What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Beatles (1 Viewer)

VH-1 is airing the Beatles Anthology (1995) in the build up to 9/9/09. Part two is on Wednesday (9/2/09) at 9 pm, part three is on the following week (9/9/09) at 9 pm.They were the first band I ever got into, never saw this series before. If you haven't, great documentary on the group.
When is part 1? 1995? :shrug:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian Epstein's influence and the infamous Decca audition

OK, so Brian signs the Beatles and he starts trying to clean up their image. He starts by getting them the, now famous, suits. Beatle legend tends to disagree on this, but for some reason, it got around that John and George hated the suits, but Paul and Brian made the Beatles sell out their tough leather image for the suits. IMO, I find it hard to believe that someone as driven to make it as John Lennon would reject anything that would make it possible for the Beatles to be noticed more or make more money. Brian makes the boys start to create set lists for their shows, stops them from eating on stage, stops them from swearing at the audience, and starts to control what goes out in the press. For example, Bill Harry, editor of Mersey Beat, which was a magazine dedicated to Liverpool's music scene, had photos of the boys in various states of silly. John with a toilet seat around his neck, reading the newspaper in his underpants, ect. Brian makes the boys get all those pictures back and starts to control what goes out.

You will notice, that nowhere in here do I mention Brian doing anything with the music. He felt that was fine and left that to the Beatles. he concentrated only on their image and getting them a recording contract.

To that end, Brian tried for months to get the Beatles an audition for a record company and had been turned down by every record company he could find. Finally, in 1962, **** Rowe, A&R man at Decca Records, decided to bring the Beatles in for an audition. So began one of the most controversial moments in Beatles history. Brian, thinking he would sell the Beatles by showing their versatility, had the boys practice their repertoire of covers. So, for the audition, it was mostly covers. Songs like Beseme Mucho, September in the Rain, and the Sheik of Araby showed the Beatles unconventional takes on older songs. They only played 3 originals for Decca, Hello Little Girl, Love of the Loved, and Like Dreamers Do. Interestingly, they didn't play Love Me Do, which was a fully realized song by this time or I Saw Her Standing There, which was one of their live staples. Also unusually, George Harrison sung lead on 3 songs, Three Cool Cats, Crying Waiting, Hoping, and The Sheik of Araby. A strange choice since George's voice clearly wasn't as good as John and Paul's at this point.

Anyway, we all know what happened. **** Rowe turned down the Beatles. Not really sure if it's true or not, but he reportedly told Brian that "guitar groups were on their way out." So, **** Rowe has become the guy that turned down the Beatles. The controversy then is, how good are the Decca tapes and should **** Rowe have signed the Beatles?? Very difficult to say. The audition is good, not great, but I don't think I would have heard it and thought, "these guys are gonna be bigger than Elvis." Personally, I think had they included some more originals, it might have helped. Love Me Do, certainly should have been played as should I

Saw Her Standing There. In Rowe's defense, at least he gave the Beatles an audition, which is more than anyone else, other than George Martin, was willing to do.

A small postscript to the story. Later, after the Beatles had been signed by George Martin and had some success, **** Rowe asked George Harrison if he knew of any good groups that he should take a look at. George's answer: "There's a group in London called the Rolling Stones..."

Next...George Martin signs the Beatles

 
One of the best threads of the year. :blackdot:
Thanks for that. The World War II thread inspired me to do this. I like the way tim set that up and did it.Anyway, here's the next edition. I'm gonna be playing some Beatles music most of tomorrow with my church band, so I might not do another one tomorrow, but I'll probably do another one or two on Sunday and then into next week. Anyway, I hope everyone's enjoying this. Feel free to chime in at any time.

George Martin signs the Beatles to a recording contract

Brian has the tapes from the Decca audition and he's bringing them around. He decides that it would be easier to have them transferred to disc, so he goes into a store. They guy cutting the disc likes the recordings and suggests Brian go talk to George Martin, A&R guy for Parlophone. Parlophone is a small subsidiary of EMI, which had already turned down the Beatles. Parlophone is known as a comedy label and had never been involved in rock and roll before. Martin hears the Decca audition and finds them "interesting." Not great. Not sure fire hit group, but interesting. He decides he needs to meet the band because there is something there.

So, the Beatles come in and Martin is immediately struck by the Beatles charisma and personality. As an illustration of this, at one point, Martin asks the boys to let him know if there's anything they don't like. George Harrision immediately cracks, "I don't like your tie." He listens to everything they can play. He is looking for the lead singer, thinking Paul and John certainly have the best voices. Paul is marketable because of his looks. John has a more forceful personality. To Martin's everlasting credit, however, he decides not to mess with the internal politics of the group. They would continue to employ multiple singers. Martin feels like their charisma would sell them, so now he just needs a song. At this point, Love Me Do is the best song he can find from them. He doesn't want to do one of the "oldies" they were doing at that point, feeling "Your Feets Too Big" and "Beseme Mucho" were too old fashioned. Interestingly, he hears a song that they wrote called "Please Please Me", which at this point, sounds like a Roy Orbison number. Slow and dramatic Please PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAASSSSSSE Me... Martin tells them to speed it up and see what they can do with it.

Martin decides to sign the group, with one request. For recording, he doesn't like Pete Best. He feels Pete is not steady enough and that, although Pete might be good enough for playing live, he needs somebody a bit more steady on the recording sessions. We all know what happened next. The Beatles drop Pete Best, bring in Ringo Starr and the rest is history. More on the Pete Best sacking, next time.

Anyway, this is where history is changed. Before the Beatles, generally, pop artists didn't write their own songs. Song writers wrote the songs and performers performed them. George Martin is looking for a hit and he finds one called "How Do You Do It." Martin felt the song was a sure fire hit and that the Beatles should record it. The Beatles didn't really like the song and wanted to do Love Me Do, instead. It took a lot of guts for the Beatles to be this defiant at this point. Martin, aware that Love Me Do wasn't the huge hit he was looking for, nevertheless, liked the song and agreed that they could record it as their first single. The day they show up to record Love Me Do, George Martin had hired a professional drummer named Andy White to play on the session. Having never heard Ringo before, and not even aware that the Beatles had replaced Pete Best, Martin decides to go with Andy White and hands Ringo a tamborine. Ringo is devistated, but does as Martin wants. They do a recording of Ringo on drums for Love Me Do and Martin, deciding that there isn't much difference between White's and Ringo's version decides to release the Ringo version as the single. The Andy White version ends up on the Beatles first album.

Love Me Do reaches #17 in the British charts. Not bad, but not enough to make George Martin drop the idea of recording "How Do You Do It." The Beatles offer an alternative which rockets them into super stardom...

Next...The riddle of Pete Best

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
So does the 09/09/09 edition Rock Band offer up Revolution #9 as one of the tracks?

:D

-QG
#9...#9...#9
"Paul is a dead man..."
I believe played backward it was "turn me on, dead man".
:goodposting: "Paul is dead man. Miss him. Miss him. Miss him . . ." was the gibberish at the end of "Don't Pass Me By" "I'm So Tired" played backwards . . .
Don't forget George moaning at the end of While My Guitar Gently Weeps, "Paul, Paul Pauuuuuuuuuulllllllll..."Definitely will have an article on the "Paul Is Dead" thing later.

 
Definitely will have an article on the "Paul Is Dead" thing later.
I have Patterson's book The Walrus Was Paul. Interesting read, but it's hard to believe that anyone took (or still takes) it seriously.
I have the same book. Love listening to all the "clues" and finding them all on the albums.You're right. Hard to believe that anybody thought it was true, but some of the clues are very creepy.

 
Definitely will have an article on the "Paul Is Dead" thing later.
I have Patterson's book The Walrus Was Paul. Interesting read, but it's hard to believe that anyone took (or still takes) it seriously.
I have the same book. Love listening to all the "clues" and finding them all on the albums.You're right. Hard to believe that anybody thought it was true, but some of the clues are very creepy.
It does seem as though the band was oddly committed to propagating the rumors and embedding these "clues."
 
Definitely will have an article on the "Paul Is Dead" thing later.
I have Patterson's book The Walrus Was Paul. Interesting read, but it's hard to believe that anyone took (or still takes) it seriously.
I have the same book. Love listening to all the "clues" and finding them all on the albums.You're right. Hard to believe that anybody thought it was true, but some of the clues are very creepy.
It does seem as though the band was oddly committed to propagating the rumors and embedding these "clues."
It certainly wouldn't surprise me if on Ringo or Paul's death bed, they let slip that they were having a little fun with the public. Certainly their sense of humor lends itself to something like this.Some of the clues HAVE to be planted.

 
Definitely will have an article on the "Paul Is Dead" thing later.
I have Patterson's book The Walrus Was Paul. Interesting read, but it's hard to believe that anyone took (or still takes) it seriously.
I have the same book. Love listening to all the "clues" and finding them all on the albums.You're right. Hard to believe that anybody thought it was true, but some of the clues are very creepy.
It does seem as though the band was oddly committed to propagating the rumors and embedding these "clues."
It certainly wouldn't surprise me if on Ringo or Paul's death bed, they let slip that they were having a little fun with the public. Certainly their sense of humor lends itself to something like this.Some of the clues HAVE to be planted.
My long departed father believed it. Instructed me in the whole long mythology along with all the rest of the history. He was a rabid Beatles fan. This thread would have been like heaven for him. We used to sit together and listen to their albums until it was my bed time. Sorry, getting a little dusty in here.

ETA - Really didn't expect all that emotion to come back. It's been nearly 30 years. Never really leaves you I guess. Sometimes a certain Beatles song can come on and it gets me then.

Still this is an awesome thread and I can't wait for the next part.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian Epstein's influence and the infamous Decca audition

OK, so Brian signs the Beatles and he starts trying to clean up their image. He starts by getting them the, now famous, suits. Beatle legend tends to disagree on this, but for some reason, it got around that John and George hated the suits, but Paul and Brian made the Beatles sell out their tough leather image for the suits. IMO, I find it hard to believe that someone as driven to make it as John Lennon would reject anything that would make it possible for the Beatles to be noticed more or make more money. Brian makes the boys start to create set lists for their shows, stops them from eating on stage, stops them from swearing at the audience, and starts to control what goes out in the press.
It's funny... the Beatles were almost the opposite of the "wholesome" image that was portrayed to the masses in the early days. Pill popping, drinking, fighting, sleeping around, etc. IIRC, it was even the Beatles who introduced the Stones to weed (after Dylan introduced them to it.)
 
Brian Epstein's influence and the infamous Decca audition

OK, so Brian signs the Beatles and he starts trying to clean up their image. He starts by getting them the, now famous, suits. Beatle legend tends to disagree on this, but for some reason, it got around that John and George hated the suits, but Paul and Brian made the Beatles sell out their tough leather image for the suits. IMO, I find it hard to believe that someone as driven to make it as John Lennon would reject anything that would make it possible for the Beatles to be noticed more or make more money. Brian makes the boys start to create set lists for their shows, stops them from eating on stage, stops them from swearing at the audience, and starts to control what goes out in the press.
It's funny... the Beatles were almost the opposite of the "wholesome" image that was portrayed to the masses in the early days. Pill popping, drinking, fighting, sleeping around, etc. IIRC, it was even the Beatles who introduced the Stones to weed (after Dylan introduced them to it.)
Yeah, that's why I laugh when people talk about the bubble gum and the boy band stuff. Image and reality are two different things. The Stones, for example, were brought up in middle class/upper middle class homes. They were from London. You can't get much more "establishment" than London, yet the Stones image was as the anti Beatles. The bad boys. Meanwhile, the Beatles were bumpkins from Liverpool which was the furthest away from the establishment that you could get. George, Ringo, and Paul all grew up in public housing. John was better off than they were financially growing up, but was deeply disturbed by all the trauma in his life.

IMO all of that stuff is image, anyway which is not important when discussing the music. In reality, the Beatles were FAR more adventurous musically than the Stones ever dared to be, which is just the opposite of the image of each band. That's just a fact. The Stones very rarely ventured away from their safe place, and when they did, it just wasn't that successful. Meanwhile, the Beatles played any kind of music they wanted to with no limits.

Stones lovers, please don't flame me. I love the Stones. If you look up rock and roll band in the dictionary, there is a picture of the Stones, as their should be. But, the Beatles were much more than just a rock and roll band. I hope to discuss this further as we go.

 
Brian Epstein's influence and the infamous Decca audition

OK, so Brian signs the Beatles and he starts trying to clean up their image. He starts by getting them the, now famous, suits. Beatle legend tends to disagree on this, but for some reason, it got around that John and George hated the suits, but Paul and Brian made the Beatles sell out their tough leather image for the suits. IMO, I find it hard to believe that someone as driven to make it as John Lennon would reject anything that would make it possible for the Beatles to be noticed more or make more money. Brian makes the boys start to create set lists for their shows, stops them from eating on stage, stops them from swearing at the audience, and starts to control what goes out in the press.
It's funny... the Beatles were almost the opposite of the "wholesome" image that was portrayed to the masses in the early days. Pill popping, drinking, fighting, sleeping around, etc. IIRC, it was even the Beatles who introduced the Stones to weed (after Dylan introduced them to it.)
Yeah, that's why I laugh when people talk about the bubble gum and the boy band stuff. Image and reality are two different things. The Stones, for example, were brought up in middle class/upper middle class homes. They were from London. You can't get much more "establishment" than London, yet the Stones image was as the anti Beatles. The bad boys. Meanwhile, the Beatles were bumpkins from Liverpool which was the furthest away from the establishment that you could get. George, Ringo, and Paul all grew up in public housing. John was better off than they were financially growing up, but was deeply disturbed by all the trauma in his life.

IMO all of that stuff is image, anyway which is not important when discussing the music. In reality, the Beatles were FAR more adventurous musically than the Stones ever dared to be, which is just the opposite of the image of each band. That's just a fact. The Stones very rarely ventured away from their safe place, and when they did, it just wasn't that successful. Meanwhile, the Beatles played any kind of music they wanted to with no limits.

Stones lovers, please don't flame me. I love the Stones. If you look up rock and roll band in the dictionary, there is a picture of the Stones, as their should be. But, the Beatles were much more than just a rock and roll band. I hope to discuss this further as we go.
My father hated the Stones. I mean hated. Felt that somehow they had stolen some of the Beatles limelight or something. I guess there was a rivalry, at least amongst the fans, back in the day.
 
Definitely will have an article on the "Paul Is Dead" thing later.
I have Patterson's book The Walrus Was Paul. Interesting read, but it's hard to believe that anyone took (or still takes) it seriously.
I have the same book. Love listening to all the "clues" and finding them all on the albums.You're right. Hard to believe that anybody thought it was true, but some of the clues are very creepy.
It does seem as though the band was oddly committed to propagating the rumors and embedding these "clues."
It certainly wouldn't surprise me if on Ringo or Paul's death bed, they let slip that they were having a little fun with the public. Certainly their sense of humor lends itself to something like this.Some of the clues HAVE to be planted.
I remember being in the car with my sister, bro-in-law and mom when I was 14 and listening to the entire taped "The Beatles Now and Forever" radio broadcast. After the last tape I had 'em replay the tape that had all the Paul Is Dead stuff as I thought it was interesting :blackdot: -QG

 
I would like to hear some opinion's about Pete Best.I used to think he was a sad, tragic figure in the history of music. But in reading the various biographies, from all different vantage points, it seems to me this: Pete Best brought on his own demise. From a personality standpoint he was lazy and unambitious. He was aloof--he'd show five minutes before they rehearsed and then split five minutes afterwards. He did the same thing when they played gigs. The other four were inseparable offstage, always hanging out together, whether at coffeehouses, restaurants, or even each other's house. Stu always went off by himself.Stu did not seem to get the concept of being in a group. (in some of the old photos John/Paul/George/Stu are all dressed alike, and there is Stu on his kit dressed altogether different). He also refused to comb his hair forward. From a technical standpoint, he couldn't (wouldn't?) play any other way than banging and thrashing, and crashing his cymbals. No subtlety at all.Paul and John acted very dooshy in the way they dismissed best. They wouldn't even do it to his face, instead sending Brian Epstein to do it. That was low class.But, all in all, I don't have much sympathy for Pete Best.
:blackdot: are some of the "Stu"s above supposed to be "Pete"s instead?-QG
 
always more of a beach boys fan growing up. became a beatles fan when i got older. now, i have to find 1s ... ugh.
I have on my short list a discussion about the Beatles and Beach Boys "rivalry." Brian Wilson was one of the few that could and did go toe to toe with the Beatles back in the day.Love the Beach Boys. Have a ton of respect for Brian, especially.
 
Brian Epstein's influence and the infamous Decca audition

OK, so Brian signs the Beatles and he starts trying to clean up their image. He starts by getting them the, now famous, suits. Beatle legend tends to disagree on this, but for some reason, it got around that John and George hated the suits, but Paul and Brian made the Beatles sell out their tough leather image for the suits. IMO, I find it hard to believe that someone as driven to make it as John Lennon would reject anything that would make it possible for the Beatles to be noticed more or make more money. Brian makes the boys start to create set lists for their shows, stops them from eating on stage, stops them from swearing at the audience, and starts to control what goes out in the press.
It's funny... the Beatles were almost the opposite of the "wholesome" image that was portrayed to the masses in the early days. Pill popping, drinking, fighting, sleeping around, etc. IIRC, it was even the Beatles who introduced the Stones to weed (after Dylan introduced them to it.)
Yeah, that's why I laugh when people talk about the bubble gum and the boy band stuff. Image and reality are two different things. The Stones, for example, were brought up in middle class/upper middle class homes. They were from London. You can't get much more "establishment" than London, yet the Stones image was as the anti Beatles. The bad boys. Meanwhile, the Beatles were bumpkins from Liverpool which was the furthest away from the establishment that you could get. George, Ringo, and Paul all grew up in public housing. John was better off than they were financially growing up, but was deeply disturbed by all the trauma in his life.

IMO all of that stuff is image, anyway which is not important when discussing the music. In reality, the Beatles were FAR more adventurous musically than the Stones ever dared to be, which is just the opposite of the image of each band. That's just a fact. The Stones very rarely ventured away from their safe place, and when they did, it just wasn't that successful. Meanwhile, the Beatles played any kind of music they wanted to with no limits.

Stones lovers, please don't flame me. I love the Stones. If you look up rock and roll band in the dictionary, there is a picture of the Stones, as their should be. But, the Beatles were much more than just a rock and roll band. I hope to discuss this further as we go.
My father hated the Stones. I mean hated. Felt that somehow they had stolen some of the Beatles limelight or something. I guess there was a rivalry, at least amongst the fans, back in the day.
Yeah, I mean, all of that rivalry was press created. As I said above, George Harrison helped the Stones get a recording contract. The Stones also recorded I Wanna Be Your Man as a single. Brian Jones recorded with the Beatles. Mick hung out during Revolver and during All You Need Is Love.In reality, the Stones and the Beatles were friends. I know Mick once commented about the Stones being a much better live band. Lennon responded in I Dig A Pony by saying "I roll a stoney. You can imitate anything you want." As far as I can see, that's the only indication of a "rivalry".

 
Brian Epstein's influence and the infamous Decca audition

OK, so Brian signs the Beatles and he starts trying to clean up their image. He starts by getting them the, now famous, suits. Beatle legend tends to disagree on this, but for some reason, it got around that John and George hated the suits, but Paul and Brian made the Beatles sell out their tough leather image for the suits. IMO, I find it hard to believe that someone as driven to make it as John Lennon would reject anything that would make it possible for the Beatles to be noticed more or make more money. Brian makes the boys start to create set lists for their shows, stops them from eating on stage, stops them from swearing at the audience, and starts to control what goes out in the press.
It's funny... the Beatles were almost the opposite of the "wholesome" image that was portrayed to the masses in the early days. Pill popping, drinking, fighting, sleeping around, etc. IIRC, it was even the Beatles who introduced the Stones to weed (after Dylan introduced them to it.)
Yeah, that's why I laugh when people talk about the bubble gum and the boy band stuff. Image and reality are two different things. The Stones, for example, were brought up in middle class/upper middle class homes. They were from London. You can't get much more "establishment" than London, yet the Stones image was as the anti Beatles. The bad boys. Meanwhile, the Beatles were bumpkins from Liverpool which was the furthest away from the establishment that you could get. George, Ringo, and Paul all grew up in public housing. John was better off than they were financially growing up, but was deeply disturbed by all the trauma in his life.

IMO all of that stuff is image, anyway which is not important when discussing the music. In reality, the Beatles were FAR more adventurous musically than the Stones ever dared to be, which is just the opposite of the image of each band. That's just a fact. The Stones very rarely ventured away from their safe place, and when they did, it just wasn't that successful. Meanwhile, the Beatles played any kind of music they wanted to with no limits.

Stones lovers, please don't flame me. I love the Stones. If you look up rock and roll band in the dictionary, there is a picture of the Stones, as their should be. But, the Beatles were much more than just a rock and roll band. I hope to discuss this further as we go.
My father hated the Stones. I mean hated. Felt that somehow they had stolen some of the Beatles limelight or something. I guess there was a rivalry, at least amongst the fans, back in the day.
Yeah, I mean, all of that rivalry was press created. As I said above, George Harrison helped the Stones get a recording contract. The Stones also recorded I Wanna Be Your Man as a single. Brian Jones recorded with the Beatles. Mick hung out during Revolver and during All You Need Is Love.In reality, the Stones and the Beatles were friends. I know Mick once commented about the Stones being a much better live band. Lennon responded in I Dig A Pony by saying "I roll a stoney. You can imitate anything you want." As far as I can see, that's the only indication of a "rivalry".
Yeah it always seemed manufactured to me.
 
always more of a beach boys fan growing up. became a beatles fan when i got older. now, i have to find 1s ... ugh.
I have on my short list a discussion about the Beatles and Beach Boys "rivalry." Brian Wilson was one of the few that could and did go toe to toe with the Beatles back in the day.Love the Beach Boys. Have a ton of respect for Brian, especially.
Yea, Brian probably could have been a Beatle. His one problem was that he was kind of alone in his band (artistically.) It was him and a bunch of Ringo's (not slamming the BB's - I like them a lot.) The Beatles essentially had two and a half Brians. :shrug:
 
always more of a beach boys fan growing up. became a beatles fan when i got older. now, i have to find 1s ... ugh.
I have on my short list a discussion about the Beatles and Beach Boys "rivalry." Brian Wilson was one of the few that could and did go toe to toe with the Beatles back in the day.Love the Beach Boys. Have a ton of respect for Brian, especially.
Yea, Brian probably could have been a Beatle. His one problem was that he was kind of alone in his band (artistically.) It was him and a bunch of Ringo's (not slamming the BB's - I like them a lot.) The Beatles essentially had two and a half Brians. :shrug:
Brian was/is immensely talented. And I think you're right with one more guy at his level in that band it would have been a very interesting competition. Because it sure seems like Brian wanted to compete with the Beatles.
 
Pete Best...Why??

Ok, so we interrupt the story briefly to discuss why Pete Best was canned. Here are the theories...

1. His personality didn't fit with the band.

Yeah, I don't know. I've heard it both ways. Pete, maybe was a bit more quiet than the others, although they didn't kick George out for being quiet. Maybe Pete didn't hang out with them as much as they hung out with each other. Pete claims he did everything the rest of them did. This might have a bit of validity. Maybe Ringo's personality fit in better with the other three.

2. Pete refused to cut his hair in the "Beatles" cut.

No. Not buying this one. I just don't believe they would have kicked him out for that.

3. Pete was always late for gigs and such.

Once again, I've read things that said that Pete was the MOST punctual of the four and actually handled their bookings before Brian came along, so I don't know. Not buying this one much either, I don't think.

4. Pete was the best looking one and all the girls liked him, so they fired him out of jealousy.

REALLY not buying this one. Everything I've read indicates that none of the Beatles had any problems finding women.

5. They thought Ringo was a better drummer than Pete.

85% correct, IMO with the other 15% probably being his personality. Ringo is/was/will always be a better drummer than Pete Best. Listen to Love Me Do on the Anthology. Pete is awful. He also sounds boring and uneventful on the Decca Audition. If, as Pete claims, everybody in Liverpool copied his 4 on the floor bass drum, it was only because that's a great stomping sound live. Other than that, Pete didn't inject anything interesting. Ringo, whatever his technical limitations, always did something interesting and you can often identify Beatles songs with the drums alone, something you could never have done with Pete Best.

Thoughts??

Next...The Beatles hit it big

 
Pete Best...Why??

Ok, so we interrupt the story briefly to discuss why Pete Best was canned. Here are the theories...

1. His personality didn't fit with the band.

Yeah, I don't know. I've heard it both ways. Pete, maybe was a bit more quiet than the others, although they didn't kick George out for being quiet. Maybe Pete didn't hang out with them as much as they hung out with each other. Pete claims he did everything the rest of them did. This might have a bit of validity. Maybe Ringo's personality fit in better with the other three.

2. Pete refused to cut his hair in the "Beatles" cut.

No. Not buying this one. I just don't believe they would have kicked him out for that.

3. Pete was always late for gigs and such.

Once again, I've read things that said that Pete was the MOST punctual of the four and actually handled their bookings before Brian came along, so I don't know. Not buying this one much either, I don't think.

4. Pete was the best looking one and all the girls liked him, so they fired him out of jealousy.

REALLY not buying this one. Everything I've read indicates that none of the Beatles had any problems finding women.

5. They thought Ringo was a better drummer than Pete.

85% correct, IMO with the other 15% probably being his personality. Ringo is/was/will always be a better drummer than Pete Best. Listen to Love Me Do on the Anthology. Pete is awful. He also sounds boring and uneventful on the Decca Audition. If, as Pete claims, everybody in Liverpool copied his 4 on the floor bass drum, it was only because that's a great stomping sound live. Other than that, Pete didn't inject anything interesting. Ringo, whatever his technical limitations, always did something interesting and you can often identify Beatles songs with the drums alone, something you could never have done with Pete Best.

Thoughts??

Next...The Beatles hit it big
I agree it was because Pete wasn't as good a drummer as Ringo. And I also feel Ringo is constantly under rated as a drummer. As you say he always brought something a little different and that in itself speaks to the talent he had. The jazz drummers I have known have always spoken better of Ringo than the rock drummers. I think too many rock drummers want to be power drummers and don't recognize you don't have to be that or play that style to be good.

 
Pete Best...Why??

Ok, so we interrupt the story briefly to discuss why Pete Best was canned. Here are the theories...

1. His personality didn't fit with the band.

Yeah, I don't know. I've heard it both ways. Pete, maybe was a bit more quiet than the others, although they didn't kick George out for being quiet. Maybe Pete didn't hang out with them as much as they hung out with each other. Pete claims he did everything the rest of them did. This might have a bit of validity. Maybe Ringo's personality fit in better with the other three.

2. Pete refused to cut his hair in the "Beatles" cut.

No. Not buying this one. I just don't believe they would have kicked him out for that.

3. Pete was always late for gigs and such.

Once again, I've read things that said that Pete was the MOST punctual of the four and actually handled their bookings before Brian came along, so I don't know. Not buying this one much either, I don't think.

4. Pete was the best looking one and all the girls liked him, so they fired him out of jealousy.

REALLY not buying this one. Everything I've read indicates that none of the Beatles had any problems finding women.

5. They thought Ringo was a better drummer than Pete.

85% correct, IMO with the other 15% probably being his personality. Ringo is/was/will always be a better drummer than Pete Best. Listen to Love Me Do on the Anthology. Pete is awful. He also sounds boring and uneventful on the Decca Audition. If, as Pete claims, everybody in Liverpool copied his 4 on the floor bass drum, it was only because that's a great stomping sound live. Other than that, Pete didn't inject anything interesting. Ringo, whatever his technical limitations, always did something interesting and you can often identify Beatles songs with the drums alone, something you could never have done with Pete Best.

Thoughts??

Next...The Beatles hit it big
I agree it was because Pete wasn't as good a drummer as Ringo. And I also feel Ringo is constantly under rated as a drummer. As you say he always brought something a little different and that in itself speaks to the talent he had. The jazz drummers I have known have always spoken better of Ringo than the rock drummers. I think too many rock drummers want to be power drummers and don't recognize you don't have to be that or play that style to be good.
Ringo has taste. Never overplays and always seems to find the right part to fit the song. His fills are unusual in that they always seem to start in the wrong place, but he makes it work.Technically, not a great drummer, but possibly the PERFECT drummer for the Beatles. I, seriously, can't think of a single drummer that would have been better in that band.

 
Ringo has taste. Never overplays and always seems to find the right part to fit the song. His fills are unusual in that they always seem to start in the wrong place, but he makes it work.

Technically, not a great drummer, but possibly the PERFECT drummer for the Beatles. I, seriously, can't think of a single drummer that would have been better in that band.
I think that is probably the reason for the jazz drummer love. And I would argue he was a great drummer. Not a prototypical rock drummer but still.
 
5. They thought Ringo was a better drummer than Pete.85% correct, IMO with the other 15% probably being his personality. Ringo is/was/will always be a better drummer than Pete Best.
In the Hunter Davies biography I linked to, Paul said it bluntly: Pete couldn't play.Ringo could.End of story.
 
Great thread! I'm old enough to faintly remember their appearence on the Ed Sullivan show. Lots of interesting facts in this thread I either never knew or had forgotten about.

From thoes that have read serveral books about the Beatles, is there one you would recommend more so than the others?

 
Pete Best...Why??

Ok, so we interrupt the story briefly to discuss why Pete Best was canned. Here are the theories...

1. His personality didn't fit with the band.

Yeah, I don't know. I've heard it both ways. Pete, maybe was a bit more quiet than the others, although they didn't kick George out for being quiet. Maybe Pete didn't hang out with them as much as they hung out with each other. Pete claims he did everything the rest of them did. This might have a bit of validity. Maybe Ringo's personality fit in better with the other three.

2. Pete refused to cut his hair in the "Beatles" cut.

No. Not buying this one. I just don't believe they would have kicked him out for that.

3. Pete was always late for gigs and such.

Once again, I've read things that said that Pete was the MOST punctual of the four and actually handled their bookings before Brian came along, so I don't know. Not buying this one much either, I don't think.

4. Pete was the best looking one and all the girls liked him, so they fired him out of jealousy.

REALLY not buying this one. Everything I've read indicates that none of the Beatles had any problems finding women.

5. They thought Ringo was a better drummer than Pete.

85% correct, IMO with the other 15% probably being his personality. Ringo is/was/will always be a better drummer than Pete Best. Listen to Love Me Do on the Anthology. Pete is awful. He also sounds boring and uneventful on the Decca Audition. If, as Pete claims, everybody in Liverpool copied his 4 on the floor bass drum, it was only because that's a great stomping sound live. Other than that, Pete didn't inject anything interesting. Ringo, whatever his technical limitations, always did something interesting and you can often identify Beatles songs with the drums alone, something you could never have done with Pete Best.

Thoughts??

Next...The Beatles hit it big
I agree it was because Pete wasn't as good a drummer as Ringo. And I also feel Ringo is constantly under rated as a drummer. As you say he always brought something a little different and that in itself speaks to the talent he had. The jazz drummers I have known have always spoken better of Ringo than the rock drummers. I think too many rock drummers want to be power drummers and don't recognize you don't have to be that or play that style to be good.
Ringo has taste. Never overplays and always seems to find the right part to fit the song. His fills are unusual in that they always seem to start in the wrong place, but he makes it work.Technically, not a great drummer, but possibly the PERFECT drummer for the Beatles. I, seriously, can't think of a single drummer that would have been better in that band.
He was on that Dave Stewart HBO show...said something about being left handed and always having to play on a right handed drum kit. Always had to reach and play things backwards, something like that. So he sounded unusual.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhjDClExtZs...feature=related

That's not the Stewart show but that's pretty much what he was saying.

 
buddyboy said:
Great thread! I'm old enough to faintly remember their appearence on the Ed Sullivan show. Lots of interesting facts in this thread I either never knew or had forgotten about.From thoes that have read serveral books about the Beatles, is there one you would recommend more so than the others?
I've read a bunch of them. The Beatles Anthology is probably the best one, but I've also enjoyed the Hunter Davies one.Really tons of stuff out there. I also loved the Geoff Emerick one about their recordings. Also, the Lewishon recordings one.Sorry guys. I'm kind of loaded. I will post something else tomorrow.Turn of your mind, relax and float downstream...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Beatles hit it big

OK, so before the brief journey into Pete Best's firing, the Beatles had just scored a #17 hit with Love Me Do. Not bad, but not enough to make George Martin drop the idea of recording "How Do You Do It" as the Beatles next single. Martin still thought this song was a #1 record and better than anything the Beatles had. The Beatles had other ideas, however. Once again, the Beatles insisted that the next single be one of their own songs, so they presented to Martin, again, "Please Please Me", except this time, the Beatles had reworked it. The sped it up. The reaction was overwhelming, Martin loved it. When they finished recording it, Martin announced down from the booth "Congratulations, you've just recorded your first #1." He was right. This marks a turning point for the band because after this, Martin would never again bring up recording someone else's song as the next single.

"Please Please Me" is a GREAT pop song. Probably my favorite of their early (before A Hard Day's Night) singles. Hooks everywhere. Love the double use of the word Please. Love the harmonies. Love the harmonica. Love the guitar playing. Great, great song. Worthy #1 hit.

After "Please Please Me" became a hit, Martin wanted the Beatles in the studio to record an album. The resulting album would be a landmark album. The reason is would be landmark is because before Please Please Me, albums were generally a hit single and a bunch of filler. This album would be different in that it would contain 8 songs written by the Beatles themselves, unheard of at the time, and 6 covers from their live repertoire. Not only that, but the album was filled with quality songs. I Saw Her Standing There, Twist and Shout, Love Me Do, Please Please Me, and Do You Want To Know A Secret were the most well known songs on the album. The Beatles recorded the entire album in one 10 marathon session leaving Twist and Shout to the end to save John's voice. Having been in the studio all day, the Beatles saved their best for last as Twist and Shout made the earth move. Arguably the greatest rock and roll vocal on record, John REALLY let it rip wasting the Isley Brothers version in the process. You can hear an audible exhale at the end of the song almost like John was relieved it was over. The album shot straight to #1.

More hit singles in Britain followed. "From Me To You" was the next #1, followed by "She Loves You", which also went straight to the top of the charts. "She Loves You" is another one of my favorite early hits. It explodes out of the speakers. Everything in the song is a hook. People making fun of the "Yeah, Yeah, Yeah" don't understand rock and roll as phrases like "yeah" and "uh-huh" and "oh yeah" are practically the essence of the art form. The Beatles were simply following in a long line of prior rock and rollers who did similar things. The best thing about "She Loves You" is that final chord though. A strange sort of harmonized major sixth chord that was very popular during the big band era to end songs, but never on a rock song. To hear an example, listen to the end of Glenn Miller's "In The Mood."

Anyway, the Beatles were now the biggest musical act in England, but it was about to get MUCH MUCH BIGGER.

Next...The Beatles hit it even bigger.

A postscript to this story. George Martin WAS right. "How Do You Do It" became the first #1 hit for fellow Liverpool band Gerry and the Pacemakers. The Beatles did record "How Do You Do It", but it was never released because they offered "Please Please Me" instead. You can hear the Beatles version of "How Do You Do It" on Anthology 1.

 
How much is this game going to cost?
I think the bundle will cost what a Rock Band bundle costs. $200ish. Game by itself probably $60. I am hoping for a special release deal at Best Buy. Something like a free Gift card, dvd, and ??? They seem to be doing that sort of thing to boost game sales. I am loving the new DLC Rock Band songs every week so much (Talking Heads, Jam, Rage next week) that I may wait for a Black Friday deal for the Beatles bundle. I don't need the instruments, but my RB ones will eventually wear out, so why not make them backups? They are showing signs of wear already, and the Beatles instruments look great. Here is some more game info for the people that think this thread is about the game like I did.

The Demo is in Best Buy stores now. I haven't played it.

Lots of clip on Youtube from there.

Full Song List:

Singles

I Want To Hold Your Hand

I Feel Fine

Day Tripper

Paperback Writer

Revolution

Don’t Let Me Down

Please Please Me (1963)

I Saw Her Standing There

Boys

Do You Want To Know A Secret

Twist and Shout

With the Beatles (1963)

I Wanna Be Your Man

A Hard Day’s Night (1964)

A Hard Day’s Night

Can’t Buy Me Love

Beatles For Sale (1964)

Eight Days a Week

Help! (1965)

Ticket To Ride

Rubber Soul (1965)

Drive My Car

I’m Looking Through You

If I Needed Someone

Revolver (1966)

Taxman

Yellow Submarine

And Your Bird Can Sing

Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967)

Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band/With a Little Help From My Friends

Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds

Getting Better

Good Morning Good Morning

Magical Mystery Tour (1967)

I Am The Walrus

Hello Goodbye

The Beatles (White Album) (1968)

Dear Prudence

Back In the U.S.S.R.

While My Guitar Gently Weeps

Birthday

Helter Skelter

Yellow Submarine (1969)

Hey Bulldog

Abbey Road (1969)

Come Together

Something

Octopus’s Garden

I Want You (She’s So Heavy)

Here Comes the Sun

Let It Be (1970)

Dig a Pony

I Me Mine

I’ve Got a Feeling

Get Back

Love (2006)

Within You Without You/ Tomorrow Never Knows

DLC release dates:

Abbey Road Oct. 20th

Sgt. Peppers November

Rubber Soul December

I read somewhere the albums will be around $15

 
How much is this game going to cost?
I think the bundle will cost what a Rock Band bundle costs. $200ish. Game by itself probably $60. I am hoping for a special release deal at Best Buy. Something like a free Gift card, dvd, and ??? They seem to be doing that sort of thing to boost game sales. I am loving the new DLC Rock Band songs every week so much (Talking Heads, Jam, Rage next week) that I may wait for a Black Friday deal for the Beatles bundle. I don't need the instruments, but my RB ones will eventually wear out, so why not make them backups? They are showing signs of wear already, and the Beatles instruments look great. Here is some more game info for the people that think this thread is about the game like I did.

The Demo is in Best Buy stores now. I haven't played it.

My brother is getting the game with the fake instruments. I'm getting the remasters since I've been waiting for those for 20 years.The remasters cost $187 right now at Amazon. I think the game is gonna be like $250 or so if you get the instruments.

 
The Beatles hit it even bigger

America was the holy grail of pop music back then, still is but back then, even more so. Rock and roll started in America and every artist who hit it big in England wanted to go to America. Only one problem, no British artist, or artist from any other country for that matter, had ever really been successful in America. Big time British artists would go to America and be 4th on the billing behind Fabian or some other star of the moment.

With this in mind, the Beatles really didn't want to go to America unless they had a #1 hit on the charts. George Martin had tried, unsuccessfully to get Capital Records, which was owned by EMI, to release "Please Please Me", "From Me To You", and "She Loves You". The answer was always the same, basically, you silly British people don't know anything about the American market. It won't fly here. Because Capital refused to release them, George Martin allowed Vee Jay and Swan Records to release Beatles music. Because these labels were so small, however, they didn't make a huge dent in the market.

Nevertheless, the news from Europe was so overwhelming, basically, that the Beatles were a huge phenomenon, that Capital had to start to take notice. Vee Jay and Swan started selling a decent number of records and their was a buzz surrounding the Beatles. Finally, when George Martin went to Capital with " I Want To Hold Your Hand", Capital couldn't refuse. In a few weeks time, Capital would wonder what took them so long. "I Want To Hold Your Hand" shot to the top of the American charts. Before setting foot in America, the Beatles were the country's biggest group.

So, what was so different about "Hand" as opposed to the singles before it? Not much, actually. To my ears, it sounds slightly inferior to "Please Please Me" and "She Loves You", but it is still a very well written, catchy pop song with tricky harmonies and great guitar playing by George. It grabs you immediately, kind of like "She Loves You." What made it different was that it was the first single release in America on a major label, therefore, the public at large, who before were mostly unaware of the Beatles, were now aware of them. "Hand" was the song that broke the American market and for that, it will always be one of the most influential records in the history of pop music. Today, pop music is a world wide music. In 1964 it wasn't...until the Beatles made it so.

The Beatles came to America and played on the Ed Sullivan show in February 1964. The 10 minutes that the Beatles were on TV, there was no reported crime. Even the criminals took time out to watch the Beatles. It was, at that time, the largest TV audience to ever watch a show. If you go by the percentage of the audience, it probably is STILL in the top 10 of all time, I would guess. It was one of those "where were you when..." moments. By April 1964, the Beatles occupied the top 5 spots in the American charts and the top two albums. Neither had ever been done before and haven't been done since.

Next...The strange case of the Capital Albums

Everyone, this is my last post for today. I have to go to Mass and play my Hofner bass for the parish community. I will probably post my next entry tomorrow afternoon/evening. Will be working on location tomorrow. Anyway, hope you are enjoying our Magical Mystery Tour. Feel free to comment, good or bad.

 
"Please Please Me" is a GREAT pop song. Probably my favorite of their early (before A Hard Day's Night) singles. Hooks everywhere. Love the double use of the word Please. Love the harmonies. Love the harmonica. Love the guitar playing. Great, great song. Worthy #1 hit.
Have always loved that song. For all the reasons you mention.
More hit singles in Britain followed. "From Me To You" was the next #1, followed by "She Loves You", which also went straight to the top of the charts. "She Loves You" is another one of my favorite early hits. It explodes out of the speakers. Everything in the song is a hook. People making fun of the "Yeah, Yeah, Yeah" don't understand rock and roll as phrases like "yeah" and "uh-huh" and "oh yeah" are practically the essence of the art form. The Beatles were simply following in a long line of prior rock and rollers who did similar things. The best thing about "She Loves You" is that final chord though. A strange sort of harmonized major sixth chord that was very popular during the big band era to end songs, but never on a rock song. To hear an example, listen to the end of Glenn Miller's "In The Mood."
So much to enjoy wiht this song.Great thread. Can't believe I didn't see it until today. :confused:
 
By April 1964, the Beatles occupied the top 5 spots in the American charts and the top two albums. Neither had ever been done before and haven't been done since.
That is ridiculous. I'm trying to imagine any of the no-talent hacks who pass for #1 artists these days accomplishing anything remotely similar. Wow.
 
"Please Please Me" is a GREAT pop song. Probably my favorite of their early (before A Hard Day's Night) singles. Hooks everywhere. Love the double use of the word Please. Love the harmonies. Love the harmonica. Love the guitar playing. Great, great song. Worthy #1 hit.
Have always loved that song. For all the reasons you mention.
More hit singles in Britain followed. "From Me To You" was the next #1, followed by "She Loves You", which also went straight to the top of the charts. "She Loves You" is another one of my favorite early hits. It explodes out of the speakers. Everything in the song is a hook. People making fun of the "Yeah, Yeah, Yeah" don't understand rock and roll as phrases like "yeah" and "uh-huh" and "oh yeah" are practically the essence of the art form. The Beatles were simply following in a long line of prior rock and rollers who did similar things. The best thing about "She Loves You" is that final chord though. A strange sort of harmonized major sixth chord that was very popular during the big band era to end songs, but never on a rock song. To hear an example, listen to the end of Glenn Miller's "In The Mood."
So much to enjoy wiht this song.Great thread. Can't believe I didn't see it until today. :coffee:
I really appreciate that, Michael J. Stay tuned. I've got a lot more.
 
By April 1964, the Beatles occupied the top 5 spots in the American charts and the top two albums. Neither had ever been done before and haven't been done since.
That is ridiculous. I'm trying to imagine any of the no-talent hacks who pass for #1 artists these days accomplishing anything remotely similar. Wow.
What's funny about it is now, it's popular with some people to call the early Beatles a "boy-band" or "bubble-gum". If those people knew ANYTHING about the history of pop music, they would know that bubble-gum is what was on the air when the Beatles came around. There was nothing of consequence going on in the American charts in 1963, except Motown and a couple of early Beach Boys records. Fabian, Frankie Avalon, ect is what was infesting the pop charts at that time. The Beatles killed, well not killed, you can't kill bubble gum, it's like cockroaches, but the Beatles ended bubble gum's hold on the pop charts for a bit. If the early singles sound tame compared to, say, the Stones Satisfaction, it's because Satisfaction came out two YEARS after I Want To Hold Your Hand and She Loves You. By that time, the Beatles, and also Bob Dylan had completely changed the landscape. The Beatles lyrics would get better. Innocent, and some might say corny lyrics, however, have NOTHING to do with the music itself and the Beatles completely changed that with those early hits."She Loves You" sounded like "Smells Like Teen Spirit" compared to what was on the radio at the time.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top