Pauls classical stuff - is it any good?

[mhnso]

Recently I have spent some times actually listening with care to some of Pauls socalled classical work. Rockmuscians venturing into classical music more often than not turns into pompous kitsch the same way like operasingers turn pop mostly sounds like garbage. There are some people who has managed the crossover rather well - Elvis Costello is one.
Pauls classical outings I find more in the Costello vein. He is actually making serious efforts into this kind of music. För a person - like me - who sometimes enjoys listening to classical music but don t have an awful lot of knowledge it can be hard to judge the quality of a work. What I do know is that I actually enjoy listening to parts of Liverpool Oratorio, Ecco cor mum and Standing Stone. The workin classical album of course is nice listening but is mostly Pauls song arranged in a classical context
I think one reason that part ofPauls classical outings works so well is Mccartneys unique sense of melody . I mean classical rewiers who dismiss Pauls classicalmusic as oversimple and amateurish might be right in a way but wrong in another - they listen to miusic in a very academic way and forget that melodies like Yesterday, Eleanor Rigby, For no one etc are melodies of exactley the same quality as the best Mozart stuff. So allinall with a little patience there are some wonderful stuff to discover in Pauls "classical" stuff let s hope the ballet also will include some vintage Macca melodies.
The onte thing I somewhat miss in Pauls classical work is evidence of his more experimental side - I mean he knew and was influenced by Stockhausen and others like him but most of Pauls classicstuff follows a more conventional route

[efghijiloveyou]

I like bits and pieces of Paul's classical music, but that is kinda the problem: just bits and pieces. I'm not that into classical but I'll listen to it from time to time and I think some of Paul's work measures up to some of the greats (but what do I know?) if taken in short bursts. The first twenty minutes of the Liverpool Oratorio I think is quite sublime at times but it loses a lot of steam as it goes and gets pretty dull even. Standing Stone is more even in quality but never has any great moments. I'm still expecting something really unique from him in this area as you said, something different and non-traditional. Not sure if he'll ever get there though from what I've heard so far. Maybe if I heard the music live I'd feel differently, because a live orchestra has a surprisingly mighty effect.

[mr h atom]

liked L.O.: a bit overwri\ought & long, tho

liked W.C. quite a bit: needed a more 18th century arramgement, for me, but, hey...

liked E.C.M. even more...

loved S.S: best of the lot so far: love the entire feel and mood of the piece

love & listen to classical quite a bit, always have: vivaldi, bach, mozart, beethoven..all the usuals.

not as much a fan as it gets into the 19th and, esp., 20th century stuff, then i'm looking for something unique (philip glass, john corigliano)

i find, quite often, that when it comes to the more modern stuff, i like alot of movie soundtracks, where i feel composers seem to get the thematic part of storytelling much better

[mhnso]

E.C-.M I think second movement is sublime - so is the first part of SS. Agree that L.O is a bit to much specially the last half of it but sdome parts are absolutely great. SS is very good I even like the poem to it as well. So all in all there are a bit of wortwhile stuff here

[efghijiloveyou]

Mr. H, I totally agree that some movie soundtracks are great in a classical sense. Star Wars and Lord of the Rings come to mind.

[mr h atom]

e...heartU: try basil poulidoris' original 'conan the barbarian' score...IF you can find it !