Quincy Jones

Discussion in 'music, bands, clubs & festies' started by gawkrodger, Feb 8, 2018.

  1. TruXta

    TruXta tired

    Back to McCartney - if you look at his post-Beatles years, name me one song he's made that a regular 20 something today would recognise as his if you hummed the melody. I'm talking a regular 20 something year old, not someone who's massively into music.

    So if he's all that great a bass player, what happened after Beatles?
     
  2. DaveCinzano

    DaveCinzano WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!

    Only the band that the Beatles could have been :cool:
     
    krtek a houby, S☼I and danski like this.
  3. TruXta

    TruXta tired

    Wings? :D
     
  4. Nanker Phelge

    Nanker Phelge Monkey Boy

    So if a 20 year old, who's not in to music, can't recognise a post Beatles McCartney tune when it's hummed to him then it demonstrates that McCartney is a crap bass player????????

    Have I got that right?
     
    editor likes this.
  5. Lord Camomile

    Lord Camomile Lemonade socialist

    That he's not a special genius bass player, I think would be a more accurate summary.
     
    Rutita1 likes this.
  6. Nanker Phelge

    Nanker Phelge Monkey Boy

    Ah, ok. Thank god it makes sense to someone.

    I hope no one is judging Miles Davis' talent on what a regular 20yr old doesn't recognise when it's hummed at them....
     
    ddraig, editor and alcopop like this.
  7. Lord Camomile

    Lord Camomile Lemonade socialist

    Miles Davis arguably wasn't going for mass appeal.

    To be fair, I've also never heard him play bass so the point may still hold up.
     
  8. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Not sure what possible relevance that has to his abilities as a bass player - how may people of any age can hum a Stanley Clarke or a Jaco Pastorious tune? Or, to turn it on its head, how many 20 years old do you think will have heard of McCartney? Quite a few, I'd wager, particularly as he recently released a record with Rihanna and Kanye West. It scored multiple number ones across the globe.

    McCartney has shifted millions and millions and millions of records in his Post Beatles career:

    Paul McCartney | full Official Chart History | Official Charts Company

    Oh and Mull of Kintyre was the first ever record to sell over two million records across the planet. I think he's done OK for himself after the Beatles myself.
     
  9. Lord Camomile

    Lord Camomile Lemonade socialist

    To be fair, you introduced the notion of The Beatles' success as a reflection of their musical merit.
    If their success was just due to their "exceptional talent and exceptional songwriting", McCartney (and the others) would arguably have had maintained a similar success and relevancy, in the intervening four decades. And no, someone in the 90s referencing Sgt. Peppers as an influence doesn't count as maintaining success and relevancy, because that's from when they were still The Beatles. They'd had 30 years for their "exceptional talent and songwriting" to produce something else.

    You could arguably look at someone like Bowie to see how it can be done.

    Daft thing is I'm actually quite a fan of The Beatles, although I don't anything near enough about music to try and prove anything one way or t'other.
     
  10. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Um, they split up and two died. The Beatles record sales continue to be in the millions every year and McCartney is still enjoying a massively successful career with his last single being number one in multiple countries. Sure looks like a successful career to me.
     
  11. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Looks like success to me!

     
  12. Lord Camomile

    Lord Camomile Lemonade socialist

    Harrison died in 2001, you don't get to play that one! :D Also, the point was they had "exceptional talent and songwriting" as individuals, not merely as The Beatles.
    Can you hum it?
     
  13. Lord Camomile

    Lord Camomile Lemonade socialist

    The last actual release cited in that is 1977*.

    Again, I actually think he was a pretty good songwriter, but so far you haven't really been able to answer TruXta's point about success and relevancy post-... what, maybe the 80s if we give you Harrison and The Travelling Wilburys?

    To be honest, you'd do better making the argument that after the mega-success of The Beatles, McCartney was exploring other musical interests that didn't use success as a metric, although I honestly don't know how true that is or not. What doesn't really work is you saying "what relevance is success?" when you were the one to introduce it as a metric to judge their talent in the first place.


    *<edit: Mull of Kintyre also doesn't have the catchiest of bass lines, to take it back to McCartney's talents as a bass player, which is where we all started. In fact, I'm not really sure why we're talking about his songwriting ability at all given it's his playing that was the original focus of this particular shit/not.>
     
  14. Lord Camomile

    Lord Camomile Lemonade socialist

    Be honest, who thought a sleight on McCartney's abilities as a bassist was going to be the most controversial thing to come out of that interview :D

    To be fair, I guess it is The Beatles...
     
    Rutita1 likes this.
  15. TruXta

    TruXta tired

    Hey, you're the one that argued that his massive fame and success put him up there with the all time top bass players.
     
  16. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    It sold shit loads so I'm not sure what your point is.
     
  17. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    You were asserting that he was merely 'competent'. I've posted up ample links where people disagree with that statement. Curiously, you still refuse to state what makes a good bass player. Why is that? How do you rate Stanley Clarke? he says McCartney had an influence on his playing:
     
  18. Rutita1

    Rutita1 Scum with no integrity, apparently.

    Leave MY BEATLES alone!
     
  19. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    It's just become so tediously fashionable to slag them off from a position of ignorance. McCartney was not just a 'competent' bass player. He was a talented, innovative and influential bass player who had an impact on major players like Stanley Clarke.
     
  20. Rutita1

    Rutita1 Scum with no integrity, apparently.

    Quincy Jones, such an ignorant, try hard, tedious, fashionable type? :D Fucking hell Ed, that's actually funny.
     
  21. TruXta

    TruXta tired

    I don't know Stanley Clarke and I don't care what he thinks. And I don't care that other people disagree with my opinion. That's life. You seem to be a bit worked up about all this. Calm down.
     
  22. Wookey

    Wookey Playful as a pussy cat

    "You know, I met Paul McCartney when he was 21."

    What were your first impressions of the Beatles?

    "That they were the worst musicians in the world. They were no-playing motherfuckers. Paul was the worst bass player I ever heard. And Ringo? Don’t even talk about it.."

    So QC appears to be talking about his first impressions of The Beatles when he met Paul at 21 years old, and it's all in the past tense. Somewhat important.

    His quote could easily be read as a tribute to Paul McCartney because at the age of 75, he's now undoubtedly an inspiring musician who influenced modern pop music a similar way to QC himself. From small acorns and all that!

    It seems everyone is assuming that QC is talking in the present tense, and that skews the whole meaning imo. :(
     
    Nanker Phelge likes this.
  23. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    He's only pretty much recognised as one of the greatest bass players in the world. Forgive me if I place his opinion above yours, even if you are strangely reticent to actually state youir opinion about what makes a great bass player.

    Oh and look who's number three in this list :D :D

    The 100 Greatest Bass Players of All Time
     
  24. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    They'd already had quite a substantial career by the time they were 21!
     
  25. TruXta

    TruXta tired

    This is a bit like talking to Jehovah's Witnesses, so I'll exit this conversation.
     
  26. elbows

    elbows WoeTimer

    I think a key point is that it was not claimed that it was all down to PR/marketing etc, but that these and other things were part of the mix.

    I certainly think it is utterly fair to claim that the Beatles were in the right place at the right time. They managed to be involved at an intersection of various things at a key moment, and its perfectly reasonable to discuss them without in any way slighting their abilities.

    I also think its perfectly possible to look at the Beatles phenomenon and the Beatles as a group and their output as two different things. I feel no need to downplay those phenomenon, I can judge their music on its own merits and if I want to give credit where it is due I can point to the way they evolved so much as a group and produced many interesting works that went well beyond the original Beatles phenomenon.

    But please dont try to paint too innocent a picture of the 1960's, especially on the PR front. What it lacked in size and industrial clout it more than made up for with vulgarity and lofty ambition. Indeed the entire way much 60's nostalgia and cultural memory gets echoed in more modern decades is testament to the strengths of some of the PR myths that were being spun about that decade at the time (swinging London 60's for example) and there is a part of the Beatles that is all about that stuff, an entire different dimension really. One that doesnt tell us one way the other about Ringos drum attributes or Pauls bass genius.
     
  27. S☼I

    S☼I I don't want your poxy mint

    Slight correction: first single to sell more than two million copies in the UK.
     
  28. elbows

    elbows WoeTimer

    I dont care how many it sold, exposure to that song and the frog song as a developing child is bound to have had an impact. Given this, I think Paul gets off quite lightly really.

    I wont apologise for appreciating their music and what it means to many people, but not holding it in quite that high esteem myself for simple reasons that have nothing to do with musical ability. Just timing, I grew up with it as a child, not something that arrived as I came of age. Although a renewed listening was in order and appreciated when I did come of age, I'm sure it didnt have quite the same impact on me as it would have if it was the current sound of the day and we had not yet learnt where it would lead, where it would end and what individuals members would go on to achieve. It has always been with me, familiar, there wasnt a time it arrived for me. But I'm sure not everyone my age feels this way, I know a few who were just as enamoured with the Beatles in the 80's and 90's as they would have been if they'd been young adults in the 60's instead.
     
    seeformiles likes this.
  29. Wookey

    Wookey Playful as a pussy cat

    It was four or so years before Sergeant Pepper, and at least 20 more years before He gave us The Frog Song!

    My point remains that I don't think QC is criticising Macca as an artist, but his relatively poor musicianship aged 21 - which is not surprising or hard to tell from the development of Beatles records, they all got much better at the music as they got older innit.
     
    seeformiles and Rutita1 like this.
  30. Kaka Tim

    Kaka Tim Crush the Saboteurs!

    For what its worth, Ive been playing in bands for years and done a fair bit of mixing and arranging in studios - i.e listening and thinking and working out how bits fit together and make a good track.
    For me, what makes a great bass player (or any musician) is not how technically good they - far more important is how what they play enhances and complements the whole. Technique helps in that it gives you more to play with - but if you dont have a good ear for the dynamics, harmony and melody of the the collective sound, then you're a shit musician in my book.
    On that basis - mc cartney is an excellent bass player. His basslines for the beatles (and im not a huge fan) are original, interesting, wonderfully melodic and he worked brilliantly with the other band members. So fucking what that he cant do flash shit like pastorious? - his bass playing is one of the most defining aspects of the beatles sounds - far more than the (pretty pedestrian) guitar work. And ringo's drumming is fine and a very good fit with the band.

    quincy jones is entertaining in that interview - but hes basically being a trolling gobshite.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice