Aggie87

Beatles Remasters coming! 09/09/09

1,368 posts in this topic

And I don't buy that Broadway and/or movie musicals had gen'ly better songwriting than tin pan alley, or Nashville or the Brill Bldg. There are lots o musicals that only had one great song and a lot of filler to move the plot along and I can think of things by Willie N, or Smokey or Chuck B that are every bit as good as Porter or Gershwin. I don't even think Porter and the Gershwins are any better songwriters than Harold Arlen, or irving Berlin or Harry Warren

Of course, being 55, I do think that songwriting has gone to hell now; perhaps in part a self-fufilling prophecy due to those who thought it had before it had...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can hear that in my head, at lest for the A sections of "Things" & "Eight Days', but not so much on paper or for the bridges of same. but then my grasp of harmony is pretty weak so things have got to be pretty darn similar for me to hear or see it.

Yeah, it's a "macro" thing more than a literal "mirroring", and it is just for the A-sections. But the melodic rhythm & even the lyrical "directionality" are just so similar... and if we are to believe that the lead singer ususally reflects whose tune the bulk of it is, then here we have an example of John doing an "answer record" to one of Paul's things... or not! But it would be ironic in the extreme that Paul's would be the more "serious" & John's the more "poppy".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanx muchly for the response, I think a lot of what people think they know about the Beatles and John vs. Paul is pretty superficial and is, on close reading of the facts, only roughly true at best. I'll try to make a detailed case for Ticket to Ride as fine songwriting later if I have time. and something else, shich I've just forgotten!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, you're welcome...I've finally been getting around to the whole Purple Chick thing, and during all the takes of "Things...", I kept hearing the lyrics to "Eight Days a Week"... after all these years it finally hit me!

As far as "great songwriting". I think that anything that uses the lyrics & melody in-sync to tell a story with any sort of "unique" and/or "personal" perspective on universal matters deserves consideration. For me, after that, it gets into how unique or how personal and how universal, and that's certainly subjective, but in all honesty I think that "I Get Around" meets & exceeds those criteria more than any number of "Great American Song Book" pieces, and that there are others in the GAS category that wipe the floor with its ass.

Which is really just to say that greatness is where you find it, and I'll be damned if there's too many places where you don't, can't, or won't, at least occasionally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree, greatness is where-ever you find it; and just to be fair, what I forgot to say before was that if you wanted a Lennon-McCartney candidate for weak, generic teen pop songwriting, I'd nominate "Thank You Girl", but even there the performance lifts it a least a little out of the muck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. I can't tell you why I like what I like and I try not to over-analyze the whys and wherefores. I know what works for me and that all that matters. Just to give you an example, I think Thank You Girl is a fine tune. Sure, the lyrics are sophomoric, but it's got a good beat and I can dance to it. I'm giving it an 85.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Thank You Girl"...teen lyrics, no quirkly Beatlcahnges, but....more hooks than a Bass Pro Shop, and the Paul/Ringo hookup is immaculate.

Plus, I don't know that The Beatles' various vocal blends get as much attention as they merit...you got three very distinct timbres that could blend together for a lot of different colorations, more than your usual pop vocal group of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Thank You Girl"...teen lyrics, no quirkly Beatlcahnges, but....more hooks than a Bass Pro Shop, and the Paul/Ringo hookup is immaculate.

Plus, I don't know that The Beatles' various vocal blends get as much attention as they merit...you got three very distinct timbres that could blend together for a lot of different colorations, more than your usual pop vocal group of the time.

That sound the three of them work up when they're all singing together is knee knocking. I've always thought of it as Beatles barbershop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sigh..

riiiigght...

"On Tuesday, Lennon's son, Sean Lennon, defended his mom while respecting his dad. Taking to Twitter, he wrote: "She did not do it for money. Has to do w hoping to keep dad in public consciousness. No new LPs, so TV ad is exposure to young.""

http://www.spinner.com/2010/03/03/sean-lennon-yoko-ono/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are more important things to worry about although I can't say I'm crazy about it. If she did it for the money, considering the amount of money the Lennon Estate must have or had have, now, that's an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sigh..

riiiigght...

"On Tuesday, Lennon's son, Sean Lennon, defended his mom while respecting his dad. Taking to Twitter, he wrote: "She did not do it for money. Has to do w hoping to keep dad in public consciousness. No new LPs, so TV ad is exposure to young.""

http://www.spinner.com/2010/03/03/sean-lennon-yoko-ono/

Huh, I was expecting a song to be used too so it's a little different at least. I guess I just used up all my angst about rock and selling out some time ago. The old & old dead folks didn't have the advantage of living during a time when it became acceptable to immediately sell your songs to The Gap and whatever car co. that Wilco did with their Sky Blue Sky album. Then again, they didn't have to deal with "music should be free" when they started too. Well, that's what the hippies wanted, but that only worked for crashing concerts. ;)

edit - got a kick out of how the announcement was from 03/03, given the title.

Edited by Quincy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sigh..

riiiigght...

"On Tuesday, Lennon's son, Sean Lennon, defended his mom while respecting his dad. Taking to Twitter, he wrote: "She did not do it for money. Has to do w hoping to keep dad in public consciousness. No new LPs, so TV ad is exposure to young.""

http://www.spinner.com/2010/03/03/sean-lennon-yoko-ono/

Huh, I was expecting a song to be used too so it's a little different at least. I guess I just used up all my angst about rock and selling out some time ago. The old & old dead folks didn't have the advantage of living during a time when it became acceptable to immediately sell your songs to The Gap and whatever car co. that Wilco did with their Sky Blue Sky album. Then again, they didn't have to deal with "music should be free" when they started too. Well, that's what the hippies wanted, but that only worked for crashing concerts. ;)

edit - got a kick out of how the announcement was from 03/03, given the title.

It's not so much the commercial it's more Sean's statement about keeping John in the public conscious. I doubt John would have cared and second he was one of the most famous people to have ever lived.

However your right about the angst part, at this point I would be more surprised if a Who song doesn't become a truck commercial.

Edited by WorldB3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree that justification was pretty lame; almost like a PR person wrote it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally got the Mono Box from the library I work for (Multnomah County, bewst public library going, thank you taxpayers)AND Sgt peppers, at least, is so better in mono, and I don't think theat it's just that it's allowing me to hear it fresh (or as fresh as it's going be for me at this point), but that is part of it. Also been on a Howlin' Wolf kick recently, not sure what that means but he's better in mono too...Live at Alices Revisited is way better than it gets credit for, better in many ways than London Sessions, but London is more interesting in a coulda/shoulda/woulda way, Alices is just the man live, great but it just is what it is. If Quad is 4 and Stereo is 2 and mono is 1; HW Live in Cambridge is next to 0 in terms of sound quality but it's a way fierce performance, way more than any Muddy I've heard and I love Muddy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally listened to both sets, contrary to most of you who had heard their music so many times, I'm as virgin as you can be regarding their music as a music fan can be, Beatles were were not much part of my music world plus the original cds sounded so bad that I never bothered buying them and since my music buying days started with the birth of the cd..., Only songs I was really weary were maybe the ones that Paul seems to butcher during his gigs (à la Hey Jude). Prior to that, although I was familiar with the majority of the materiel, I've never heard it in the context of listening to their albums in a chronological fashion. So, here are a few of my thoughts after listening to all the racket

Regarding the Mono vs Stereo debate, I will agree with the majority, Mono rules, to me the music sounds more organic than most of the stereo. As it was pointed out, there is nothing wrong with the stereo set except being the second best set.

One of the pleasant suprises of was how much I enjoyed a lot more than I would expect their early material, yes the lyrics are sometimes naïve, but the songs sound fresh and energetic like I never suspected them to be. Have to plead guilty of suprising myself to dance alone when some of these pieces were played

Not being familiar with the albums by themselves prior to this listening, I truly enjoyed the kaleidoscopic aspect of the albums from Help and those afterwards, only album that was a bit of a downer because of the lack of diversity is probably the last one (Let it be).

Finally the three songs that for whatever reason stood out the most during this Beatles Marathon, not because they are the best but they are the ones that still remain inplanted in my brain. The first one is weirdly a cover Mr Moonlight, great harmonies on this one and a melodramatic interpretation , reading on the subject it apparently got panned but I did enjoy it probably because the song in its way stood out from the rest of the material of the album

Second one is And your bird can sing great pace great melody once again great harmonies , loved the guitar work. Weirdly listening to the different version available on Youtube , none are as enjoyable of what came out of my stereo.

And finally Tomorrow never knows that never sounded as well as it did on the Mono set, never really cared much prior to listening to this version, I finally got it , in three words, what a trip !!!

Edited by Van Basten II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re:Tomorrow Never Knows... "check around" and see if you can find the mono mix that got onto the first half-days album production before George Martin changed his mind and literally "stopped the presses" to replace it with the one that became the "standard" mono mix. That thing....is scary.

http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/beatles/var-1966.html

here it is on YouTube, but believe me, you gotta hear it in lossless off a good source...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re:Tomorrow Never Knows... "check around" and see if you can find the mono mix that got onto the first half-days album production before George Martin changed his mind and literally "stopped the presses" to replace it with the one that became the "standard" mono mix. That thing....is scary.

All I can say is I'm glad I didn't run into that mono mix when I was in, shall we say, my experimental period. That's the kind of thing that could've messed up your head for a week or ten days.

According to Richie Unterberger's The Unreleased Beatles, there is an alternate take of Tomorrow on Anthology 2. I just checked it out but it's not the mono version Jim is referring to. It is pretty peculiar in its own right. Sounds like a really early take. His only other mention of the song is as follows:

The mix on the first mono British pressing of Revolver lasts about three seconds longer, with different placement of the special effects.

Even though Ian McDonald devotes several pages to the song in Revolution in the Head, there's no mention of the mono take.

I wonder why Martin pulled it. I actually like it better than the "released" version.

Addendum:

Check this out: http://rateyourmusic.com/release/unauth/the_beatles/alternate_revolver/

Edited by Dave James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Anthology 2 version is the real Take 1 of the song, then referred to as "Mark 1"..

About 4 minutes into this...The two Georges, Paul, & Ringo revisit the mix...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.