Paul McCartney singing last night

gazelle77 · ‎03-01-2013

I do not think he sounds great anymore. I think he famous for being a Beatle, not for his music. Last night listening to him sing when Ringo was playing drum ,on the Grammys, it was not a "great" voice, nor was the song great. I was surprised it got a Grammy actually! People love him for his past. He is lucky for that! I loved him as a 12 year old myself!

151949 · ‎03-09-2010

Well, when you are as rich and famous and talented as Sir Paul your opinion on this subject will have some weight - until then - not smart to dis Sir Paul.

croemer · ‎03-10-2010

I heard this being discussed on the radio today...that he did not sound well.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

**Careful... I have caps lock and I am not afraid to use it.**

RainCityGirl · ‎12-16-2012

Even as frail as Paul's voice sounded, it still wasn't as bad as the old country dudes. Blake had to really work to cover for them. And then there was Trent Reznor. My ears were bleeding.

gazelle77 · ‎03-01-2013

On 1/27/2014 happy housewife said: Well, when you are as rich and famous and talented as Sir Paul your opinion on this subject will have some weight - until then - not smart to dis Sir Paul.

Oh, I am sure he is talented! And knows the business. I just think his great music days are over. He should just enjoy the limelight and let people show him the love. Time to accept and move on.

Catitude · ‎01-09-2014

Most elderly can no longer carry a tune. That's a given with Paul. It's not about the vocals. He's a legend and is worthy of praise however he is trying so desperately hard to fit in with today's music and the ""young"" crowd.

Frank Sinatra would never have done that.

adelle38 · ‎03-09-2010

I always liked Paul's musicianship but I never thought he had much of a voice. His voice seems to have good days and bad days now.

It's always a victory for me when I remember why I entered a room.

ahoymate · ‎05-30-2010

On 1/27/2014 happy housewife said: Well, when you are as rich and famous and talented as Sir Paul your opinion on this subject will have some weight - until then - not smart to dis Sir Paul.

ITA! I don't how old this poster, gazelle77, but she has a lot of judgements that are negative on life.

Let's see how you're doing when you are Paul's age, 71. He looks great and so does Ringo. Nice to have cash to get the some anti aging help from the plastic surgeons.

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

Is this the same Gazelle who just started another post that older women should not wear leggings?

SIR Paul is a music icon...still creating, still enjoying performing.

Maybe not to your taste...but beloved by millions.

azterry! · ‎10-21-2011

On 1/27/2014 RainCityGirl said:
Even as frail as Paul's voice sounded, it still wasn't as bad as the old country dudes. Blake has to really work to cover for them. And then there was Trent Reznor. My ears were bleeding.

that's for sure!

The segment with Willie, Merle and Kris was a trainwreck.

I didn't think Paul sounded bad. Is his voice as pure and strong as when he was in his 20's? Of course not. He had one of the best voices in the business in his prime. For 71 years old, I saw him in concert a couple of years ago and he sang for 2 1/2 hours straight--and not just ballads either!