OT: Final Beatles Song

[AUSSIEKEYS]

I liked it a lot. A LOT.

 

Infact will become a favourite as over the years when radio existed as a medium i got so sick of hearing their back catalogue songs.

 

But not just theirs other greats such as Elvis etc. Didnt mean i started to dislike their songs but it certainly creates a "not again" please play something new.

 

And finally they did and i love it but I'm biased to this style of song as i could add this to my solo repertoire. Im not as interested in their other 2 songs as their is too much going on.

 

Perhaps though this song does create a very Beatles sound in my mind i really think of it as a Lennon solo song. But it'd probably stay lost if not for this Beatles collab. 

 

I give it a BIG thumbs up

 

Thanks to Beato for giving us what i expect from him are the correct chords. Although it sounds a simple arrangement I dont have a keyboard setup to nut it out so I did a quick search of chords before seeing his video and found typical guitarist take on the chords which are often wrong interpretations but i expect his to be spot on as usual.

 

Infact the song inspired me to try to set up my keyboard in my storage shed today to try it out. Weve been moving house for 6 months and i reckon i havent played a piano for that long. Thanks John L for getting me off my but with your great song.

[Muad’Dib]

I enjoyed this new Beatles track!

[jerrythek]

4 hours ago, elsongs said:

The instrumental Bridge in the full recording differs from the demo recording, which was obviously just a rough, incomplete sketch intended by Lennon to further flesh out at a later date (which never happened as he intended for whatever reason). It's safe to assume Paul did the final arrangement (strings arranged by Giles Martin) and composed the new Bridge, based on some of the chords Lennon used for his intended B section.

Thanks for the education.

[Jim Alfredson]

I think it’s great and poignant. While I was born long after the Beatles broke up, and Lennon died when I was just three, my parents were huge Beatles fans and I heard their music my entire life. My mother had their solo albums and I remember hearing Double Fantasy even though I was really young. 
 

It is a shame that Lennon was taken so young and we never got the reunion we all wanted. Then again, even if he wasn’t murdered, they may never have gotten together again in that way. Look at Genesis / Gabriel. 
 

I think it’s a fitting farewell to the band. Paul and Ringo won’t be here much longer and I for one appreciate that they did this for the fans. 

[Spider76]

8 hours ago, Radagast said:

  Just because it has the name Beatles on it doesn’t make it great.  I liked Free As a Bird better. This isn’t a bad song, but it’s not one of the Beatles’ greatest either.

 

Funny how personal taste varies so wildly. Among the "lost" songs I couldn't care less about Free as a Bird, I find it a totally plain and insignificant song.

But this brought a tear to my eyes. While I agree that it's definitely not the Beatles' or John's greatest song, I find it has some feeling and depth that the other lacked.

But of course it's just my gut reaction.

[Cliffk]

Without being schmaltzy, the Beatles’ music has always had a strong affective, even personal, element to it. George’s All Those Years Ago is one that hits a strong emotional chord for me.

This tune is another such example, a fitting coda to an unparalleled legacy.

[RABid]

When researching this song it is amazing how much the implied use of AI is varies from story to story. According to reports the use of AI ranges from separating Lennon's voice from piano on old tapes to recreating Lennon's voice and style. What ever the truth is, the damage has been done. I took some education classes in college and something that I always took with me is a professor discussing paddling in school. "Right or wrong, good or bad. You have to remember that you are ALWAYS teaching the children. When paddling a child one message you are sending is violence is okay. No matter the situation or your reasoning, that is what some children will learn." With the Beatles releasing a song that uses AI for Lennon's voice, the message many will receive is that it is okay to use AI to emulate a superstar's performance. If AI was only used to separate Lennon's voice from piano on old tapes then the living members of the Beatles need to really push that information. 

[Polychrest]

I just loved hearing Lennon’s voice again in something I’d never heard before.  Purists are carping about over-processing and audible AI effects.  Screw ‘em.  It’s a Beatles song, a Lennon original with the other three guys present and accounted for.  Kudos to McCartney for pulling this off.

[SteveCoscia]

My first impression of a first listen.

 

I liked it until about 1:10.  The simplicity of John's vocal and the piano conjured up an emotional response.  Once the other instruments came in the vibe changed for the worse.

 

Regarding the song; it has that mid-1970s style reminiscent of Eric Carmen's All by Myself and Harry Nilsson's Without You.

[Anderton]

1 hour ago, SteveCoscia said:

I liked it until about 1:10.  The simplicity of John's vocal and the piano conjured up an emotional response.  Once the other instruments came in the vibe changed for the worse.

 

Same here. Love John's voice, the song, the piano, and George's solo. I just wish they would have left it at that. I think the demo probably had a more intimate feel than how it ended up. One thing I learned on my last album project is that if you have a good 45 seconds of a song, then be content with having a good 45-second song  

 

This isn't to diminish peoples' beautiful emotional responses to a period of musical seismic activity, and the opportunity to revisit it for a bit is welcome. But for better or worse, I'm one of those people who believes you can't go home anymore. "Don't want to live in the past, no matter what they say it's overrated. And the present, now, yeah it's okay but in 24 hours it's yesterday." John liked his post-Beatles music raw. Releasing a version with minimal fixes might not have been as a good a tribute to the Beatles, but I think it would have been a good tribute to John.

 

The Beatles left a huge legacy of incredible music that is being diminished by revisionism ("oh, we can't put the mono version on streaming services, we have to put on the new stereo mixes because we can't listen to old stereo mixes, right?").

 

IMHO the Beatles themselves said it best: Let it be.

 

 

[MathOfInsects]

To be sure, there is a sheen to it that I'm not used to hearing on a Beatles song. But it still sounds like them, which all in itself is amazing. I wasn't a huge fan of the other two Threetle releases, the ELO-ness bugged me and those Lennon tracks were chorused and pitchy and sometimes there's a reason that songs aren't released after someone writes them.

I loved the arrangement of this one, and felt they really put thought into what a "last" Beatle release would need to sound like. I mean, did the song itself beg for those choppy strings, arranged by Giles Martin? Maybe not. But did a "last Beatles song" need those strings, arranged by Giles Martin? Completely.

You really can't compare it to "The Beatles," you have to compare it starting with "not-song" and making a Beatles song out of it. John was in his sloggy phase then and he often did this thing where his songs would come down at the chorus instead of lift. This one has that happening, and I don't think it's necessarily the strongest chorus he or anyone ever wrote. But again, the comparison is to not making a single out of that tape. Starting there--with "not-song"--and ending here, I think they did a gorgeous job. 

I find it sneaky-epic and really haunting. 

[Baldwin Funster]

I shut it of at about 1:28. Other than John's voice and blocky piano playing and maybe drums not unlike Ringo, there is little here that would make me think Beatles if I heard this by accident. This isn't a living Beatles song its a zombie propped up on a digital post. It's appropriate for holloween in that sense.

I could go on but I would only further disturb those here that like it. Enjoy .

[Anderton]

7 minutes ago, Baldwin Funster said:

I could go on but I would only further disturb those here that like it. Enjoy .

 

Based on the reactions, it's clear that for many people it's a worthwhile project with a welcome emotional overlay. For others, it seems like overreach. That's fine. But I do wish they would stop replacing the original recordings with newer versions. At least make both available. Those mono mixes had their own gestalt.

 

It's interesting to compare how people look at the first new Stones album in 18 years. Reactions vary from "Well, it doesn't really sound like the Stones, so I don't like it" to "Well, it doesn't really sound like the Stones, so I like it"

[miden]

Glad they released it, not their best song, but that wasn’t the aim … one final cut for all of us to enjoy. An important footnote to the anthology.

[Anderton]

Interesting...I checked out the following, and now I like the song itself a lot more. These aren't the best cover versions in the world, and neither of them quite figured out what to do with the solo. But stripping the song down to its essentials avoids the distractions that kind of got in my way.

 

Cover version 1

 

Cover version 2 (it starts after the fake Ed Sullivan introduction)

 

 

[MathOfInsects]

7 minutes ago, Anderton said:

 

Based on the reactions, it's clear that for many people it's a worthwhile project with a welcome emotional overlay. For others, it seems like overreach. That's fine. But I do wish they would stop replacing the original recordings with newer versions. At least make both available. Those mono mixes had their own gestalt.

 

It's interesting to compare how people look at the first new Stones album in 18 years. Reactions vary from "Well, it doesn't really sound like the Stones, so I don't like it" to "Well, it doesn't really sound like the Stones, so I like it"

Yeah. I have no musical nostalgia. I was fine with the Beatles and any other group just being when they were and whoever is now being now. My favorite song is whatever the next great song I hear might be. But I definitely have personal nostalgia related to the Beatles. I stayed home from school the day John Lennon was killed. I was wrecked. That group was everything to me in my childhood.

Then I moved on and even though I still liked them, I took on lots of other groups and artists. Then many years later I ended up teaching the university's Beatles class a bunch of times while I was doing my degree(s). I was afraid it would kill them for me, but it had the opposite effect--it only made them more interesting to me! And then my kids and particularly my son discovered them on their own and I got to listen with fresh ears a third time, and again, it only made them resonate more instead of less.

But I've hated most of what they've all done ever since the Beatles broke up, with some occasional exceptions, and I particularly disliked the other two fake-Beatles releases. So I was prepared to hate this one too. But the opposite happened (again!). I certainly don't think it's for everyone. It's a very idiosyncratic sound and style. I can't see a club kid making it through a half a second of it. But for personal reasons, I really like it, and feel all sorts of complicated stuff around having John and George "back" for a few minutes, and knowing that a few more minutes is all the other two are counting on having left at this point.

[Radagast]

29 minutes ago, Anderton said:

 

Based on the reactions, it's clear that for many people it's a worthwhile project with a welcome emotional overlay. For others, it seems like overreach. That's fine. But I do wish they would stop replacing the original recordings with newer versions. At least make both available. Those mono mixes had their own gestalt.

 

 

Some of the stereo mixes didn’t need improving either.

[Radagast]

24 minutes ago, Anderton said:

Interesting...I checked out the following, and now I like the song itself a lot more. These aren't the best cover versions in the world, and neither of them quite figured out what to do with the solo. But stripping the song down to its essentials avoids the distractions that kind of got in my way.

 

Cover version 1

 

Cover version 2 (it starts after the fake Ed Sullivan introduction)

 

 

I actually like the first one.

[AUSSIEKEYS]

30 minutes ago, Radagast said:

I actually like the first one.

 

Yes agree the first is a good interpretation. I liked it.

 

The second didnt gel at first but if i looked at it as a live version in 1964 emulating them on stage and thrashing thru songs to a wildly bopping audience who couldnt hear them anyway i could get it. 

 

I think what the second one lacked to portray this properly was a Lennonish voice.

 

His voice was his voice and normally i applaud that but in this case he was doing a "look a like" thing so his voice should "sound a like" to impart the tribute band thing he was giving us. Here i think the "Beatleish" video made us realise the voice should have been a John "sound a like".

 

It wasnt till half way thru I enjoyed watching what might come next in one of the first cover song  videos. I was ready to give up when it started but by the end i got what he was trying to do with an uptempo version. The video was corny in a cute way. Video sort of reminded me of Pauls solo song "coming up" which i really loved in the day.

[Paul Woodward]

Love the song. As for the production, imagine finding something so rare and valuable. They did the AI thing to get the voice isolated then rolled the red carpet out and polished this nugget until its gleam blinds you. Inevitable nowadays. 

[o0Ampy0o]

I'd rather have just had the salvaged pieces presented so you can hear them rather than this attempt to make it an official Beatles song. First impression is that as a Beatles song it is weak. After reading through the posts I think people are moved from the nostalgic perspective of today looking backwards. They are reading too much into the words and the fact that this is probably the last new song of The Beatles. I would not be surprised if they scrounged something up in the future, maybe one of them singing in the shower or clowning around caught on tape and made into a full-blown release song. It will have to be 95% AI Beatles if they are not fast enough though. On its own this one is less than mediocre. It starts out with piano as the focus. The piano is very atypical of The Beatles and should have been much more of a driving force than just a train car riding along. The vocals are an idea performance, like jotting down notes. They are not the level of make-it-count with heart and soul for a final recording. In this regard they reflect John's lack of perfectionism in his solo career absent the presence of everything involved with The Beatles writing and recording. Of the four in their post-Beatles careers John seemed to me to care the least about production and nailing down a good performance. I don't think he had enough time to grow beyond his jaded ex-Beatle feelings.

[stoken6]

It doesn't have to be a great Beatles song. It just has to be the last Beatles song. And it clears that hurdle and more.

 

Thanks Craig @Anderton for posting the covers. You can draw a straight line from the first one to REM (and many other bands, but this was the first thought that rose, unbidden, into my consciousness).

 

Cheers, Mike.

[AnotherScott]

17 hours ago, o0Ampy0o said:

I'd rather have just had the salvaged pieces presented so you can hear them rather than this attempt to make it an official Beatles song. 

here you go...

 

 

[mrk7421]

Regarding a Beatles reunion....if it would have ever happened this would have been what we would have gottten. In other words....that infectious energy that made the Beatles what they were  in an earlier day is not what this music is about. It's pleasant and most of all it has  BEATLES stamped on it.....I am not going to judge negatively but if I were 12 years old again I probably would not buy it. But I am glad it happened

[mrk7421]

Another "reunion" thought.....I would have liked to have seen some gigs where Paul might have sat in with Ringo and the All Starr Band. And as a second drummer....add Pete Best to the mix. The one thing the Beatles DID NOT do was to give Best credit for his two grueling years in Hamburg. As far as him being inadequate....if you listen to the Decca audition there were moments where they all sucked. He got punished for sucking on Love Me Do.... George Martin said no go and that was it for Pete. Can you imagine?...we have all had personality clashes as working musicians.....Pete took the worst ever rejection that has EVER been given in the music biz....the worst form of loss ever. Something could have been done to heal that one. All you need is love,?

[o0Ampy0o]

It is nice that remaining members of The Beatles, especially Paul seeing this through, got to work on yet another song with contributions of each Beatle. This still has all the earmarks of post-Beatle Lennon and the presence of the other members does not change that. The VERY palpable energy/aura of The Beatles had dissipated after each of their first solo albums. It was something I and many felt like a layer of existence in addition to common senses. Even non-fans felt it. Google a story of the police unexpectedly stopping in their tracks as The Beatles exited a building across the street and got into their Bentley. This is not a Beatles song.

[Bill H.]

3 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

here you go...

 

 

 

Interesting... I hadn't heard the original before. Paul did a considerable amount of editing, including excising these lyrics:

 

I don't wanna lose you oh no

Lose you or abuse you oh no no no darling

But if you have to go - away

If you have to go... [high falsetto that I can't decipher]

 

With those lyrics out, the song is open to interpretation. With those lyrics in, plus the fact that John recorded it in 1977, plus the fact that May Pang claims that they remained lovers until 1977 (Wikipedia), plus the fact that John didn't include it in his next album (Double Fantasy with Yoko)...

 

Anyway mystery solved in my mind. And now, I'm not so sure John would have approved of this project. 

 

 

 

 

[stoken6]

3 hours ago, mrk7421 said:

Regarding a Beatles reunion....if it would have ever happened this would have been what we would have gottten. In other words....that infectious energy that made the Beatles what they were  in an earlier day is not what this music is about. It's pleasant and most of all it has  BEATLES stamped on it.....I am not going to judge negatively but if I were 12 years old again I probably would not buy it. But I am glad it happened

I think that's allowed. Look how David  Bowie's style and material evolved as he grew up. Plenty of other examples, from Madonna to Danny Elfman. 

 

For a more modern take, whose current-period music do you prefer: Taylor Swift or Katy Perry?

 

Cheers, Mike.

 

 

[elsongs]

On 11/4/2023 at 10:50 AM, Anderton said:

 

Same here. Love John's voice, the song, the piano, and George's solo. I just wish they would have left it at that.

 

 

The only thing on the recording that's John Lennon is the digitally cleaned-up lead vocal.  The piano from the demo was replaced by a new track played by Paul. And the slide guitar solo is actually Paul doing a Harrisonesque solo as a tribute to George. Though the electric rhythm guitar parts were played by George, recorded in 1995. 

[mrk7421]

Someone asked if I prefer Taylor Swift or Katy Perry....I haven't paid much attention to either though have heard Taylor a bit. I don't think she is a Beatles level talent....Among the new generation I am impressed with some of what is coming out of the bluegrass movement....Molly Tuttle really caught my ear and some others that are involved with her. Show business has gotten so big and overblown that it just doesn't seem real to me anymore. And jazz has left my interest.... I loved the bebop rebels of the 40s 50s...certain Blue Note of the 60's particularly tragic underdogs like Tina Brooks....the organ guys....guitarists like Wes Montgomery, Grant Green etc. I have been in and out of being a pop music fan but Katy Perry? I wouldn't recognize her....is it worth listening to?  Back to Beatles though....am a huge fan of the early recordings.....live at the BBC etc. As an early live band they were SO MUCH FUN.