Paul McCartney - The REAL King of Pop? - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > The Music Forums > Pop
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-08-2011, 12:20 AM   #81 (permalink)
Make it so
 
Scarlett O'Hara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,181
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier View Post
....and I never claimed McCartney`s solo stuff to be any good either, looks like we agree.

If you look at the original post, you`ll see I never claimed that any one of them to be any good outside of their golden eras anyway! Whether Bowie has some better songs than McCartney is largely irrelevant, as we have artists here that are largely living off their previous reputations and have been spent creatively for like 3 decades now.
Look, here are the facts:

Bowie > Paul McCartney
__________________
"Elph is truly an enfant terrible of the forum, bless and curse him" - Marie, Queen of Thots
Scarlett O'Hara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 02:16 AM   #82 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 937
Default

I doubt Bowie would agree.

As I said Bowie has done some good music, but I think he is rated even higher by some because of his unusual rock image.
__________________
non-cliquey member of every music forum I participate on
starrynight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 02:25 AM   #83 (permalink)
Live by the Sword
 
Howard the Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,075
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanilla View Post
Look, here are the facts:

Bowie > Paul McCartney
i seem to think they're about the same
__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Virgin View Post
what? i don't understand you. farming is for vegetables, not for meat. if ou disagree with a farming practice, you disagree on a vegetable. unless you have a different definition of farming.
Howard the Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 04:46 AM   #84 (permalink)
Horribly Creative
 
Unknown Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanilla View Post
Look, here are the facts:

Bowie > Paul McCartney
But the true facts are actually:

The Beatles/David Bowie (70`s era)>>>>>>>Rolling Stones>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David Bowie/Paul McCartney and last but not least >>>> Mick "Lips" Jagger.

Now that`s a much better perspective and should keep everybody happy.
Unknown Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 08:38 PM   #85 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: houston, TX, USA
Posts: 3
Default

I should say that I still love MJ because he came at the right moment so he got the right "branding"..
musiclive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 10:28 PM   #86 (permalink)
carpe musicam
 
Neapolitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Les Barricades Mystérieuses
Posts: 7,710
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight View Post
I doubt Bowie would agree.

As I said Bowie has done some good music, but I think he is rated even higher by some because of his unusual rock image.
Did Bowie have an image? Yes, but so did The Beatles. Look after your Beatles broke up, David Bowie was the man. He was one of the best of Glam Rockers and influential to many bands after that genre fizzled out. If you looked at The Beatles throughout their history they wore faux leather jacket like "Gene Vincent" wannabees, then they don French fashion to appear like the boys next door, then they were wearing Naru Jackets, they start dressing down, then dressing up, then dressing down, wearing silk jackets, they were always into some kind of fashion conscience image. How can you make it appear like Bowie has his popularity point pushed by his image and not The Beatles?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by mord View Post
Actually, I like you a lot, Nea. That's why I treat you like ****. It's the MB way.

"it counts in our hearts" ?ºº?
“I have nothing to offer anybody, except my own confusion.” Jack Kerouac.
“If one listens to the wrong kind of music, he will become the wrong kind of person.” Aristotle.
"If you tried to give Rock and Roll another name, you might call it 'Chuck Berry'." John Lennon
"I look for ambiguity when I'm writing because life is ambiguous." Keith Richards
Neapolitan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 11:09 PM   #87 (permalink)
Live by the Sword
 
Howard the Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Posts: 9,075
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan View Post
Did Bowie have an image? Yes, but so did The Beatles. Look after your Beatles broke up, David Bowie was the man. He was one of the best of Glam Rockers and influential to many bands after that genre fizzled out. If you looked at The Beatles throughout their history they wore faux leather jacket like "Gene Vincent" wannabees, then they don French fashion to appear like the boys next door, then they were wearing Naru Jackets, they start dressing down, then dressing up, then dressing down, wearing silk jackets, they were always into some kind of fashion conscience image. How can you make it appear like Bowie has his popularity point pushed by his image and not The Beatles?
i seem to think people just assumes Bowie is better because he's "cooler" than Paul, i seem to think musical meritoriously, they're about the same and Paul had the slight edge of being in the Beatles

all the good albums of Bowie's I can count on one hand:-

Ziggy Stardust
Station to Station
Low
Heroes
1. Outside

(and maybe Let's Dance)

the rest are mediocre to abysmal
__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Virgin View Post
what? i don't understand you. farming is for vegetables, not for meat. if ou disagree with a farming practice, you disagree on a vegetable. unless you have a different definition of farming.
Howard the Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 03:43 AM   #88 (permalink)
Horribly Creative
 
Unknown Soldier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, The Big Smoke
Posts: 8,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan View Post
How can you make it appear like Bowie has his popularity point pushed by his image and not The Beatles?
Because loads of bands looked like the Beatles, but nobody ever quite looked like Bowie and went through the amount of image changes that he did. Regardless of his music, Bowie has always been very image driven and probably the most image driven artist in the history of rock.
Unknown Soldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 04:10 AM   #89 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2
Default

Yeh I think it was the 2 self titles ones in particular he did that.
tticooldn92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 05:08 AM   #90 (permalink)
Groupie
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by starrynight View Post
Surely. He must have wrote many more great melodies than Michael Jackson. The whole Michael Jackson as 'king of pop' was just a record company idea in the early 90s.
Paul is the real king of pop. Like it or not the Beatles infuenced every genre today. Sort of like Mozart's influence.
mainekick is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.