who is better: paul mccartney or phil collins?

D

droid

Guest
stelfox said:
4) looking at their collaborative ventures really answers this for me, though. mccartney = ebony and ivory and the frog chorus. collins = easy lover. yup, phil's a clear winner.

Maybe its cos I was 6 when it came out - but I LOVE the frog chorus! :p Plus its well overdue for some kind of ironic mash-up style re-imagining.. CRAZY frog chorus anyone??

:D

Other than that - im not too familiar with McCartneys solo work, but i can say with certainty, that the overriding horror of Collins' crimes against fashion should ensure he loses any poll of this nature...
 

joenice

Miriam Gonzalez lover....
AshRa said:
ARE YOU MAD?!
Nope...not at all.
AshRa said:
Besides the sheer lunacy comparing Phil Collins to Prince.....
mms said:
phil collins and prince ??
now come on .
I'm not sure what you all are missing here. Prince's work in the 80's is legendary.

Sure, their music isnt really comparable...i understand that. Different styles, but my comparison was purely on the basis of a decade of music......Personally, i like Prince more than PC, but that's a different thing altogether.

If you look at each musician's body of work in the 80's....you'd have to say Prince was better.
 

stelfox

Beast of Burden
right, i haven't, as it turns out really got much time to do a big bit of writing on this, but i will point out why i like phil more.
the thing is, it's easy to slag them both off, easy to take the anti-MOR stance and say that they're both crap and irrelevant as solo artists, but they'r e not really. both have done good things, either in bands or on their own.
(for the record, anyone who says the beatles were crap or that anything genesis did, even at their best, surpasses the beatles on top form is absolutely certifiable in my book.)
but have both become pariahs mainly thanks to their personal traits - macca's insane quest for recognition and respect and desire to be loved despite being revered and adored as a member of the best pop band ever (really, is that not enough?) and collins’ paul daniels-style toryism and wife dumping by fax stupidity - rather than their musical abilities.
they've both been resposnible for some absolute atrocities on their own, but i really do believe that phil collins can claim a far more cohesive, consistent and all-round better body of work without a band behind him.
marcus and derek have both pointed out the piecemeal nature of mccartney's solo career, a career which he even admits to not being wholeheartedly committed to a lot of the time, whereas phil collins is a lot, lot sharper in his aims.
macca isn't a great bassist and isn't a great singer or songwriter, either (i know he turned out gems with lennon, but he did write obladi oblada, too, so my criticism stands) and, far from being guileless, tries so hard to be all things to everyone that his strike ratio is pretty bad. i mean, who is he, what is he about, what has he been trying to do?
you can't say that about collins, his music is absolutely of its time and totally him. i can't listen to no jacket required without thinking about being about 12/13, watching miami vice on my school holidays and the whole era he managed to capture. returning to his "leaving the country" threat you can even say that he captured it in his own life with his own crapulent thatcherism, therefore as historic documents, his records work remarkably well.
this leads directly on to what i like about phil at his best: the clarity and sense of purpose behind what he was doing (even if some of it's not actually that likeable in itself).
while mccartney dithers and tries his hand at absolutely everthing, wanting to please everyone as bassist, singer, multi-instrumentalist (he plays flugelhorn on his new album!), as a result coming across as aimless and tired, collins sticks to what he believes (wrongly) or knows (absolutely correctly).
what he knows is drumming. listen to any of his records and they're an absolute barrage of percussion. even the weakest moments foreground the rhythm tracks, with all the melodic and vocal elements way down in the mix. you could say this is his ego in effect but i don't buy that because his voice is absolutely submerged on the heaviest tracks, so it's more apt to say that he knows how to play to his strengths, where mccartney lacks the self-control/awareness to rein himself in and not expose his inadequacies.
finally, joe mentions prince, and i say he's right because if you listen to no jacket required and around the world in a day by prince back to back, it actually pretty frightening how similar they are, from the linn drums and brass sections to the basic melodies.
in fact, tracks like who said i would and raspberry beret make perfect companion pieces. while there's no doubt that prince was infinitely more charismatic, more innovative, smarter and just all-round better, it's worth remembering that these records were released within a couple of months of each other, with collins having the slight edge being released in february and prince coming out in may, and share a lot of common traits - and who better exemplifies "good" 80s music than prince.
anyway, by dint of virtuosity, restraint and being able to nail a whole era, phil smashes this particular clash for me.
thank you!
 
Last edited:

Diggedy Derek

Stray Dog
collins sticks to what he believes (wrongly) or knows (absolutely correctly). what he knows is drumming. listen to any of his records and they're an absolute barrage of percussion. even the weakest moments foreground the rhythm tracks with all the melodic and vocal elements way down in the mix

Not sure about this. Surely solo work is characterised by moving to the piano, a rather showboating effort that rather contradicts your emphasis on his drumming. Plus, his appalling Motown pastiche Two Hearts was an extremely ill-advised retro effort that precisely showed him moving away from his [admittedly impressive] 80s AOR strengths to disasterous effect.

Good post otherwise though, although I'm sure the idea of "the way he nails the 80s" is tempting rather K-Punk to try and hit you for six.
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
Stelfox's defence of Collins sounds like a job application... 'clear sense of purpose... self-motivated' ... :) fitting for the drab eighties aspirationalism of PC's yuppie pop

yes, collins reminds me of the mid-80s, that's why he is so irredeemably mediocre

and he drums like someone falling downstairs... bang clatter bang, dreadful :)

(hadn't seen derek's post before i did this btw)
 
Last edited:

stelfox

Beast of Burden
Diggedy Derek said:
Not sure about this. Surely solo work is characterised by moving to the piano, a rather showboating effort that rather contradicts your emphasis on his drumming. Plus, his appalling Motown pastiche Two Hearts was an extremely ill-advised retro effort that precisely showed him moving away from his [admittedly impressive] 80s AOR strengths to disasterous effect.

Good post otherwise though, although I'm sure the idea of "the way he nails the 80s" is tempting rather K-Punk to try and hit you for six.

yeah, i'm talking only about that particular era. it all falls apart circa buster. however, collins did manage to be relevant to an era on his own which mccartney hasn't ever done.

re k-punk, i want him to do better than he's just done because i didn't say any of those things!

(also mark, be sparing with the posts becuse seeing you with street fighting man next to your name has unfailingly made me laugh lately ;) )
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
stelfox said:
re k-punk, i want him to do better than he's just done because i didn't say any of those things!


You didn't say 'self-motivated' but you might as well have done since you did say 'clear sense of purpose'... your whole post was about 'aims and objectives' :)

Surely your acclaim for Phil is entirely contingent upon your being 12 or 13 at the time when those records came out. Because for me and surely for others McCartney too and Wings are at least as reminiscent of the 70s as Collins is of the 80s. There is no record that captures an era (entirely for the worse) than Mull of Kintyre for instance. But Band on the Run and Live and Let Die, they are totally 70s too, couldn't have come out any other time....
 

stelfox

Beast of Burden
k-punk said:
You didn't say 'self-motivated' but you might as well have done since you did say 'clear sense of purpose'... your whole post was about 'aims and objectives' :)

pffffft! it was all about having a finely honed aesthetic and being absolutely able to fulfil it! however, you're right, the language of the free market *is* perfect for talking about collins' 80s output. this is not necessarily a bad thing either. as i say, he was completely of his time, so why not discuss him in the context of that era. this is ok. and surely mark, there's no way that macca can be as evocative of the 70s as bowie, bolan, roxy et al, is there? macca totally rode and set the zeitgeist with the beatles. he has never done it as an individual.
 
Last edited:

owen

Well-known member
stelfox said:
(also mark, be sparing with the posts becuse seeing you with street fighting man next to your name has unfailingly made me laugh lately

LOL!

stelfox totally right abt the percussion, specially on before and after science.....

question is, what is the worst sin committed by these people? 'another day in paradise' vs 'the frog chorus'?

people mentioning prince are on crack
 

bassnation

the abyss
stelfox said:
pffffft! it was all about having a finely honed aesthetic and being absolutely able to fulfil it! however, you're right, the language of the free market *is* perfect for talking about collins' 80s output. this is not necessarily a bad thing either. as i say, he was completely of his time, so why not discuss him in the context of that era. this is ok. and surely mark, there's no way that macca can be as evocative of the 70s as bowie, bolan, roxy et al, is there? macca totally rode and set the zeitgeist with the beatles. he has never done it as an individual.

so you don't agree with alan partridge then?

"Alan tries to be the everyman -- despite the fact that he’s obsessed with ABBA, Roger Moore, and himself. It’s not just that Alan is uncool though, it’s that what he loves is so pure and so wrong. When Alan advises a young hip bellboy at the hotel to the greatness of a band called Wings, the clerk asks Alan, "who are Wings?" An unironic Alan responds, “Only the band the Beatles could have been.”
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
stelfox said:
pffffft! it was all about having a finely honed aesthetic and being absolutely able to fulfil it! however, you're right, the language of the free market *is* perfect for talking about collins' 80s output. this is not necessarily a bad thing either. as i say, he was completely of his time, so why not discuss him in the context of that era. this is ok.

Because his time was absolute shit, politically, aesthetically, every way...

and surely mark, there's no way that macca can be as evocative of the 70s as bowie, bolan, roxy et al, is there? macca totally rode and set the zeitgeist with the beatles. he has never done it as an individual.

Not AS evocative, no, but that's because the 70s was way richer than the mid-80s. Evoking the mid-80s is nothing to be proud of. Very much to the contrary.
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
owen said:
LOL!

stelfox totally right abt the percussion, specially on before and after science.....

????? I'm uh missing a beat here. Before and After Science, that well-known Phil Collins album?
 

bassnation

the abyss
k-punk said:
Because his time was absolute shit, politically, aesthetically, every way...

Not AS evocative, no, but that's because the 70s was way richer than the mid-80s. Evoking the mid-80s is nothing to be proud of. Very much to the contrary.

i don't know. i was 14 in the mid-eighties and i find a lot of things from that time to be evocative in an unrealistic rose-tinted way.

even watching films like threads you can find yourself being nostalgic over an entirely different set of apocalyptic fears than the ones we are dealing with now.
 
k-punk said:
????? I'm uh missing a beat here. Before and After Science, that well-known Phil Collins album?

Referring to the fact that Phil Collins was a featured guest drummer on several of Eno's late '70s albums.

Did macca ever get to play on an Eno record? No.

The prosecution rests....
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
Nick Gutterbreakz said:
Referring to the fact that Phil Collins was a featured guest drummer on several of Eno's late '70s albums.

Ah! That explains it...

Did macca ever get to play on an Eno record? No.

The prosecution rests....

Session playing on other folk's albums is stretching it surely...
 

michael

Bring out the vacuum
k-punk said:
Because his time was absolute shit, politically, aesthetically, every way...

Hang on... Talk Talk's Colour of Spring, Kate Bush's Hounds of Love, Phuture 3's Acid Tracks, Mr Fingers' Mystery of Love, Eric B & Rakim's Paid in Full, Jesus & Mary Chain's Psychocandy, Prince's Sign 'o' The Times, The Cure's Head on the Door ... All these things sound very much of their time to me. I don't think any of them sound particularly similar. I also think all of them are pretty "good", whether or not I like listening to them all.
 

k-punk

Spectres of Mark
michael said:
Hang on... Talk Talk's Colour of Spring, Kate Bush's Hounds of Love, Phuture 3's Acid Tracks, Mr Fingers' Mystery of Love, Eric B & Rakim's Paid in Full, Jesus & Mary Chain's Psychocandy, Prince's Sign 'o' The Times, The Cure's Head on the Door ... All these things sound very much of their time to me. I don't think any of them sound particularly similar. I also think all of them are pretty "good", whether or not I like listening to them all.


Fair point .... but if you ask me, the Talk Talk, Kate Bush, Phuture, Mr Fingers and Eric B are the quality here ... Psychocandy, Sign O' The Times and Head on the Door are of their time in a bad way ... (I know it's heretical but I've never been fully persuaded of the merits of Prince, and his day-glo concoctions do seem locked to the eighties now in every bad way; like Psychocandy SOTT doesn't really cut it as an album... )

In any case, I think there's an issue about being OF a time, and DEFINING a time ---- In every way for the worse, Collins manage to date-stamp that period, capture it for his bland midatlantic cheeky chappy cockney tax exile blue eyed soul yuppie pop ---- If you want to talk about hip hop or house, yes it was a fine time, a brilliant time --- but I prefer to think of them as fugitive lines of escape from the Dominant Pop code that Collins represented ----
 
k-punk said:
If you want to talk about hip hop or house, yes it was a fine time, a brilliant time --- but I prefer to think of them as fugitive lines of escape from the Dominant Pop code that Collins represented ----

Ooooh, yeah that's put things back in perspective! What the hell am I doing defending that twat Phil Collins for?! He was everything I hated at the time!

Nostalgia is a terrible burden.

PC is still better than that ex-Beatle ponce, mind!
 
Last edited:

stelfox

Beast of Burden
k-punk said:
Sign O' The Times and Head on the Door are of their time in a bad way ... (I know it's heretical but I've never been fully persuaded of the merits of Prince, and his day-glo concoctions do seem locked to the eighties now in every bad way; like Psychocandy SOTT doesn't really cut it as an album... )

sorry mark but how was sign o the times a bad record doing anything in a bad way? it was transgressive, socially conscious, and absolutely groundbreaking. this is just crazy talk
 
Top