McCartney* – McCartney III

The first album (1969) was made under great stress, mental and emotional duress but as an expression of breaking out, independence, insecurity, freedom, and even experimentation.
The second album (1980) was pure experimentation with electronic elements, not as pure as the first, but still a joy.
The third album is a bored Karl Wallenda in Puerto Rico 1978, with all the money in the world, greatly aged, stretched beyond the listener’s endurance of the 3 minute limit, purposely over compressed (that resembles a Phil Spector production), and completely forgettable. Not only is it late by decades - it should have been out in 1990 - but it also fails to deliver the goods. I own the white and the green pressings (gifts) and the different limited editions of other colors and combinations are only cash grabs on an album that needs all the help it can get. Had John been alive this (and most other) vanity releases like this one would have been free bonus s or tracks on a deluxe edition for some other album. Or a giveaway to a charity record.

Yes, his voice is gone. Yes, the songs would barely muster on a Wings album. But at this point, I don't really expect classic material or knock 'em dead performances.
The songs are good for what they are, the scribblings of a man in his '70s who's done it all. Listen first without reading the lyrics.
I think his voice kinda works on the more melancholy and slower paced tunes. A little like a Leonard Cohen feel, or Bob Dylan on his later efforts, more intimate and warm.
He obviously can't handle screaming rockers anymore, so he wisely avoids that. As always, the melodies are there.
With a full band (not his touring outfit) some of these songs might have been elevated to a loftier status.
I wish Paul would dispense with the need to be contemporary and collaborate with some worthy peers. Maybe it's too late for that now, but 20 years ago when he was dicking around with people like Kanye West it would've been welcome.
Overall this is a once in a while listen, like McCartney II.

Whereas the first album from 1969 was a mix of half finished songs, some bright moments, a couple of so-so tracks, and a masterpiece or two, and the second featured Paul experimenting with sound in his home studio, both of these are still listenable pieces. The third one, however, was slapped together when he found himself confined to the house during the COVID pandemic. Unfortunately the album sounds compressed, his voice did not age well, the songs forgettable, and the whole project can’t hide the fact it’s a collection of rejected and half baked songs from a man who has lost his curiosity and hunger. In order to rack up sales the album was released in various “limited edition “ colors and sleeve artwork. Some of these versions on the vinyl color alone command ridiculously high prices. The album is still a stinker. If you’re looking for audiophile features here, you’re in the wrong place. The whole album is a lo fi recording from his home studio, a bad habit he surely picked up from Jeff Lynne. The album is boring but I understand why people praise it so much: fans are just happy for any new material and that the guy is still alive. This album should have been recorded ( with better songs) and delivered 30 years ago. Too bad he was too busy preaching veganism and animal rights instead of writing good songs.

Huge McCartney fan but for the love of *. Please can we just put out one vinyl lp instead of all these different limited variations? You could have a beautiful embossed tri-fold album with beautiful pictured-filled inserts, stickers, and what-nots that we all could enjoy. I can't afford to purchase all the different variations. Give us fans a break!

It's a decent Paul McCartney album. Not great, but decent. Grows on you like a liver spot. It reminds me a little of McCartney 1 album with the acoustic guitar sound on some of the tracks. McCartney's voice is shot, but he's 78 years old, when he recorded it. One of the things I like about it is Paul's weathered beaten down voice. Worst track on the album is "Pretty Boys, Just a horribly constructed song. Sounds awful and the lyrics are stupid. Paul needs a producer to tell him, You came up with the concept of Sgt. Pepper, but that song is garbage and isn't good enough to be on the album. Go write something better... I do think it's a slightly better album than McCartney 2, But doesn't hold a candle to McCartney 1 or Ram.

I bought it on impulse before hearing it because it was so strongly promoted, but I’m not sure if it can grow up on me. The vocals are pretty shot (I realize the ex-Beatles is 78 at time of recording). The music boring. I liked Deep down on first listen. And they made a tribute album immediately after. I must of have missed something. Makes me want to put on Ram.

I've had this record for a little over six months now - bought it on street date from a local shop - and I've been thoroughly enjoying it.
It's got a warm, winter/late night feeling. Laid back and just different enough to be constantly rewarding.
The pressing is very, very good, nothing to add to the already positive reviews on the technical side.

what country is it from? . . . . .

Mine sounds nearly perfect, but in Winter Bird / When Winter Comes Paul's vocie very sibilant. Anyone experienced the same?

Actual vinyl much better than Egypt Station, even if the music isn’t quite as good.