|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
In 1975 and 1976 Paul McCartney and Wings undertook the epic "Wings over the World" tour, the largest scale tour they would ever undertake as a band. From this tour came both the legendary "Wings Over America" triple live album and the concert film "Rockshow," which are both now available restored and remastered. Learn more |
Listen to Samples and Buy MP3s
View the MP3 Album.
Special Offers and Product Promotions
- Buy a CD or a vinyl record, get a $1 Amazon MP3 Credit. Limit one promotional credit per customer. Here's how (restrictions apply)
- Includes FREE MP3 version of this album Here's how (restrictions apply)
Frequently Bought Together
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Editorial Reviews
2011 release from the former Beatle, an orchestral piece commissioned by the New York City Ballet. The recording was conducted by John Wilson, produced by John Fraser and performed by The London Classical Orchestra. Ocean's Kingdom is the first time Paul has written an original orchestral score or any kind of music for dance and is the result of a collaboration between Paul and Peter Martins, the Ballet Master in Chief of the New York City Ballet, who have worked together to present the world premiere of a new ballet for the company's 2011/2012 season.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
46 of 49 people found the following review helpful
Format:MP3 Music|Amazon Verified Purchase
For those of you hard core Beatles fans out there, like me, who also enjoy good classical music, also like me; this album will likely be right up your alley. While there is little here that screams Beatles, there is much here to truly enjoy. McCartney wrote this music to accompany a ballet with an underwater theme. While I understand that the ballet opened to less than stellar reviews for the choreography and costumes, the music itself was highly regarded. Personally, I truly enjoyed the album. Perhaps this music is best enjoyed through headphones, rather than accompanying a ballet (hasn't that been the case for so much music written for dance over the years?). There is enough variation in the tempo and organization of music to keep you going, and truly enjoying the score, for the nearly 60 minutes of play. I am really impressed that McCartney has ventured as far down the path of classical music composition as he has. While many rock musicians play service and homage to the classical forefathers, McCartney has taken this to entirely new dimension. For that, I give him a lot of credit. I hope he keeps going forward in this endeavor. Recommended!
40 of 42 people found the following review helpful
Format:MP3 Music|Amazon Verified Purchase
I am a big Beatles fan, and have seen Paul McCartney in concert a few times -- one of which was the best rock concert I have seen in my life. I also love classical music and have enjoyed reimmersing myself pretty heavily in it over the last few years. But this is the first time I have ventured into Sir Paul's classical music.
I am really pleasantly surprised by this album. No one should be expecting huge classical scope here. But for what it is -- tuneful, engaging orchestral music designed to drive a storyline in a ballet context -- I found this to be pretty darn good.
McCartney uses the tricks of the trade well. It starts out with a sufficiently watery-sounding opening that vaguely recalls the atmosphere of the underwater opening of Wagner's "Rheingold". Dramatic sequences use the percussion section well -- tympanis and xylophones beat out rhythmically driving, somehow corporate-sounding themes representing the bad guys in the storyline of the ballet.
The ballet itself has an environmental theme about a happy underwater kingdom being invaded by an army of aggressive landlubbers. This represents, of course, mankind's pollution of the seas, as McCartney said in a recent interview I read when the ballet premiered a few days ago.
I came to the album with some skepticism, half expecting it to be clumsy and amateurish. But it's really well done. McCartney brings his outstanding talent for writing tunes to a complex, satisfying work that seems like it would serve its storyline well in the ballet hall. Of course he's not Tchaikovsky or Stravinsky -- the two composers who were held out to him as examples of melody and rhythm when he accepted the commission to write the ballet. But he's Paul McCartney and he found his own way.
If you're getting the MP3, pick up the version with the digital booklet. It has a synopsis of the action and good background on how the ballet was commissioned and written.
Note the track times given by Amazon, which also show up in the Cloud Player, are off. The tracks are in fact much shorter than listed. The real track times are:
1. 14:07
2. 16:19
3. 13:37
4. 12:31
I imagine Amazon will be fixing this soon.
I'm afraid usual McCartney fans might not be attracted to a classical work, and classical music people might turn their noses up at this, because as McCartney himself said, he wrote this without "knowing how things are supposed to be done". But I'm very glad to have picked this one up. Recommended for anyone prepared to give up their preconceptions about Paul McCartney on the one hand, or about classical music on the other.
I am really pleasantly surprised by this album. No one should be expecting huge classical scope here. But for what it is -- tuneful, engaging orchestral music designed to drive a storyline in a ballet context -- I found this to be pretty darn good.
McCartney uses the tricks of the trade well. It starts out with a sufficiently watery-sounding opening that vaguely recalls the atmosphere of the underwater opening of Wagner's "Rheingold". Dramatic sequences use the percussion section well -- tympanis and xylophones beat out rhythmically driving, somehow corporate-sounding themes representing the bad guys in the storyline of the ballet.
The ballet itself has an environmental theme about a happy underwater kingdom being invaded by an army of aggressive landlubbers. This represents, of course, mankind's pollution of the seas, as McCartney said in a recent interview I read when the ballet premiered a few days ago.
I came to the album with some skepticism, half expecting it to be clumsy and amateurish. But it's really well done. McCartney brings his outstanding talent for writing tunes to a complex, satisfying work that seems like it would serve its storyline well in the ballet hall. Of course he's not Tchaikovsky or Stravinsky -- the two composers who were held out to him as examples of melody and rhythm when he accepted the commission to write the ballet. But he's Paul McCartney and he found his own way.
If you're getting the MP3, pick up the version with the digital booklet. It has a synopsis of the action and good background on how the ballet was commissioned and written.
Note the track times given by Amazon, which also show up in the Cloud Player, are off. The tracks are in fact much shorter than listed. The real track times are:
1. 14:07
2. 16:19
3. 13:37
4. 12:31
I imagine Amazon will be fixing this soon.
I'm afraid usual McCartney fans might not be attracted to a classical work, and classical music people might turn their noses up at this, because as McCartney himself said, he wrote this without "knowing how things are supposed to be done". But I'm very glad to have picked this one up. Recommended for anyone prepared to give up their preconceptions about Paul McCartney on the one hand, or about classical music on the other.
21 of 22 people found the following review helpful
Format:MP3 Music|Amazon Verified Purchase
I am 23, I am a musician on the side (no longer in any band, sadly, and a massive Beatles, Lennon, Harrison, and McCartney fan. I love instrumental music (classical is a very misleading term) so this is right up my alley. I apologize if my review isn't laid out perfectly or if I repeat myself. I'm writing this around 6AM.
To start, I'd like to say that I disagree with the reviewer who seems to think that simplicity in music is, by nature, always a fault. I can assure you that it is not. (Also, simplicity needs to be defined before we can argue its merits and disadvantages) Paul has written hundreds of songs for guitar, bass, and piano/keyboard. They are not technically the hardest, most finger-tying, mind-bending parts but do we all still love and adore them? Oh, yes. Paul isn't a good piano player by most standards but his music as a whole makes his supposed lack of technicality irrelevant. Tell me that you don't go around humming "Eleanor Rigby", that you don't enjoy "Too Much Rain", that you don't exalt gems like "Jet" and "Band on the Run" (or my personal favorite from The Firemen, "Sing the Changes." The same goes for this piece, it may not use the full orchestra most of the time, but you don't necessarily need to. It's beautiful anyway.
It lets each instrument speak for itself. You have the trumpets singing and articulating their sound, the flutes at another time dancing around on top, at one point you have what I think is a bassoon or bass clarinet (I'm sorry, I've been out of music for a few years and my ears a bit rusty in this regard) which, every time I hear it, puts a grin on my face. There are some fast paced, running strings as a foundation in quite a few parts and as you'd expect, it gets your heart going. The french horn parts in the fourth movement are just lovely and actually reminiscent of John Williams fanfares (though Paul doesn't actually use them for this). The beginning of the second movement is just so catchy that I guarantee you'll be humming it later, if you're actually listening to it (as opposed to having it as background music while you do something else).
I absolutely adore that Paul is branching out into ballet orchestration and learning to write scores. Ballet needs new updates and new ideas if it is to survive as a creative medium in a world where voices are electronically altered and computer generated instruments are the basis of popular music (Lady Gaga, the Ke$a person whose name I don't pretend to understand, or any other artist you've heard about using auto-tuning, like in the Antoine Dodson song called Bed Intruder.)
I think that we need to bring in artists from other genres. It benefits them (pushing them to learn and expand their skills) as well as whatever medium we bring them into. Those who have never been properly introduced to it (like ballet and instrumental music) can be given a gateway into it. "Oh, I like Paul McCartney and he's written some music for a ballet. Maybe I should check it out!"
I think that every artist, no matter the genre, no matter the medium, no matter the era in which they live, hopes that all their music will be a hit and successful. They also know that this isn't reality, where they will be lucky to have even one work become famous. Obviously, Paul has been far luckier than most. He didn't write this hoping to shake up the ballet world or redefine instrumental music. He wrote it because he was asked, it was something he hadn't done before, and he found it interesting. Will this blow the top off of instrumental music? Nope. He knows that.
It was written to accompany a story in his head. I think he succeeded. I can certainly envision the ocean, dancing, running, love, struggle, so many things, while listening to this. I think that may be the true test of instrumental (classical, if that helps you understand) music. Does it capture a mood, an event, does it speak without words? Yes, for me, this piece does. I can follow it in my head and come up with ideas for what might be happening (as I'm obviously not able to see it with the accompanying ballet) just the same way that I can if I listen to works by Mozart, Dvorak, Chopin, Bach, Tchaikovsky, Elgar, Copeland, or even the very famous modern day film score composer, John Williams. I'm not putting Ocean's Kingdom in their league, per se, just saying that the imagination and story is there with Paul's piece, too.
Listen to the samples before you buy, don't expect the music world we know it to be blown apart, and understand how, why, and who it was written for. Perhaps, also take into account the man never learned to read mainstream music notation (of which most of us are familiar with, even if only by sight). Take it for what it is, enjoy it, and applaud Paul for taking such a giant leap into waters, or indeed an ocean, where he had never before ventured.
My one question/concern about this is not related to the music itself, exactly. Why does it say, for example on the fourth movement, that it is 20 something minutes long but plays only until around the 14th minute? Did my copies not download properly?
To start, I'd like to say that I disagree with the reviewer who seems to think that simplicity in music is, by nature, always a fault. I can assure you that it is not. (Also, simplicity needs to be defined before we can argue its merits and disadvantages) Paul has written hundreds of songs for guitar, bass, and piano/keyboard. They are not technically the hardest, most finger-tying, mind-bending parts but do we all still love and adore them? Oh, yes. Paul isn't a good piano player by most standards but his music as a whole makes his supposed lack of technicality irrelevant. Tell me that you don't go around humming "Eleanor Rigby", that you don't enjoy "Too Much Rain", that you don't exalt gems like "Jet" and "Band on the Run" (or my personal favorite from The Firemen, "Sing the Changes." The same goes for this piece, it may not use the full orchestra most of the time, but you don't necessarily need to. It's beautiful anyway.
It lets each instrument speak for itself. You have the trumpets singing and articulating their sound, the flutes at another time dancing around on top, at one point you have what I think is a bassoon or bass clarinet (I'm sorry, I've been out of music for a few years and my ears a bit rusty in this regard) which, every time I hear it, puts a grin on my face. There are some fast paced, running strings as a foundation in quite a few parts and as you'd expect, it gets your heart going. The french horn parts in the fourth movement are just lovely and actually reminiscent of John Williams fanfares (though Paul doesn't actually use them for this). The beginning of the second movement is just so catchy that I guarantee you'll be humming it later, if you're actually listening to it (as opposed to having it as background music while you do something else).
I absolutely adore that Paul is branching out into ballet orchestration and learning to write scores. Ballet needs new updates and new ideas if it is to survive as a creative medium in a world where voices are electronically altered and computer generated instruments are the basis of popular music (Lady Gaga, the Ke$a person whose name I don't pretend to understand, or any other artist you've heard about using auto-tuning, like in the Antoine Dodson song called Bed Intruder.)
I think that we need to bring in artists from other genres. It benefits them (pushing them to learn and expand their skills) as well as whatever medium we bring them into. Those who have never been properly introduced to it (like ballet and instrumental music) can be given a gateway into it. "Oh, I like Paul McCartney and he's written some music for a ballet. Maybe I should check it out!"
I think that every artist, no matter the genre, no matter the medium, no matter the era in which they live, hopes that all their music will be a hit and successful. They also know that this isn't reality, where they will be lucky to have even one work become famous. Obviously, Paul has been far luckier than most. He didn't write this hoping to shake up the ballet world or redefine instrumental music. He wrote it because he was asked, it was something he hadn't done before, and he found it interesting. Will this blow the top off of instrumental music? Nope. He knows that.
It was written to accompany a story in his head. I think he succeeded. I can certainly envision the ocean, dancing, running, love, struggle, so many things, while listening to this. I think that may be the true test of instrumental (classical, if that helps you understand) music. Does it capture a mood, an event, does it speak without words? Yes, for me, this piece does. I can follow it in my head and come up with ideas for what might be happening (as I'm obviously not able to see it with the accompanying ballet) just the same way that I can if I listen to works by Mozart, Dvorak, Chopin, Bach, Tchaikovsky, Elgar, Copeland, or even the very famous modern day film score composer, John Williams. I'm not putting Ocean's Kingdom in their league, per se, just saying that the imagination and story is there with Paul's piece, too.
Listen to the samples before you buy, don't expect the music world we know it to be blown apart, and understand how, why, and who it was written for. Perhaps, also take into account the man never learned to read mainstream music notation (of which most of us are familiar with, even if only by sight). Take it for what it is, enjoy it, and applaud Paul for taking such a giant leap into waters, or indeed an ocean, where he had never before ventured.
My one question/concern about this is not related to the music itself, exactly. Why does it say, for example on the fourth movement, that it is 20 something minutes long but plays only until around the 14th minute? Did my copies not download properly?
Most Recent Customer Reviews
3.0 out of 5 stars
It is music for a ballet...
The critics did not like this very much, but I like music that was designed for ballet. This one is a little boring.
Published 16 days ago by BikerBehr
4.0 out of 5 stars
Ocean's Kingdom
a nice change of pace for Sir Paul. even tho classical music is not my favorite type of music. its better than i thought. very relaxing and soothing.
Published 1 month ago by beatle5
4.0 out of 5 stars
Floating!
Was so curious to hear what Paul had done with the ballet.
Enjoyed it very much.
Such a long journey from the 60's.
Enjoyed it very much.
Such a long journey from the 60's.
Published 3 months ago by gene plank
4.0 out of 5 stars
Different Paul
If you want to listen to something by a Beatle, that does not sound like one, this is it. Paul expandds his unlimited base. He is truly dynamic in his sounds. Read more
Published 9 months ago by Cornelius J. Wenthen
2.0 out of 5 stars
GREAT FOR $1.99
This is the best music purchase I have ever made for $1.99. I don't think one needs to actually see the ballet performed to comprehend the music. My question is, Why Sir Paul, Why? Read more
Published 9 months ago by Mark D. Serbin
5.0 out of 5 stars
paul mccartney ocean's kingdom
We all know about the genius of Paul. Again demonstrated their creative abilities. Another great recording of an amazing musician of our time. We all love Paul.
Published 10 months ago by marcelo
5.0 out of 5 stars
Deceptively simple, grows on you
Like most great compositions, this is so deceptively simple. At the end of the first listen, you catch yourself thinking 'OK then, that's all there is to it then. Read more
Published 11 months ago by Henri C. Ransford
5.0 out of 5 stars
Paul hits it out of the Park with this one.
I love pretty much whatever Paul McCartney does--I am like a mother with his stuff. I love it but recognize his faults and am indulgent--bc most of his stuff--the overwhelming... Read more
Published 13 months ago by Topher Russo
4.0 out of 5 stars
It's Cool
I gave four star because it's so deep music for me. I never thought that it's only music without lyrics. My husband can understand all types of music so he likes it... Read more
Published 14 months ago by PieTon
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent orquestral work from Paul.
This is another effort from Paul to demonstrate his wide variety of musical skills, and what a good one, excellent orquestation.
Published 14 months ago by Roberto
Listmania!
|
|
