. And, people still talk about Michael Jackson.

As long as there are people who remember, these artists will live on. Elvis died in 1977. You think anyone talks about him today? What do you think?

[Jerry Oz]

I was speaking in a philosophical and perhaps overly-broad manner. I do that more and more, these days as time is running out of my hour glass. For clarification, let me state that he isn't on the Top 100 chart yet. Consequently, someone who once would have debuted in the top 40 isn't charting with 'today's typical pop music fan', as I stated in my post.

And although I hear Michael Jackson mentioned from time to time in casual conversation, after his unprecedented month-long domination of the news cycle, the only thing that appears on television about him relates to his kids and his fortune. And Elvis was remembered on his birthday.

To be sure, somebody in the next generation or two will remember most of us. My mom tells me about her late uncles and aunts, some of whom died before I was born. She and her siblings will take their memories with them one day. As such is life.

But there has been a blessed and fortunate few who will live forever. John Coltrane, Miles Davis, and Duke Ellington will live as long as jazz lives, which I hope will be forever. Heck, I'm a Patsy Cline fan, so you know that every genre's icons will have somebody to pass their memories on.

[skooldem1]

Michael Jackson had a big hit this past summer. If you are a TV watcher, you couldn't watch TV without the commercial featuring that song coming on every 15 minutes.

[timmyfunk]

Timmy, no, I kid you not. There are lots of people under the age of 35 that have no clue who Paul McCartney is.

There's no way to prove that either way.

[Jerry Oz]

Michael Jackson had a big hit this past summer. If you are a TV watcher, you couldn't watch TV without the commercial featuring that song coming on every 15 minutes.I remember. I also remember the hologram performance, so thanks for reminding me that he 'lives' from beyond. Guess I should have said Whitney instead of Michael to make my point...

[timmyfunk]

Oh no! I'm 100% sure that there are people who don't know who Paul Mccartney is. They may have heard of The Beatles, or even Wings, but they probably don't know the guy in those two bands.

There's no way to prove that either way. I've heard that most of those tweets were gag posts.

[soulster]

There's no way to prove that either way. I've heard that most of those tweets were gag posts. Except that I have met and talked with people who don't know who he is.

[RossHolloway]

I'm not sure why folks are so amazed that Kanye's fans have no idea who Paul McCartney is or his history, just like I'm sure most of Paul's fanbase have no idea who Kanye West is -aside from being married to Kim Kardashian. Paul is a legacy artist, but hasn't been really relevant to current music in close to 35 years. Musical tastes change, new artist arrive on the scene every year and time keeps marching on.

[marv2]

I'm not sure why folks are so amazed that Kanye's fans have no idea who Paul McCartney is or his history, just like I'm sure most of Paul's fanbase have no idea who Kanye West is -aside from being married to Kim Kardashian. Paul is a legacy artist, but hasn't been really relevant to current music in close to 35 years. Musical tastes change, new artist arrive on the scene every year and time keeps marching on.

His last number one hit in the US came 32 years ago with Michael Jackson and "Say, Say, Say".

[soulster]

His last number one hit in the US came 32 years ago with Michael Jackson and "Say, Say, Say".

His last top 10 hit was "Spies Like Us" from 1986". But, even so, he has consistently toured and has been releasing albums and making videos. Let's not forget about all the Beatles-related activity.

[RossHolloway]

His last top 10 hit was "Spies Like Us" from 1986". But, even so, he has consistently toured and has been releasing albums and making videos. Let's not forget about all the Beatles-related activity.
And that's all well and good, but has very little sway or impact on folks under 40 and listening to pop/soul/urban radio stations or buying and downloading music. To them Paul is an oldies act and something that their grandparents listened remember. In reality Paul's music/history has no real impact on what's going on in popular music today.

[Jerry Oz]

That's very true. It also occurs to me that his music is guitar driven and most of what's played on the pop radio these days is synthesized hyper-processed in the studio. He's not hard enough to be played on most rock stations, obscure enough to be played on most indie stations, or young enough to hit Top 40.

[RossHolloway]

That's very true. It also occurs to me that his music is guitar driven and most of what's played on the pop radio these days is synthesized hyper-processed in the studio. He's not hard enough to be played on most rock stations, obscure enough to be played on most indie stations, or young enough to hit Top 40.

This will eventually happen to EVER artist, regardless of their popularity or genre of music.

[Jerry Oz]

Well, in the world of Pop and Soul, you only have a few who have been able to change with the times. Madonna is one of them. I'll go out on a limb and suggest that the folks who were able to sell records from the '80s [[and before) into the aughts more likely benefited from their producers than from their voices.

Curiously, country, reggae, jazz, and blues musicians have remarkable staying power among their fans. I'll save my commentary as to why I believe this is true.

[soulster]

And that's all well and good, but has very little sway or impact on folks under 40 and listening to pop/soul/urban radio stations or buying and downloading music. To them Paul is an oldies act and something that their grandparents listened remember. In reality Paul's music/history has no real impact on what's going on in popular music today. Not quite. As there are people of the younger generations who have no idea who McCartney is, there are just as many who do. I meet those people as well.

[soulster]

Well, in the world of Pop and Soul, you only have a few who have been able to change with the times. Madonna is one of them. I'll go out on a limb and suggest that the folks who were able to sell records from the '80s [[and before) into the aughts more likely benefited from their producers than from their voices.

Curiously, country, reggae, jazz, and blues musicians have remarkable staying power among their fans. I'll save my commentary as to why I believe this is true. Unless you have not listened to anything Paul McCartney has done in the last decade, you would not know how his sound has kept up with the times.

[Jerry Oz]

Unless you have not listened to anything Paul McCartney has done in the last decade, you would not know how his sound has kept up with the times.
Great point. But as I stated, he's not top 100 even though his album broke, so his sound either hasn't kept up or is just relatively bad in trying. With that said, I'm on my way to YouTube to listen to some of it tonight. I'll let you know if I like what I hear or if I think he is more contemporary than I suspect.

[RossHolloway]

Not quite. As there are people of the younger generations who have no idea who McCartney is, there are just as many who do. I meet those people as well.

I would wager great sums to say that more folks under 40 have no idea of his musical background than those who do, especially those folks who download/buy a majority of the popular music that is played on radio today.

[RossHolloway]

Well, in the world of Pop and Soul, you only have a few who have been able to change with the times. Madonna is one of them. I'll go out on a limb and suggest that the folks who were able to sell records from the '80s [[and before) into the aughts more likely benefited from their producers than from their voices.

Curiously, country, reggae, jazz, and blues musicians have remarkable staying power among their fans. I'll save my commentary as to why I believe this is true.

Madonna, the personality, still will make headlines, but not so much her music. Over the past 20 years or so she has tried to stay relevant by collaborating with current/trendy artist, but seldom over the past 10-15 years is her music picked up by top 40 stations.

[Jerry Oz]

This [[Hope For the Future) is the most recent Paul McCartney song on YouTube, which as I guessed is indeed guitar driven with minimally effected vocals. Although I unwisely generalized to suggest that most music on the pop stations is heavily produced, I believe that thoughtful lyrics, stripped down production, and guitar-based music have to be extremely catchy to make it. This song would have done better on the pop stations in the mid-90s than it will these days. It's not because it's a bad song, I just don't think it will bring more awareness to those who don't know who he is.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=163_C5UVU-I

[soulster]

Great point. But as I stated, he's not top 100 even though his album broke, so his sound either hasn't kept up or is just relatively bad in trying. With that said, I'm on my way to YouTube to listen to some of it tonight. I'll let you know if I like what I hear or if I think he is more contemporary than I suspect.

Or, it's just a matter of promotion. I didn't say his music sounds like the contemporary dance-pop on the airwaves, but it follows the rock sounds of today.

Of course, it goes without saying that age matters a great deal more to the younger generation than it did with ours, IMO. When we were coming up, we easily accepted people like Neil Sedaka and Barbra Streisand, and their records, even if they didn't always sound like the other contemporary pop/rock. Today, artists like J-Lo, Madonna, and Lady Ga-Ga find it hard to get on the radio, even if their sound is up-to-date. I even think Usher's days are numbered. He's still making music, but he's been around since the 90s!

[Jerry Oz]

He's in a good place, though. He's got a mix of older, middle aged, and young fans that very few other artists have. I can see him being relevant at least until the end of the decade.

[stephanie]

When I saw those tweets false or not I cracked up I am glad I was not drinking any water. When we were growing up those of us 35 and older we KNEW the names of people and songs in the fifties and sixties and some forties. People now in their 20s dont even know some of the songs that were 10 years before them and its because the radio doesnt play them anymore. The only place you can find it is on SIRIUS or internet radio. There is a generation gap. When I was little adults and kids like the Supremes, the Beatles, The Turtles and more. Who listens to gangster rap or techno as a parent there are some but not many.
This is where the problem lies. People watched TV together and you could see the lastest act who was on an acid trip on Dick Cavett or Ed Sullivan. Gosh I miss Don Kirshners Rock Concert where you could see people live! Generation gaps and filth and lack of clothing.