Cliff Englewood Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) Where did you read that Paul was playing that solo? In this, in my opinion definitive, Beatles book. From wikipedia; "In his book Revolution in the Head: The Beatles' Records and the Sixties, first published in 1994, MacDonald carefully anatomised every record The Beatles made, drawing attention to broad themes, particular examples of inspiration and moments of human frailty alike. The book contains forensic song by song analysis; access to the original masters were granted to MacDonald when researching it." Pity he came to such a horrible end, he was clearly a brilliant writer, so much so in fact, I wouldn't actually mind reading his book on Shostakovich. Edited September 19, 2009 by Cliff Englewood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Thanks. My birthday is coming up so I guess I'll ask for this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzbo Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Hmmm. . . .I need help . . . medium German? Hm. Err, ... ... you've got something there. I just don't know what. It's definitely far too straight to have anything to do with my roots, and it's too middle of the road to really be a genuine German one, so, I guess, I would go with the Northern European influence. P.S.: It's funny how these threads get derailed once in a while. I like the derailments and returns. Very conversation like! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Lark Ascending Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Pity he came to such a horrible end, he was clearly a brilliant writer, so much so in fact, I wouldn't actually mind reading his book on Shostakovich. I read that back in the 90s and found it very enlightening...though I've seen it rubbished by classical critics (probably irked that some pop oik has dared to enter the portals of high culture). I really enjoyed his collection of essays and articles 'The People's Music'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 I'm late to the party (as ususal) but I've spent the morning listening to the stereo versions of Revolver, Rubber Soul, & The White Album, and I really like these remasters; Macca's bass comes through loud and clear on these cds. The sound is much clearer, cleaner, and more powerful then the old cds. I broke down and ordered the mono box today, I must admit that I think I enjoy the earlier albums more then the later ones, and to have them in the original mono mix is a plus in my book. The first five cds seem to have a sense of fun to them that got lost in some of the later albums, where the weight of the expectations, at times, made the Beatles later work strike me as strained. That's not to take anything from their greatness however... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ayers Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 I must admit that I think I enjoy the earlier albums more then the later ones, and to have them in the original mono mix is a plus in my book. The first five cds seem to have a sense of fun to them that got lost in some of the later albums, where the weight of the expectations, at times, made the Beatles later work strike me as strained. That's not to take anything from their greatness however... And there you have it. That's why everyone who can afford it has jumped all over the mono box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Lark Ascending Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) I must admit that I think I enjoy the earlier albums more then the later ones, and to have them in the original mono mix is a plus in my book. The first five cds seem to have a sense of fun to them that got lost in some of the later albums, where the weight of the expectations, at times, made the Beatles later work strike me as strained. That's not to take anything from their greatness however... And there you have it. That's why everyone who can afford it has jumped all over the mono box. The first two albums are only of historical interest to me. HDN, BFS and H are hugely enjoyable but... It's Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt P (with reservations), the White Album and Abbey Road + the singles album that are the big atraction for me (I've not heard 'Let It Be' as an album ever!...should be remedied in the next couple of weeks). Mono, stereo, cylinder disc, download...doesn't enter into the equation for these ears. Edited September 19, 2009 by Bev Stapleton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 I must admit that I think I enjoy the earlier albums more then the later ones, and to have them in the original mono mix is a plus in my book. The first five cds seem to have a sense of fun to them that got lost in some of the later albums, where the weight of the expectations, at times, made the Beatles later work strike me as strained. That's not to take anything from their greatness however... And there you have it. That's why everyone who can afford it has jumped all over the mono box. The first two albums are only of historical interest to me. HDN, BFS and H are hugely enjoyable but... It's Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt P (with reservations), the White Album and Abbey Road + the singles album that are the big atraction for me (I've not heard 'Let It Be' as an album ever!...should be remedied in the next couple of weeks). Mono, stereo, cylinder disc, download...doesn't enter into the equation for these ears. Ah! now here is where tastes differ! Please Please Me to my ears is one of the greatest power pop records of all time, I love it! I always return to PPM when I need a jolt of rock 'n roll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Lark Ascending Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Ah! now here is where tastes differ! Please Please Me to my ears is one of the greatest power pop records of all time, I love it! I always return to PPM when I need a jolt of rock 'n roll. Absolutely. Though I heard all the Beatles singles in the background growing up in the Sixties I was very late in hearing them on album. So those first two albums do litttle for me. But I can see why they might be thrilling to other ears. Thank the lord we don't all hear things the same way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 I must admit that I think I enjoy the earlier albums more then the later ones, and to have them in the original mono mix is a plus in my book. The first five cds seem to have a sense of fun to them that got lost in some of the later albums, where the weight of the expectations, at times, made the Beatles later work strike me as strained. That's not to take anything from their greatness however... And there you have it. That's why everyone who can afford it has jumped all over the mono box. The first two albums are only of historical interest to me. HDN, BFS and H are hugely enjoyable but... It's Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt P (with reservations), the White Album and Abbey Road + the singles album that are the big atraction for me (I've not heard 'Let It Be' as an album ever!...should be remedied in the next couple of weeks). Mono, stereo, cylinder disc, download...doesn't enter into the equation for these ears. Ah! now here is where tastes differ! Please Please Me to my ears is one of the greatest power pop records of all time, I love it! I always return to PPM when I need a jolt of rock 'n roll. Listening to these box sets has caused me to "rediscover" early Beatles. Those first 5 albums are definitely loaded with charm and great R 'n R for me again. However, this rediscovery does not deter me from the opinion that their later albums are their best musically --- Rubber Soul on up is where it's at for me. I am still kind of befuddled as to why many Beatles fans find Revolver to be their best offering. Can this really be said about an album that has "Yellow Submarine" on it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) The first two albums are only of historical interest to me. HDN, BFS and H are hugely enjoyable but... It's Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt P (with reservations), the White Album and Abbey Road + the singles album that are the big atraction for me (I've not heard 'Let It Be' as an album ever!...should be remedied in the next couple of weeks). Mono, stereo, cylinder disc, download...doesn't enter into the equation for these ears. I'm with you....at least up until now The Beatles basically "began" for me with Rubber Soul. Well, I should admit that my listening experience with regard to the first five albums is limited to whats on the Anthology documentary and of course what has been played on the radio. Now, I did order the mono box set (won't arrive for a few weeks) but up until now I've never been inspired to purchase the earlier stuff. That said, I have an open mind and am quite looking forward to getting my hands on all of the early albums. In the back of my mind, I've often wondered what brought about the great transition which for me occurred in 1965. In the past, I've often thought of it as rather a sudden break / transformation but that begs the question of what propelled it. Not to glorify the influence of drugs, but it seems that Dylan getting them high in a New York hotel in August 1964 may have played some role. Anyway, I'm looking forward to digging further into some of the books /bios mentioned above to grapple with this. Then, on the other hand, maybe the transition was more gradual than I originally conceived -- maybe it can be seen in varying degrees on Beatles for Sale and Help!, as well. Edited September 19, 2009 by Norm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) A very interesting book can be written about the bands who have been influence by Please Please Me vs. Revolution/Rubber Soul. This is where there seems to be a divide on opinions as to the musical importance of The Beatles. Just to take two of my favorite rock bands: The Flamin' Groovies come down very much on the PPM side of this divide, while XTC is very much under the influence of the later albums. Do I even need to mention Oasis in this context? I know that this is over simplification in a lot of ways, but those two strands of influence are there, and very pronounced in different bands. Edited September 19, 2009 by Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 A very interesting book can be written about the bands who have been influence by Please Please Me vs. Revolution/Rubber Soul. This is where there seems to be a divide on opinions as to the musical importance of The Beatles. Just to take two of my favorite rock bands: The Flamin' Groovies come down very much on the PPM side of this divide, while XTC is very much under the influence of the later albums. Do I even need to mention Oasis in this context? I know that this is over simplification in a lot of ways, but those two strands of influence are there, and very pronounced in different bands. It's funny, I was talking to someone today who claimed that neither the Beatles nor Led Zeppelin had ANY influence over today's music. I, of course, told him that he was crazy. And he called me a "flower child" for even liking the Beatles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 A very interesting book can be written about the bands who have been influence by Please Please Me vs. Revolution/Rubber Soul. This is where there seems to be a divide on opinions as to the musical importance of The Beatles. Just to take two of my favorite rock bands: The Flamin' Groovies come down very much on the PPM side of this divide, while XTC is very much under the influence of the later albums. Do I even need to mention Oasis in this context? I know that this is over simplification in a lot of ways, but those two strands of influence are there, and very pronounced in different bands. It's funny, I was talking to someone today who claimed that neither the Beatles nor Led Zeppelin had ANY influence over today's music. I, of course, told him that he was crazy. And he called me a "flower child" for even liking the Beatles As a child of the 60s, I would consider that a high compliment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 The first two albums are only of historical interest to me. HDN, BFS and H are hugely enjoyable but... It's Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt P (with reservations), the White Album and Abbey Road + the singles album that are the big atraction for me (I've not heard 'Let It Be' as an album ever!...should be remedied in the next couple of weeks). Mono, stereo, cylinder disc, download...doesn't enter into the equation for these ears. I'm with you....at least up until now The Beatles basically "began" for me with Rubber Soul. Well, I should admit that my listening experience with regard to the first five albums is limited to whats on the Anthology documentary and of course what has been played on the radio. Now, I did order the mono box set (won't arrive for a few weeks) but up until now I've never been inspired to purchase the earlier stuff. That said, I have an open mind and am quite looking forward to getting my hands on all of the early albums. In the back of my mind, I've often wondered what brought about the great transition which for me occurred in 1965. In the past, I've often thought of it as rather a sudden break / transformation but that begs the question of what propelled it. Not to glorify the influence of drugs, but it seems that Dylan getting them high in a New York hotel in August 1964 may have played some role. Anyway, I'm looking forward to digging further into some of the books /bios mentioned above to grapple with this. Then, on the other hand, maybe the transition was more gradual than I originally conceived -- maybe it can be seen in varying degrees on Beatles for Sale and Help!, as well. Speaking of the books, as I delve deeper into the Gould book, I heartily recommend it, as a lot of it is social history. It's making for fascinating reading, especially as the author delves into their musical inspirations: Elvis, Chuck Berry and Buddy Holly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 A very interesting book can be written about the bands who have been influence by Please Please Me vs. Revolution/Rubber Soul. This is where there seems to be a divide on opinions as to the musical importance of The Beatles. Just to take two of my favorite rock bands: The Flamin' Groovies come down very much on the PPM side of this divide, while XTC is very much under the influence of the later albums. Do I even need to mention Oasis in this context? I know that this is over simplification in a lot of ways, but those two strands of influence are there, and very pronounced in different bands. It's funny, I was talking to someone today who claimed that neither the Beatles nor Led Zeppelin had ANY influence over today's music. I, of course, told him that he was crazy. And he called me a "flower child" for even liking the Beatles As a child of the 60s, I would consider that a high compliment. Yeah, but I'm afraid he didn't mean it that way. I think he was calling me an old fart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 I don't know about you John but I am going to be 59 in a few weeks so the heck with him. Okay, a question. What is Revolution 9 supposed to be about? I've read some explanations about Yoko and John fooling around and so forth and I suppose once I pick up the MacDonald book, I'll get a better answer. We were listening to the White Album today and my wife couldn't believe Good Night was a Beatles song. A site I recently discovered had this quote by Paul (circa 1994) about it: "I think John felt it might not be good for his image for him to sing it, but it was fabulous to hear him do it, he sang it great. We heard him sing it in order to teach it to Ringo and he sang it very tenderly. John rarely showed his tender side, but my key memories of John are when he was tender, that's what has remained with me-- those moments where he showed himself to be a very generous, loving person. I always cite that song as an example of the John beneath the surface that we only saw occasionally... I don't think John's version was ever recorded." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 I must admit that I think I enjoy the earlier albums more then the later ones, and to have them in the original mono mix is a plus in my book. The first five cds seem to have a sense of fun to them that got lost in some of the later albums, where the weight of the expectations, at times, made the Beatles later work strike me as strained. That's not to take anything from their greatness however... And there you have it. That's why everyone who can afford it has jumped all over the mono box. The first two albums are only of historical interest to me. HDN, BFS and H are hugely enjoyable but... It's Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt P (with reservations), the White Album and Abbey Road + the singles album that are the big atraction for me (I've not heard 'Let It Be' as an album ever!...should be remedied in the next couple of weeks). Mono, stereo, cylinder disc, download...doesn't enter into the equation for these ears. Ah! now here is where tastes differ! Please Please Me to my ears is one of the greatest power pop records of all time, I love it! I always return to PPM when I need a jolt of rock 'n roll. Listening to these box sets has caused me to "rediscover" early Beatles. Those first 5 albums are definitely loaded with charm and great R 'n R for me again. However, this rediscovery does not deter me from the opinion that their later albums are their best musically --- Rubber Soul on up is where it's at for me. I am still kind of befuddled as to why many Beatles fans find Revolver to be their best offering. Can this really be said about an album that has "Yellow Submarine" on it? "Revolver" IS their best album. Yes, it has "Yellow Submarine" (which I think is a perfectly charming track), but it also has "Taxman," "Love You To," "Tomorrow Never Knows," "She Said, She Said," "I'm Only Sleeping," "Doctor Robert," "Eleanor Rigby," etc., etc. "Taxman" has to be the best opening track since, well, "I Saw Her Standing There" on "Please Please Me"! (It still amazes me that only three years separate those two albums. And notice that both start with a count-in!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasing the Korean Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 (edited) (It still amazes me that only three years separate those two albums. Wait'll you hear the Decca audition. Edited September 19, 2009 by Teasing the Korean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllenLowe Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 I think the White Album is the best - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 (It still amazes me that only three years separate those two albums. Wait'll you hear the Decca audition. Not sure I follow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danasgoodstuff Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 the Decca audition is much weaker than their early work for Parlaphone, I think that's what he was saying... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasing the Korean Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 (It still amazes me that only three years separate those two albums. Wait'll you hear the Decca audition. Not sure I follow. I'm saying that the one-year leap between the Decca audition and their first album rivals the four-year leap between their first album and Revolver. The Decca audition is unbelievably bad for so many reasons, it's no wonder they were not signed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 Where is that available for listening? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 Where is that available for listening? A few tracks are on the first volume of the Beatles "Anthology," mostly made up of rather bizarre covers ("Searchin'", "Young Blood," "The Sheik of Araby"). I was just remarking on this earlier tonight over dinner, how relatively poor the Decca audition was. They really don't seem to be taking the whole thing seriously at all. If I had been the Decca producer overseeing that audition, I probably would have passed on them too. They seem to be striving to be a novelty act. There are a lot of weird little asides (John's "Not 'Arf" interjections in "Araby" and performing strange voices on the other songs. Also, would it have killed Paul to actually LEARN the lyrics to the Coasters' "Searchin'"?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.