Scott Fraser Posted August 18, 2012 Share Posted August 18, 2012 So here's another question: What does it say about a band that broke up 43 years ago, and people are STILL having discussions and debates about 'em? Whitefang It says those guys, who were in their twenties at the time of their creative streak, were absolutely on fire. Scott Fraser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Schmieder Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Yeah, the release dates on the Delaney and Bonnie stuff were different in the US, as was the Clapton album that featured them (not to mention it was an entirely different production with slightly different songs and different takes), so I'm a bit hazy about the order of release for the gazillion albums that came out between 1968-9 and 1972-4 that featured this dynamite rhythm section and backing band that was behind so many of the bit hits from that era. George commented at the time that he was working with much better musicians than The Beatles. He meant players. The other Beatles would be the first to admit that they were writers first and players second. Nothing wrong with that, but I think it's a good thing that George moved on and established long-term working relations with some very good players, as that was probably exactly what he needed in order to bring his songwriting to the next level after the split. Don't forget, Ringo was the oldest and George was the youngest. This played no small part in band dynamics. George often let others do the guitar solos -- even on his own tunes, like "Taxman" -- partly due to insecurity and also admiration of Lennon and McCartney as his "elders", but maybe as a diplomatic way of improving the odds of his songs getting used. The miracle is that they lasted as long as they did, given the underlying tensions and the way that their lead guitarist was made a second class citizen in the band. Eugenio Upright, 60th Anniversary P-Bass, USA Geddy Lee J-Bass, Yamaha BBP35, D'angelico SS Bari, EXL1, Select Strat, 70th Anniversary Esquire, LP 57, Eastman T486, T64, Ibanez PM2, Hammond XK4, Moog Voyager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larryz Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 +1 Mark on giving George some well deserved kudos. I think Paul was upset that the Beatles had no rock out lead guitar and wanted to show George how it was done on Taxman...George was the sound that made the Beatles SO great to so many people...he played mostly rhythm guitar and wrote the riffs and provided all the color that made the Beatles music stand out to include writing the chords to a thousand songs...if you wanted to sound like the Beatles, you had better learn to play like George. Paul and John could kick back but George's song identity guitar parts had to be there on every song. If you go on Youtube and watch the guitars being played in their early performances, you'll see what I mean. George was not quiet and shy, in fact he came out on our national TV and on stage in front of the largest audiences ever assembled. He made the music happen and played all of his parts live by rote. He sang back up with Paul when John sang and back up with John when Paul sang. He wrote and sang a few of the Beatles best songs. "Quiet George" was the underpaid and underrated Beatle IMHO. I think maybe Paul and John kept him down to only a couple of songs on any one album for the future royalty end of it...when he did play lead in the studio, it was pretty good stuff...it's mostly his rhythm guitar chords, runs and riffs, that made him a real guitar slinger/arranger... Take care, Larryz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Schmieder Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Of everything The Beatles ever recorded as a group or on their own, nothing sent chills down my spine more than the opening of "All Things Must Pass". I didn't even know much about Dylan at the time, so initially attributed this seeming change of musical direction to him. Even now as I write this, it sends a shiver to think about that gorgeous opening to "I'd Have You Anytime". Guitar chords from Heaven! Eugenio Upright, 60th Anniversary P-Bass, USA Geddy Lee J-Bass, Yamaha BBP35, D'angelico SS Bari, EXL1, Select Strat, 70th Anniversary Esquire, LP 57, Eastman T486, T64, Ibanez PM2, Hammond XK4, Moog Voyager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitefang Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 You can correct my terminology if you like, but it looked to me as if George, when playing rhythm, was playing "counterpoint" to John. In that I mean if John was playing a certain chord in one position, George was playing the same chord in another. THAT could have an affect on the overall sound. Some of us older fans might think it was a mean thing to do in keeping George out of the songwriting mix, but in retrospect, it allowed him the freedom to keep reaching and stretching as a guitar player and having us be the benefactors of his learning. If he was too busy writing and arranging a lot of the songs for the group, we might not have had the pleasure of his fine slide work on "Something". Just a thought.Whitefang I started out with NOTHING...and I still have most of it left! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larryz Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Or the Sitar work on Norwegian Wood...John was playing chords in the normal register and George was free to wander up or down the neck to play "counterpoint" so as not to repeat the same chords but to add to what John was playing (kind of a capo concept sans capo)...he also added coloring and beautiful chord runs like on Help...just got to watch the live performances on Youtube to appreciate what George was playing when you heard the tunes on the old records...I think the breakup allowed George to expand his writing talents and continue on in a new direction with Clapton, the Willburys and others. I wish he had been given more credit for his input on stage and on record while the group was together. All of the focus was on Paul and John (well deserved focus I must admit), and then there was Ringo.... Take care, Larryz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Iverson Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Ringo played some brilliant drum parts! I can't imagine "Ticket to Ride" with a typical dumb back beat part! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terrell Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Uhm, Record Sales? I'm out on a limb, but that's what comes to mind first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larryz Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 +1 Ringo's drumming was great... Take care, Larryz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Schmieder Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Yes, I have read interviews where George expressed the deliberate strategy of playing inversions of each other's chords for a wider/fuller sound than standard doubling. I can't think off-hand of many other groups that did this (maybe CSNY?). Eugenio Upright, 60th Anniversary P-Bass, USA Geddy Lee J-Bass, Yamaha BBP35, D'angelico SS Bari, EXL1, Select Strat, 70th Anniversary Esquire, LP 57, Eastman T486, T64, Ibanez PM2, Hammond XK4, Moog Voyager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Fraser Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 Yes, I have read interviews where George expressed the deliberate strategy of playing inversions of each other's chords for a wider/fuller sound than standard doubling. This was a major part of their brilliance, their innate understanding of arranging. Though unschooled they had a natural gift for finding complimentary inversions & interesting voicings. Scott Fraser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Iverson Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Maybe I should play Beatles' records for some of the kids I know, who don't understand the concept of "arrangement" at all, why anyone would want to do anything other than just strum chords or play generic leads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p90jr Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 THE ANSWER REVEALED!!! http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/377285_412466062136639_249045780_n.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Fraser Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 THE ANSWER REVEALED!!! http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/377285_412466062136639_249045780_n.jpg Thank goodness finally somebody can explain it all. Scott Fraser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picker Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 I think it was George who said what I think is the best explanation of what happened with them. IIRC, he said something along the lines of they were just four guys who were in the right place at the right time with the right stuff for that time. They were pretty good at what they did, very tight after playing 3 or 4 shows a day for months in Hamburg, had a distinctive sound, and, after Brian Epstein got through, a distinctive look. They were creative people, or they wouldn't have outlasted Beatlemania. But if the same four guys had done what they did a year earlier or later, I'll bet nobody would have heard of 'em. It was their good fortune to happen along at just the right time, make a sensation, & parleyed that into a career. It's not the first time it happened. Carl Perkins would have knocked Elvis out of the business but for a bad car wreck that took him out of the scene at the wrong time. Elvis was fortunate enough to make it big before he got drafted. He thought he was through when he went in. Timing... Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Iverson Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 This is funny in light of John's lyric: "But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman MaoYou ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p90junior Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Maybe I should play Beatles' records for some of the kids I know, who don't understand the concept of "arrangement" at all, why anyone would want to do anything other than just strum chords or play generic leads. A guy I play in bands with and I are both the kinds of players who were drawn to songs first, learning licks and stuff second, as far as our development... he mostly plays keys in bands these days, but he and I will get really into dissecting different people's work compositionally, and we were trying to bring back modulations in a couple of the bands we play in... "the lost art of modulations." Nobody we played with would go for it... not even when covering a song that modulated, they'd want to leave it out. Crap, having a bridge these days is pushing people too far... in pop songs. On the other hand, there's a lot of bands that approach songwriting like geometrical theorems... just a bunch of mathematical phrases that aren't guided by melody or anything really "artful." I've played in some of those bands and didn't dig it, just a bunch of people counting "do this 12 times, then that part 5 times, then the other part 6 times..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larryz Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 But if the same four guys had done what they did a year earlier or later, I'll bet nobody would have heard of 'em. It was their good fortune to happen along at just the right time, make a sensation, & parleyed that into a career. It's not the first time it happened. Carl Perkins would have knocked Elvis out of the business but for a bad car wreck that took him out of the scene at the wrong time. -1...I believe the Fab 4 would have made it with or without the turtle suits, beatle boots and the mop head haircuts. It wouldn't have mattered whether or not they came out a year ealier or a year later. They had just too much talent to go unnoticed in singing, playing and writing IMHO...Carl Perkins was great but as evidenced in the remake of Blue Suede Shoes which Carl wrote, but Elvis blew him out of the water. Carl would not have stood a chance against Elvis and Carl had many recordings going nowhere to prove it. There are very few songs on my CD of about 36 Carl Perkins' hit tunes that could compete with Elvis, although Carl was a pretty darn good singer. He did do the remake of Chuck Berry's Roll Over Beethoven before the Bealtes did it. He also did and wrote Honey Don't that inspired The Beatles. He could never have knocked Elvis out of business, even though they were both cool Rockabilly cats... Take care, Larryz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larryz Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 THE ANSWER REVEALED!!! http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/377285_412466062136639_249045780_n.jpg Thank goodness finally somebody can explain it all. You are getting Verwie Verwie Sweepy...you pesky wittle wabbits... Take care, Larryz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p90jr Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 But if the same four guys had done what they did a year earlier or later, I'll bet nobody would have heard of 'em. It was their good fortune to happen along at just the right time, make a sensation, & parleyed that into a career. It's not the first time it happened. Carl Perkins would have knocked Elvis out of the business but for a bad car wreck that took him out of the scene at the wrong time. -1...I believe the Fab 4 would have made it with or without the turtle suits, beatle boots and the mop head haircuts. It wouldn't have mattered whether or not they came out a year ealier or a year later. They had just too much talent to go unnoticed in singing, playing and writing IMHO...Carl Perkins was great but as evidenced in the remake of Blue Suede Shoes which Carl wrote, but Elvis blew him out of the water. Carl would not have stood a chance against Elvis and Carl had many recordings going nowhere to prove it. There are very few songs on my CD of about 36 Carl Perkins' hit tunes that could compete with Elvis, although Carl was a pretty darn good singer. He did do the remake of Chuck Berry's Roll Over Beethoven before the Bealtes did it. He also did and wrote Honey Don't that inspired The Beatles. He could never have knocked Elvis out of business, even though they were both cool Rockabilly cats... The story I read many places as a kid was that Sam Phillips thought Carl was the one... he thought he had more raw potential than Presley and was a great, marketable and smoother singer AND he was a smoking guitarist AND he wrote his own material. Elvis could sing, Carl could do much more... was much of the brains behind his own operation and seemingly the sky was the limit for him: he could be the white Chuck Berry. So he sold Presley's contract, and had the funds to put behind Perkins to take him all the way. Then Carl got into a car accident that hurt him pretty bad and sidelined him for while, during which he re-discovered religion and didn't want to be the King of Rock and Roll anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larryz Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 When I was a kid the 1st 45 my mom bought me was Blue Suede shoes by Carl Perkins, I was an Elvis fan and thought it was Elvis singing and to this day I know Carl did a great job writing and singing it and sounded a lot like Elvis. Elvis left Sun Records in 1956 and signed with RCA and the 1st record cut (Heartbreak Hotel) went gold and blew out the charts. Scotty Moore stepped down as his manager when EP signed with RCA and Colonel Tom Parker took over. Scotty knew he could no longer manage EP. Sam Phillips of Sun Records let Elvis go for the same reason. He knew he was holding him back and could only hamper his success if he was not signed to a major record company. Elvis had many major hits at Sun Records that sold more records than Carl Perkins. Sam got paid well for Elvis. Carl was never going to surpass Elvis at Sun Records even though he was a great singer, performer, writer, and 20 times the guitar player EP was. Elvis was on National TV and touring in 1956 and all of his first records went gold with RCA as singles. One of his songs back in those days was the only song to ever be a gold record without ever having been released as a single (Love Me). There were other major record companies like Capital that were bidding against RCA. There was no chance for Carl to be the King of R&R with Elvis around. Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Bill Haley, Fats and other potential Kings were out there too but record sales was the name of the game at that time...this is just what I've read and seen over the years and I don't want to discount the Carl Perkins story in any way as he was a success and he did many performances and TV shows long after the accident... Take care, Larryz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyalcatraz Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I think it was George who said what I think is the best explanation of what happened with them. IIRC, he said something along the lines of they were just four guys who were in the right place at the right time with the right stuff for that time. They were pretty good at what they did, very tight after playing 3 or 4 shows a day for months in Hamburg, had a distinctive sound, and, after Brian Epstein got through, a distinctive look. They were creative people, or they wouldn't have outlasted Beatlemania. I think George was being modest, at least on the subject of talent and creativity. I was just reading about the recording process behind "Tomorrow Never Knows"- one of the first songs to use the flange effect, multiple (at least 5) loops, ADT, the use of the Leslie rotating speaker... Simply put, they made deceptively simple complex songs, used techniques others would come to copy or rely upon... They innovated or popularized a lot of things that make up the pop/rock lexicon. Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: âNinety percent of everything is crapâ My FLMS- Murphy's Music in Irving, Tx http://murphysmusictx.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsureit Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Anyway, the 1st few comments on that thread were mostly not abt the clip itself but how great the Beatles were..."The greatest band EVER", etc. Initially I was a bit disappointed in the responses there. I hope that's not offensive to anyone but I always wonder about people's opinions when they're vehement in their insistence of any artist's ultimate superiority to all else. "The Dead !!", "The Stones, man !!" I like a lot of music but I can't think of anyone who never served up some bad clams. The insistence that The Beatles (of whom I'm clearly a fan) were better than bands such as, to mention just a few examples, Louis Armstrong & Earl Hines, Sun Ra, PFunk, some of the groups led by Miles Davis or Frank Zappa... somehow to me that actually reduces the validity of the Beatles's very real achievement, which is/was vast & extensive far beyond the music itself. Good topic for discussion. I actually played with Mr. Zappa and Mr. Davis (and Ray Charles) back in the mid-70s (played horns as a sideman for a couple of shows in Austin - nothing more). I can assure you that these giants of music admired and were inspired by The Beatles. Perhaps that adds another check mark on the Beatles' side of the ledger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitefang Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 When I was a kid the 1st 45 my mom bought me was Blue Suede shoes by Carl Perkins, I was an Elvis fan and thought it was Elvis singing and to this day I know Carl did a great job writing and singing it and sounded a lot like Elvis. Elvis left Sun Records in 1956 and signed with RCA and the 1st record cut (Heartbreak Hotel) went gold and blew out the charts. Scotty Moore stepped down as his manager when EP signed with RCA and Colonel Tom Parker took over. Scotty knew he could no longer manage EP. Sam Phillips of Sun Records let Elvis go for the same reason. He knew he was holding him back and could only hamper his success if he was not signed to a major record company. Elvis had many major hits at Sun Records that sold more records than Carl Perkins. Sam got paid well for Elvis. Carl was never going to surpass Elvis at Sun Records even though he was a great singer, performer, writer, and 20 times the guitar player EP was. Elvis was on National TV and touring in 1956 and all of his first records went gold with RCA as singles. One of his songs back in those days was the only song to ever be a gold record without ever having been released as a single (Love Me). There were other major record companies like Capital that were bidding against RCA. There was no chance for Carl to be the King of R&R with Elvis around. Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Bill Haley, Fats and other potential Kings were out there too but record sales was the name of the game at that time...this is just what I've read and seen over the years and I don't want to discount the Carl Perkins story in any way as he was a success and he did many performances and TV shows long after the accident... Funny story by Perkins that ties in with the Beatles... When Elvis recorded HIS cover of Perkin's "Blue Suede Shoes", You might notice the difference in how it opens. For example, Perkins pointed out HIS opening had three beats after each line; "Well it's one for the money" ba-da-dot! "Two for the show" ba-da-dot! The Elvis version went straight to the point.; "Well it's one for the money", POW! "Two for the show", POW! Perkins said he kinda liked that, so HE started playing it that way. Did so for years. Then the Beatles came along, and when they arrived in America, one of the people they said they'd like to meet was Carl Perkins. Someone arranged it. So when they got together, they asked Perkins if they could jam on one of Carl's songs. Perkins said "sure". Then asked which song they'd like to do. The Beatles said they'd be honored to do "Blue Suede Shoes" with him. So they began to play it, with Carl doing the ELVIS opening, while the Beatles just sat there looking at one another. When Carl asked them what was the matter, George Harrison piped up and said, "Well...you're PLAYING it wrong!" Turned out the Beatles learned it off HIS record, NOT the Elvis version! Heard that in a "Fresh Air" NPR interview Carl did shortly before he died. Always thought it amusing. Whitefang I started out with NOTHING...and I still have most of it left! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larryz Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 Very cool story WF...just goes to show you don't have to play it just like the original as even the originals can find new ideas to work with. I would have thought Ringo would have said something instead of George? Carl was a cool cat. My dad still tells me the story of Carl jamming with a british rock group (might have been the Stones?) on TV and showing them how to rock out on the guitar! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFspshhFfJE <----I think this might have been the show my old man (84 years young) remembers! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhrpf8eNcbM&feature=related <--- here's Blue Suede Shoes for you WF! alright I'll stop now...Ringo sings Honey Don't on the show too! Take care, Larryz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.