Nirvanas new frontman

[thebennyd]

I like that track better than anything they did with kurt. Probably because it isn't Nirvana

[danger_aux]

Wow, that was awesome! Love that slide riff.

[fastlanestoner]

I didn't think it sucked either, and I liked how they did a new tune. I was fairly worried about Paul hitting that "a deniallllll..."

[Winny Pooh]

Mark Lanegan is the only guy worthy (and good enough) to do a Nirvana gig.

Kurt thought he was great. Listen "bubblegum", awesome (youtube "Hit the city" - w P J Harvey)

[Hot Vibrato]

Paul has always been my favorite Beatle. He can sing so sweetly on the ballads, and turn around and do the most intense screamo rock vocals that you can imagine. He's still got it. I dig the track - very reminiscent of Helter Skelter.

[kafka]

Would LOVE to see McCartney with Them Crooked Vultures.

http://www.nme.com/news/paul-mccartney/49287

[TobyToby]

Just to give a counter opinion an that. It fits like vanilla fudge with anchovy and it's definitely not a Nirvana reunion. It is like pi$$ing on a memorial. . Nirvana is gone with Kurt Cobain in 1994

[catfishmusic]

Listened and turned it off after about 20 seconds. A little too much of a publicity stunt for my taste.

[emitsweet]

Originally Posted by catfishmusic

Listened and turned it off after about 20 seconds. A little too much of a publicity stunt for my taste.

McCartney is arguably the best singer of all time, he can do it all, however why would someone his caliber want to do this and stoop to this level of unmusical noise? I don't get it. McCartney should do an album with someone talented like Chris Cornell or some insane over the top talented band like King's X. He has to be doing this for some ulterior motive other than the music, since this band is not music.

I thought it was very odd that JPJ played with these bozos too. Very strange. Doesn't anyone have any dignity? You never see talent like Sylvester Stone stooping to this level just to cash in. He'd rather live in a mobile home than sell out the family stone for some quick moolah. I hope McCartney is just board or between solo albums. He doesn't need the money and he can't possibly think this is good music. After all he wrote Yesterday and Hey Jude. So he obviously knows good music and knows how to compose it like no other human before or after him.

Maybe his 9 year old grandchildren think this is like sesame street music, and he wants to impress them just for fun? Maybe he looks at it like taking them to the circus or miniature golfing or taking them to see a Muppets movie matinee, or maybe like taking them to McDonald's for a happy meal? has to be something odd like that since this music is made by clowns and muppets.

[travisbrown]

Originally Posted by emitsweet

McCartney is arguably the best singer of all time,

Hmm.

[rainmaker]

Wow, what warped reality.

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by emitsweet

McCartney is arguably the best singer of all time, he can do it all, however why would someone his caliber want to do this and stoop to this level of unmusical noise? I don't get it.

There is no best but what about Aretha, Oum Kalthoum, Al Green, Solomon Burke, George Jones, Etta James, Frank Sinatra, Ray Charles, Ella Fitzgerald or John Lennon....just to name a few?

But since Paul Mc Cartney is certainly among the greatest and most flexible singers from the rock era and one of the greatest bass players and songwriters....well, I guess that's really something.

And since Kurt Cobain was a huge Beatles fan this casting here only makes sense. It's not some wannabee that's out there, it's ****ing PAUL MC CARTNEY! Kurt surely would dig that.

I like this Nirmania thing just for the hell of it: How many times has Mc Cartney been written off as sappy, past-his-prime, etc? I guess he wants to show the world that he can kick some ass and I think that's great! The man is still very ambitious.

[emitsweet]

Originally Posted by doorknocker

There is no best but

I did say arguably

Originally Posted by doorknocker

And since Kurt Cobain was a huge Beatles fan this casting here only makes sense.

Essentially everyone is a Beatles fan to some degree

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by emitsweet

Essentially everyone is a Beatles fan to some degree

Though not many reach the same melodic heights, like Nirvana did. Of course it was very different to the Fab Four because it was a different time and place.

[emitsweet]

Originally Posted by travisbrown

Hmm.

Well going from singing Yesterday to Helter Skelter shows some serious versatility especially without pitch correction. Add in Oh Darling, its all good

What other singers can cover those extremes? not many. Cornell, Robert Plant maybe a few others? It's not even a question of who can sing with such versatility. It comes down to who actually did it on record and was successful at it and with conviction. For instance, Mariah Carey has 6 octave range but her yelling into a mic singing a track like Helter Skelter is not going to work to well. Aretha Franklin is not going to sing Blackbird and then go sing Oh Darling and be convincing. Most singers are one trick ponies. McCartney was diverse and still very appealing. It comes down to, who was better?
He is 70 years old now, so you have to put into perspective and judge him by his earlier years. When he did what the did
singers were not allowed to take chances, but they did.

[Jpchartrand]

I actually really enjoyed the performance. The fact that they didn't do an overplayed song really made it great for me.

It's definitely not a Nirvana reunion since Kurt is dead.

[stoplaughing]

Kind of a cheese ball rock song. Who mixed this ?

[emitsweet]

Originally Posted by doorknocker

Though not many reach the same melodic heights, like Nirvana did.

I don't hear any melody there

[stoplaughing]

Originally Posted by emitsweet

I don't hear any melody there

agreed

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by emitsweet

Well going from singing Yesterday to Helter Skelter shows some serious versatility especially without pitch correction. Add in Oh Darling, its all good

What other singers can cover those extremes?

Solomon Burke could do it.

Him and Mc Cartney were the only ones I know that could go from 'crooning smooth' to full-out distorted shouting. I mean in the way the voice totally changes its timbre. It reminds me of a guitar with a beautiful full sound that suddendly changes into nasty distortion.

But of course great vocals are about much more than this. I have immense respect for Paul Mc Cartney but when it comes to plain goosebumps John Lennon's vocals always affected me the most.

Since they were in the same band with two other immensely talented dudes, well....that's why.

Originally Posted by emitsweet

I don't hear any melody there

Just because it's distorted and loud doesn't mean it isn't melodic. I'm certainly not the world's greatest Nirvana fan but the first time I've heard them they reminded me of the Beatles: Great, compact, driving songs, memorable and to the point.

'Teen Spirit' has much to do with Boston's 'More than a feeling' and while I generally don't like mainstream 'big rock' very much, the Boston track is amazing. As is 'Teen Spirit'.

It's just about great songs and great performances. Who cares about the labels?

[travisbrown]

Originally Posted by emitsweet

I did say arguably

Well, Paul is a competent pop singer, but I'd be hard pressed to even say "arguably" the best. Give someone ten minutes and they could probably easily come up with 100 better popular singers. I just don't think there is anything exceptional about him as a vocalist.

He doesn't need to be the absolute greatest singer to still be Sir Paul. I'd say he was an engaging performer more than a captivating vocalist.

I mean, the Beatles had good vocals, interesting vocals, but nothing amazing. They did the job.

[youngfreak]

Originally Posted by emitsweet

I don't hear any melody there

You may be better off just stating that you don't care for it; otherwise, I'd recommend you look up some Nirvana piano covers on YouTube if you seriously don't think any of their songs have melodies.

[travisbrown]

Originally Posted by emitsweet

Well going from singing Yesterday to Helter Skelter shows some serious versatility especially without pitch correction. Add in Oh Darling, its all good

What other singers can cover those extremes? not many. Cornell, Robert Plant maybe a few others? It's not even a question of who can sing with such versatility. It comes down to who actually did it on record and was successful at it and with conviction. For instance, Mariah Carey has 6 octave range but her yelling into a mic singing a track like Helter Skelter is not going to work to well. Aretha Franklin is not going to sing Blackbird and then go sing Oh Darling and be convincing. Most singers are one trick ponies. McCartney was diverse and still very appealing. It comes down to, who was better?
He is 70 years old now, so you have to put into perspective and judge him by his earlier years. When he did what the did
singers were not allowed to take chances, but they did.

Most pop performers are one trick ponies. Agreed. I wouldn't cast PM in that lot. We are talking about exceptional singers. And also agreed, it's fair to take PM at his prime for discussion. (As an aside, I'm not sure I'd call Aretha or Mariah one trick ponies. They primarily sing in a more focused genre, but I suspect their range of capability is exceptional.)

But any good working session singer with reasonable versatility should be able to cover this stuff. And presuming that we are limiting to pop rock singers, because some performers in other genres would seriously trounce most everyone we think it good in the limited scope of pop/rock.

I think Abe Laboriel Jr. is a better singer than Paul, but that's not who I want to see fronting.

Take away the stigma and nostalgia of the Beatles and Paul himself. Imagine seeing PM for the first time in a club, doing modern arrangements of contemporary music. You'd probably think, "Huh. Good, solid singer who looks like he's having fun", not "OMG! This is arguably the greatest singer I've ever heard in my life."

Or maybe you would.

[FFTT]

There may be better vocalists, better bass players, maybe even better songwriters,
but how many can even come close to Sir Paul on the complete package?

[TranscendingM]

Originally Posted by TobyToby

Just to give a counter opinion an that. It fits like vanilla fudge with anchovy and it's definitely not a Nirvana reunion. It is like pi$$ing on a memorial. . Nirvana is gone with Kurt Cobain in 1994

+1

Why is "Nirvana" even in the title?
Nirvana with Kurt, as with anything else, was an event that happened. Done.

This sounds like standard blues rock to me.

[GJ999x]

Originally Posted by TobyToby

Just to give a counter opinion an that. It fits like vanilla fudge with anchovy and it's definitely not a Nirvana reunion. It is like pi$$ing on a memorial. . Nirvana is gone with Kurt Cobain in 1994

Not that i even agree 100% but glad someone said it..

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Gearslutz App

[emitsweet]

Originally Posted by travisbrown

Most pop performers are one trick ponies. Agreed. I wouldn't cast PM in that lot. We are talking about exceptional singers. And also agreed, it's fair to take PM at his prime for discussion. (As an aside, I'm not sure I'd call Aretha or Mariah one trick ponies. They primarily sing in a more focused genre, but I suspect their range of capability is exceptional.)

But any good working session singer with reasonable versatility should be able to cover this stuff. And presuming that we are limiting to pop rock singers, because some performers in other genres would seriously trounce most everyone we think it good in the limited scope of pop/rock.

I think Abe Laboriel Jr. is a better singer than Paul, but that's not who I want to see fronting.

Take away the stigma and nostalgia of the Beatles and Paul himself. Imagine seeing PM for the first time in a club, doing modern arrangements of contemporary music. You'd probably think, "Huh. Good, solid singer who looks like he's having fun", not "OMG! This is arguably the greatest singer I've ever heard in my life."

Or maybe you would.

I don't think Paul is the best singer ever but he's one of them.

[nuthinupmysleeve]

Originally Posted by FFTT

There may be better vocalists, better bass players, maybe even better songwriters,
but how many can even come close to Sir Paul on the complete package?

Back in the day? Not many! Today? Paul is best collaborating with someone with an edge. He was obviously great with lennon, and he was great on the record he made with elvis costello. Then there's silly love songs. Ahem.

I didn't think too much of the McCartney/Grohl/Novoselic collaboration, but it was better than expected. My expectations were very low.

[tiny333]

Sir Paul McCartney s contribution to modern music will echo down the centuries

Dave Grohl will be remembered as one of the best rock drummers ever

Chris Novoselic is bloody wonderful and it great to see him standing up.

If they choose to play together then woopie

All you haters gonna hate wtf

Get a life meh meh meh meh i dont hear any melody blah blah blah

Morons

Worst side of gearsluts

Happy new year