Log In
Register
4.31pm
1 May 2010
Offline
I think it would be interesting to discuss this because most of my friends in beattales (a Mexican board for rock fans, including Beatle ones) are already going ga-ga with Roger Waters concert The Wall Live and declaring it better than Macca's Up and Coming that was held last May in Mexico.
I don't want to sound a Beatle fan, but I think it's unfair to compare. Roger Waters concerts are based on a concept, while McCartney is more like a band playing on a stage.
What do you think guys? Is it fair to compare both concerts? 
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
4.37pm
19 September 2010
Offline mithveaen said:
I don't want to sound a Beatle fan, but I think it's unfair to compare. Roger Waters concerts are based on a concept, while McCartney is more like a band playing on a stage.
What do you think guys? Is it fair to compare both concerts?
No it's not, But I say Macca, and as someone who has heard accounts of the Waters concert in Ottawa, It's not as great. McCartney appeals to all with a wide range of songs from 4 eras, whereas it it a one album concert from Roger Waters. So I say Macca
As if it matters how a man falls down.'
'When the fall's all that's left, it matters a great deal.
5.38pm
25 November 2010
Offline It's almost two different genres, isn't it? It's almost like comparing a Paul McCartney show to one by Public Enemy. (I've never been to a PE show, but appreciate some of their stuff and know they helped define rap in the 80s. In other words, a big name in that specific genre.)
It'd be interesting to see The Wall live. I've only seen the movie, and that was completely crazy.
6.05am
4 December 2010
Offline I had a friend go see the Wall in October and be completely blown away with it. He's also seen Paul (not the Up and Coming tour but when he was at Shea Stadium before they tore it down) and he loved that concert. But I wouldn't consider two types of genres, but rather two different levels of rock. Paul is more peppier, commercial while Roger is more dark, noncommercial, and a bit psychedelic. You can compare it but I don't think it would be on a level playing field.
I've never seen either artist. I've seen Paul's concerts on television and I've seen The Wall movie (scarred me as a Pink Floyd fan. Not the greatest way to dive into their music). SO I can't say which one is better, but I wouldn't mind seeing both.
Well we all shine on like the moon, the stars, and the sun.
8.16pm
27 February 2010
Offline The Wall isn't the best Pink Floyd album, at all; and Waters' solo albums are plain and boring as hell.
In the other hand, even if Paul isn't my favourite beatle, he is absolutely awesome.
I'd like to say "thank you" on behalf of the group and ourselves and I hope we passed the audition.
John Lennon
