Why the Beatles? (1 Viewer)

This is the only copy I've ever had, so I don't know how the first two compare. I believe the 2009 stuff was just remastered, not remixed, so this would be the first remix of the songs.
 
I bought the 1+ box (2 DVDs and 1 CD). I love the information in the 120+ pages book. Each of the 50 videos gets two pages of information, but I think the book should have had some information on the remix process, which it does´nt have.

It was funny to see the Fab Four dance in one of the "Hello, Goodbye" videos, especially Lennon. :D And it was interesting to see the alternate version of the "I Feel Fine" video in which the Fab Four are eating fish and chips since it's never been released before because Epstein thought it would be demeaning to "the boys" to be seen eating with their fingers.

It was easy to hear how "Eleanor Rigby" had been remixed. In the original version you hear Paul's voice in the right speaker, which sounded odd, but now in the remixed version his voice is in the middle, as I think it should be.
 
Bukfan said:
it was interesting to see the alternate version of the "I Feel Fine" video in which the Fab Four are eating fish and chips...
Click to expand...
I just saw that last night, it was great. They start the music playback while they're eating and they mouth a few lines of lyrics. Good one.
 
What's funny about that I Feel Fine film is the food is actually on the floor on top of a couple pieces of greasy newspaper and they are crouched around it eating with their hands. "Sure, you've sold millions of records and conquered America, but we can't be bothered to find a table or even a box to put your food on. You'll have to eat it off the floor."
 
mjp said:
"Sure, you've sold millions of records and conquered America, but we can't be bothered to find a table or even a box to put your food on. You'll have to eat it off the floor."
Click to expand...
Now you mention it, it is kinda odd.
- Funny, that the footage was labeled "I Feel Fried" in the Apple archive. At least they had a sense of humor at Apple (but no table and chairs to sit on for "the boys").
 
When "The Led Zeppelin" "Toppled" The Beatles


Ah I like 'em both, but I prefer Zepp, even though they're different and shouldn't really be compared but you know what the media are like.
It must have been magic to be a youngun in the 60's and 70's. Things seem to be shit these days, music, films, etc. I'm not impressed.
 
mjp said:
The latest issue of Guitar Player showed up at the house yesterday, and it has an interview with Babiuk and excerpts from his latest project, Rolling Stones Gear: All the Stones' Instruments from Stage to Studio. I'm not necessarily a Stones fan, but I'll definitely be picking up the book (when the paperback comes out, anyway).
ir


But in the interview they asked him what he was working on, he said a revised edition of Beatles Gear with 300 new pages. To which I can only say, 'wow,' and, 'sign me up!'
Click to expand...
The revised Beatles Gear came out some time in 2015. I picked up a copy today; at 512 pages, you can burn calories just lugging it over to your arm chair.
 
just found this - haven't checked it out much but seems to be a HUGE archive of pics and fab4 info.

http://beatles229.rssing.com/chan-20897428/all_p1.html

from the site -

Welcome Beatle fans!

This blog is to highlight photos and stories of people who have met the Beatles in person. And while fan taken photos are my favorite, I also like to include vintage fan photos and other photos that show the Beatles meeting fans.

The idea behind this blog is to follow in the footsteps of the great Beatle fanzines of the 1970's & 1980's such as The Write Thing, The Harrison Alliance, With a Little Help from my Friends, Paperback Writer, etc etc. Photos and article from those publications and others are reproduced here to preserve the history of the fans who met one or more Beatle in person.
 
They certainly nailed the interplay of the three guitars that make up that "chord."

I was ready to say that it was impossible to isolate those three guitars since it was unlikely they were on separate tracks (in a 4 track recording in 1964), but they were:

1 - "Basic rhythm" (which I assume to be drums and bass?)
2 - John vocal
3 - John and Paul vocal, bongos drums, acoustic guitar
4 - 12 sting guitar, piano
 
There was nothing new for the '66 xmas market in the UK, so they fabricated this. A bit Capitolesque, wouldn't you say?

Ed: I see wikipedia beat me to it. Fantastic.
 
Interesting cover to slap on something at that not-insignificant point of their fame. It screams cheap and unofficial. And the name. I guess that stuff marketed itself, but still.
 
It does look rather hokey; and this is considered to be an official release. Fortunately, the powers that be didn't see fit to include it in the 2009 UK remasters and knock the price up another ~$16 or so.
 
I still contend that Ringo is not all that. He played the parts John and Paul creatively told him or taught him to play. He had the right style for the songs, sure, but many other drummers, it seems, coulda done that. Neither an amazing musician myself nor a drummer I could be wrong. Have yet to be swayed. Anyone? That being said, this clip is a fun piece.

 
PhillyDave said:
I still contend that Ringo is not all that. He played the parts John and Paul creatively told him or taught him to play. He had the right style for the songs, sure, but many other drummers, it seems, coulda done that. Neither an amazing musician myself nor a drummer I could be wrong. Have yet to be swayed. Anyone? That being said, this clip is a fun piece.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how my opinion could carry any more weight than that of the drummers in that viddy, but Ringo had a loose yet tight, really swinging yet insistent thing going on in the early years that was rare at that time outside of the jazz world. Could others have done it? Sure, probably. But that's not the mark of a great musician nor an average musician. Rather, Ringo was the right guy for the job at hand. He also evolved over time to be more than just an insistent beat-holder, which was a critical part of his live performance due to the not a dry seat in the house syndrome that was so pervasive in '64-'66.

He left his musical mark on so many of the Beatles studio songs. She Loves You, Ticket to Ride, Rain, Tomorrow Never Knows, Strawberry Fields, Something, to name just a few. How many R&R songs are identifiable by the drum parts? Many Beatle songs are. And that bit about just playing the parts John and Paul told/taught him to play? There may be an ounce of truth to that, but I doubt that there's a pound of truth to that.

Lastly, playing technically difficult drum parts is very demanding, but playing perfectly-suitable, yet musical drum parts with an unconventional swing yet stable swagger for a group of egotistical songwriters and instrumentalists who are, literally, at the top of the world, is no easy feat. Not that I've ever tried it, but it's not difficult to imagine.

Hold your opinion until you see Ron Howard's film in September. Then let's see what you think.
 
PhillyDave said:
many other drummers, it seems, coulda done that.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter. He did it, they didn't.

I always find it funny when people denigrate iconic or influential musicians by deeming their styles "simple," or saying things like, "I can play everything Jimi Hendrix played." No, actually, you can't. And more importantly, you didn't create it, because you don't have that thing that makes some people great and the rest of us not as great.

To insult or demean Ringo or Johnny Ramone or the guy who went donk-chicka-donk-chicka-donk behind Johnny Cash is ignorant, and to me it shows a lack of understanding what music actually is. Any soul-dead MIT worm can play a three thousand note guitar solo or pound a 25 piece drum set (with gong) like a metronome. But those guys never swing. As Chelsea Clinton would say, "Never, ever." They don't know how.
 
Yeah, I definitely see what your saying mjp, really. Purple too and Star. "He did it, they didn't." Great point. And I think some other drummers' sound wouldn't have worked on Beatles song. But then again, the band, considering how skilled and musical they were, would have made it work somehow if Bonham or Clyde Stubblefield or Stewart Copeland was the drummer.
 
PhillyDave said:
the band, considering how skilled and musical they were, would have made it work somehow if Bonham or Clyde Stubblefield or Stewart Copeland was the drummer.
Click to expand...
Well, of course they would have, but it would have been a different band, wouldn't it.

And if it would have been a different band - which I think we can all agree is true - well, that just proves that Ringo was as responsible for the sound of the band as any of the other three.






And this is where I drop the microphone and walk off the TED stage to rapturous applause, and there waiting in the wings are the MacArthur fellows with my Genius Grant check and NPR wants an interview but I have to tell them, "Tomorrow, tomorrow," because I'm sitting down for a 60 Minutes interview at 7:30, then going to Maron's garage to record a special episode of WTF...
 
Oh, I wasn't trying to re-convince you, or prove you wrong, it's just that your comment about the other drummers made for a good spot to make a point. ;)
 

Similar threads

nervas
The Beatles Rockband
Replies
17
Views
2K
number6horse
number6horse
Short Bus
Beatles Tour!
Replies
0
Views
855
Short Bus
Short Bus
d gray
Beatles live!
Replies
13
Views
2K
mjp
mjp
Purple Stickpin
Beatles Anthology Series
Replies
2
Views
1K
roni
roni
d gray
beatles/rock memorabilia auction...
Replies
13
Views
2K
d gray
d gray

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top