Twitter Doesn't Know Who Paul McCartney Is, Thanks Kanye For 'Discovering' Him

www.techtimes.com ^ | 01/05/2015 | Staff

[Steve_Seattle]

"Fifty years ago, how many teenage Beatles fans knew about music from 1915. That would be the equivalent."

No it isn't. Because of dramatic changes in technology and the pervasiveness of media, few - if any - active performers in 1915 would still have recordings of their performances - in any media - still widely available in 1965. On the other hand, McCartney is still touring, he performed at the Super Bowl a couple of years ago, and the music of The Beatles is still widely played on oldies radio stations. A better analogy would be comparing the sixties era to the Big Band era, and most of us sixties-era people had heard of Benny Goodman, Artie Shaw, and Glen Miller, the equivalents of Paul McCartney.

[ModelBreaker]

Too bad Kayne can’t collaborate with Sinatra and Elvis. Bet he’d make them into stars too. He also missed collaborating with Mozart and Bach. They were all so unlucky to have missed out on the Kayne magic.

[Steve_Seattle]

"1915 was not a fair comparison."

True. I made that same point on a post of my own.

[Borges]

As I mentioned down thread. Also, the singer was not yet the focal point of popular music in the 1910s. Sinatra signalled that change and he retained superstar status from the 1940s till his death in 1998.

[kristinn]

The Beatles had the top selling album of the first decade of the 21st Century.

Linky.

[Maceman]

Fifty years ago, how many teenage Beatles fans knew about music from 1915. That would be the equivalent.

Hardly the equivalent. In 1915, there was no TV, no music on radio, no talking movies, and no equivalent pop cultural explosion.

Virtually EVERYBODY in the Western World -- including my 80-year-old Russian born Jewish immigrant grandmother who never learned to read English -- knew who the Beatles were by the end of 1964, which made them TRUE superstars -- as opposed to today, when the world is full of "superstars" that an awful lot of people -- especially people in their 60s and 70s -- never heard of.

I can tell you though, having been a new teenager when the Beatles first hit the American airwaves, I sure knew who Rudy Vallee was, and recognized the parody when the New Vaudeville Band released "Winchester Cathedral" with the singer sounding like he was singing through a megaphone.

[kristinn]

And as this writer points out:

...the best-selling album of the decade is the Beatles' 1, a collection of their number one hits. And that, when counting the individual albums in their massive (and very expensive) box sets of remastered recordings released just this past September as individual albums rather than one "unit," the erstwhile lads from Liverpool have sold more CDs than Eminem, the leading solo act of the decade, or any group, for that matter.

[IronJack]

The sooner Paul McCartney is forgotten, the better.

[kristinn]

Billboard, August 2014:

Hot Tours: Paul McCartney Is No. 1 With Sold Out U.S. Tour

[Borges]

Which popular musician from his generation is more suitable for posterity then?

[Steve_Seattle]

"The sooner Paul McCartney is forgotten, the better."

I agree that his post-Beatles singles, e.g., "Band on the Run," "Silly Love Songs," were mostly insipid. It seems that McCartney and Lennon needed each other to moderate their respective excesses and flaws.

[Steve_Seattle]

"Which popular musician from his generation is more suitable for posterity then?"

I liked The Animals before Eric Burdon started taking LSD and became messianic.

[Borges]

A lot of the Animals output wasn’t even self written. Especially before the late 60s.

[kiryandil]

A POS rapper married to that fat ass Armenian whore.

Don't sugarcoat it.

[Steve_Seattle]

"A lot of the Animals output wasn’t even self written. Especially before the late 60s."

I know that; I am talking about them as performers, not as song writers. Elvis didn't write his own material, either.

[EEGator]

"I've got a case of the Mondays..."

[Borges]

McCartney will endure as a songwriter first. And at his best he had one hell of a voice.

[a fool in paradise]

I don’t need a virtual web station to listen to the Beatles. You can listen to their entire catalog in less than a day.

[a fool in paradise]

The big band era bands are like comparing the Beatles to the bands of 1991-1994.

[Steve_Seattle]

"McCartney will endure as a songwriter first. And at his best he had one hell of a voice."

McCartney had a very versatile voice; he could do "Michelle," but also do the high-pitched, Little Richard "Whoo!!" with perfection. He could also rock - "Long Tall Sally" - and do the upper-scale harmonies which separate the average band from the superstars. He was also very good at coming up with relatively complex melodies. But I never liked his solo stuff.