Organizing The Beatles

[A String]

In another thread, Billster Organized The Beatles according to his favorites, I thought that would make an interesting post.

 

Mine are (In order):

 

(1)John - A man of his convictions, always standing up for what's right. An amazing writer and his artistic side always kept everything fresh.

 

(2)Paul - Another great writer, Great singer and a very underrated bass player.

 

(3)George - Some of his stuff was a little out there for me, but who can argue with the amazing and original guitar playing. He was playing the same scales as others, but man did he make them sound original.

 

(4)Ringo - Strange how he always seems to come in last. Always thought he was a great drummer though!

 

Anyone else?

[Billster]

Thanks for the nod A!

 

For those who didn't see it:

 

The Beatles (in order of magnitude)

 

George - the best Beatle hands down. Cool, smart, best post-fab four, etc. and on

Ringo - a sense of humor and humility

Paul - too treacly. third best only because I hate John.

John - too whiny.

 

To me, Lennon/McCartney were a great songwriting team because their worst qualities (sappy McCartney vs. abrasive Lennon) cancelled each other out and left the good stuff to float to the top.

 

Sorry A, I just never "got" John.

[Tedster]

Well, I reckon I've always perceived The Beatles as one of the ultimates in checks and balances...the whole greater than the sum of its parts. For the most part.

 

They each kept each other from getting too buried in their own idiosyncracies, for the most part. For example, "Silly Love Songs" probably never would of could have been a Beatles song. Granted, some of McCartney's schmaltz did get released on Beatle albums, as did some of Lennon's bizarre experimentalism (case in point, from the White Album "Honey Pie" and "Revolution 9"). They could have brought Harrison more into the mix as far as original songs, especially toward the end. Example, during the "Get Back" (Let It Be) sessions, they spend a bit of time going over "All Things Must Pass". A phenomenal song. But, the far sillier "For You Blue" ends up on the LP. As for Ringo...I still hear people doing drum licks on today's CDs (listen to "Kathleen" by Josh Ritter, for example) and recognize their origin..."THAT'S RINGO!"...you can hear it in their playing. Whether it's conscious or not, it's quite a tribute to the guy who was the backbone and backbeat of the Fabs.

[coyote]

Some say Ringo got lucky, that he signed on the dotted line at the right moment.

 

While the talents of the other three would definitely have surfaced anyway, it could be argued that The Beatles' success was in large part due to Ringo! Remember, he was an English star in his own right when he came aboard. His rock-solid and musical drumming, combined with his personality and drawing power, might very well have been a major force in putting them over-the-top.

[Funk Jazz]

the whole is greater than the parts.

[AlanThomas]

Originally posted by coyote:

Some say Ringo got lucky, that he signed on the dotted line at the right moment.

 

While the talents of the other three would definitely have surfaced anyway, it could be argued that The Beatles' success was in large part due to Ringo! Remember, he was an English star in his own right when he came aboard. His rock-solid and musical drumming, combined with his personality and drawing power, might very well have been a major force in putting them over-the-top.

Wha?

 

I love Ringo, his drumming, his personality, hell I even like his singing! But I think what you said is really a super stretch.

 

I mean, theories abound that Pete Best was sacked because he was too popular with the locals (especially the girls) and was diverting attention from John and Paul: He was upstaging them. Why would they then hire someone that would do the same?

 

I think Ringo got hired because of his smart, delicate drumming (in contrast to Pete's ham fisted, no dynamics, bashing) and the fact that the others really came to like him but mostly because he would not challenge the others either musically or visually.

 

Anyway, here's my Beatle ranking:

 

1) John - The best Rock & Roll singing voice ever in my opinion. Phenominal melodic, harmonic, and lyrical songwriting, best of the four of them and top 5 ever.

 

2) George - A highly under rated guitarist. When their stuff started coming out on CD years ago, I was hearing guitar parts that I never could hear before. A very tasty and delicate player!

 

3) Ringo - As I said above; smart, delicate drumming, a great personality (seems like a really easy going, rock solid kind of guy), and I think a great singing voice on the right song.

 

4) Paul - I think Paul's a great bass player: very melodic. I think he altered the face of Rock & Roll bass playing. Of course great songwriting & singing. So why my least favorite? He's smarmy. He seems to take himself a little too seriously... It's all relative though, I'd take him over Sting any day.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by AlanThomas:

I mean, theories abound that Pete Best was sacked because he was too popular with the locals (especially the girls) and was diverting attention from John and Paul: He was upstaging them.

That may be the theory (mostly postulated by Best himself, and his buddies), but I don't think that had anything to do with it. Best was fired because bottom line, his drumming sucked. And he didn't fit in with the others personally either.

 

Ringo already WAS a star in his own right at the time he joined the Beatles. He had a huge following of his own as the Hurricanes' drummer. Which really makes the "Best was fired because he upstaged the others" seem even more ridiculous than it would be if you've ever heard his drumming.

 

As for listing my favorite Beatles in order, fahgeddaboutit. Can't be done!

[jbote]

As Lee noted, Pete Best was sacked because he wasn't a good enough drummer to record...George Martin told the boys that Best would have to go if they were going to get anywhere. They were already pretty unhappy with Best's drumming at this point anyway and that was enough to bring in Ringo.

 

Impossible to rank the fabs in any favorite order...musically, they're inseparable!

[the.circular.motion.rub.it]

cmon yall, paul is totally biznitchin

 

awesome bassist, awesome vocalist, awesome songwriter/arranger/etcetera

 

and cmon, whats wrong with love?... bunch of cynics on this forum i tell ya...

 

its sorta weird how all the members of the band were/became like archetypes,,, like, have you ever compared your band to the beatles? im sure everyone has...

 

...

 

...right? right??

 

...

 

...uh, fine, me neither

 

(peace )

[Billster]

True Circular,

 

there's lots of talk about the "best" Beatle, but no one ever has debates about the "best" Kink or the "best" Rolling Stone (We all know it's Keith anyway )

[coyote]

On January 2 1964 Mersey Beat ran a story called 'The Ghost Of Ringo Haunts This Group.':

 

"Virtually every night of the week, Rory Storm & the Hurricanes perform at venues in the North. But something seems to be missing. Rory, Ty, Lu and Johnny seem to swing together, but the drummer always seems to be the odd one out.

 

"It has been this way since August 1962 when Richard Starkey left the group.

 

"Says Rory: 'Ringo was with us for more than four years. When the group first started, only ourselves and the Bluejeans were known on the Mersey scene - we were the first rock group to do the rounds.'

 

"At the time Ringo was a member of the group, the Hurricanes were regarded as one of Merseyside's leading outfits, and in the first Mersey Beat poll they were placed fourth.

 

"During the four or five years Ringo was with us he really played drums - he drove them. He sweated and swung and sung.

 

"'Ringo sang about five numbers a night, he even had his own spot - it was called 'Ringo Starrtime.' Now he's only a backing drummer. The Beatles' front line is so good he doesn't have to do much. This is not the Ringo Starr who played with us.

 

"Since August '62 the group has had a great deal of bad luck as far as finding a suitable replacement is concerned. Drummers from Preston, Newcastle, London and numerous Merseyside musicians have occupied the drum seat with the group - yet Ringo's place remains vacant.

 

"Gibson Kemp, Brian Johnson, Keef Hartley, Ian Broad, Trevor Morais - the names of the drummers who have appeared with the Hurricanes continues to lengthen.

 

"Without a suitable regular drummer the group can't practice or rehearse, and they can't gain the enthusiasm they once had."

[kylen]

I like all those guys well enough and would include George Martins' name as a member.

 

I was listening to the 'All Things Must Pass' CD last night and was really struck by how George Harrisons' words concerning Love, Unity, and Peace made me feel about the events in the World today - as well as my thoughts on the matter.

 

His thoughts on that, subject at least, are not dated one bit !

 

But yeah, I guess John usually gets credit for the grit, Paul the sugar and melodies, George the early rockabilly and unique slide, Ringo the fun guy...

 

It seems they have all had a hand in activism at some point but I don't know enough about Ringo on that topic.

 

There was a cool TV movie on a few years back - was it called 'Two of Us' ? where the story continued on as if John had not been murdered [by that idiot] and a fictional meeting between John and Paul in NYC are the focus of the story... that's a fun one. Also sad...

[fantasticsound]

I just wish John and Paul went ahead and crashed George's SNL appearance in which he attempts to claim Lorne Michaels' offer of... $3,000 to play on SNL...

 

That would've been an incredible night.

[Lee Flier]

Originally posted by kylen:

There was a cool TV movie on a few years back - was it called 'Two of Us' ? where the story continued on as if John had not been murdered [by that idiot] and a fictional meeting between John and Paul in NYC are the focus of the story... that's a fun one. Also sad...

Yeah, I remember that movie. Actually it was based on a real meeting between John and Paul in the mid 70's. Paul dropped by the Dakota while he was on tour and apparently he and John had a great time just hanging out and shooting the shit... then they watched SNL together, as Neil mentions, and saw where the SNL guys were offering the Beatles $3000 to get back together... LOL... and they actually considered going down to the studio and blowing everybody's minds, apparently. Had called a cab and everything. But they changed their minds at the last minute.

[AlanThomas]

Originally posted by Lee Flier:

Originally posted by AlanThomas:

I mean, theories abound that Pete Best was sacked because he was too popular with the locals (especially the girls) and was diverting attention from John and Paul: He was upstaging them.

That may be the theory (mostly postulated by Best himself, and his buddies), but I don't think that had anything to do with it. Best was fired because bottom line, his drumming sucked. And he didn't fit in with the others personally either.

 

Ringo already WAS a star in his own right at the time he joined the Beatles. He had a huge following of his own as the Hurricanes' drummer. Which really makes the "Best was fired because he upstaged the others" seem even more ridiculous than it would be if you've ever heard his drumming.

I didn't say that I bought the theory. I was trying to point out that I don't think drummer popularity was why they hired Ringo. That Ringo was so popular would tend to disprove the theory that Pete was fired because he was popular.

 

I think Ringo was probably hired despite his popularity not because of it. Like I said, "I think Ringo got hired because of his smart, delicate drumming (in contrast to Pete's ham fisted, no dynamics, bashing) and the fact that the others really came to like him but mostly because he would not challenge the others either musically or visually." I'll retract the last "but mostly" but other than that I'll stand by that...

 

Anyway, out of the surviving Beatles, Ringo is definately my favorite, so whatever the circumstances were then, I'm glad we have Ringo now!

[the.circular.motion.rub.it]

i think paul and ringo should team up with daltrey and townshend

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

maybe not...

 

(peace )

[kylen]

Originally posted by Lee Flier:

Actually it was based on a real meeting between John and Paul in the mid 70's. Paul dropped by the Dakota while he was on tour and apparently he and John had a great time just hanging out and shooting the shit...

Yeah, Yeah, Yeah - that's it - John gives Paul grief about the 'Silly Love Songs', I gotta dig that thing out !

[Mudcat]

Originally posted by the.circular.motion.rub.it:

i think paul and ringo should team up with daltrey and townshend

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

maybe not...

 

(peace )

You know Ringo's son Zak has been playing with the Who for the last several years. He's the best drummer they've had since Keith IMHO.

[Gruupi]

My opinions on this probably change from month to month but I'll approach it in an over/underated way.

 

Paul-has received alot of due credit and deserves it. Maybe the best rock singer of all time. I have friends in beatles bands and the hardest slot to fill is Paul. His songwriting musically is great and he can write in any style. Lyrically maybe not the best but melody and harmony wise just does so many nice things. Sure he has done some cheesy songs but I think he likes to explore all areas of popular music even if they are not currently fashionable.

 

George-underated as a guitar player and as a musician. Way underated as a songwriter. He has a destinct sound to his writing that I don't hear anyone else doing. Something is my current favorite Beatle song. Maybe not all of his songs were of high quality but several are great songs as good as any John or Paul songs.

 

Ringo-Underated as a drummer. Maybe he doesnt have Neil Peart chops but he played songs and helped make the songs what they were. Obviously his persona helped the band and his solo career. But I enjoy several of his post beatles hits just because they were fun to listen too.

 

John- A great talent but in my opinion but overated. A good shouting voice and wrote intersting lyric's. Musically was adequate but nothing groundbreaking. He had ideas but I tink it was Gearge Martin that really mader all the wierd stuff work. I think the journalists and critics like John because he was outspoken on political issues. Culturally he may have been important but musically he was just average. Don't get me wrong, I love John's music, but it wasn't as great as most critic's seem to think it is.

 

But overall the beatles were a sum of the part's. Paul probably could have been a star on his own. Maybe John, George and Ringo would have made it in the music business on their own but who knows what circumstances would have brought if they had not all been together.

[fantasticsound]

I have to agree with Gruupi on all but one point. I totally disagree that John was merely an average songwriter.

 

Go back and listen to Help!, Do You Want To Know A Secret? (George singing, but it's John's song.), In My Life, Norwegian Wood, Come Together... need I go on? The man had an incredible gift for using Occam's Razor, despite the complex arranging and editing done to their later work. The arrangements might be masterful, but these are not songs that are diminished when played on solo guitar or piano. Imagine, Watching The Wheels, and other solo works away from Sir George seem to connect back to earlier songs while at the same time evolving.

 

Whatever you think of John as a guitarist or as a singer (and I think he was a fine singer), his songwriting was incredible. It's no surprise George Harrison looked up to John as a mentor, despite very different personalities.

[Hound Dog]

To me, John's voice was kind of like a good tube amp pushed hard. He could get it worked up to where it broke up and distorted. While this is a natural gift that is hard to control, it fit the music and made the songs.

 

Examples:

 

Rock and Roll Music

Any Time At All

Dizzy Miss Lizzy

Twist and Shout

[A String]

I always thought that I could hear each aspect of The Beatles in their solo music. Listening to what each person came up with while solo, you can hear what sound they contributed to the original band. I would never claim that one was more important then another. I just wanted to see if people had favorites.

 

I also find the "John" controversy very interesting. I suppose he was one of those guys that you either loved or hated (Not that I wanted to use a word as strong as hate but just to coin a term).

[Teahead]

John Lennon is the greatest songwriter of his generation for my money. Coupled with the fact that his generation was probably the most distinguished of all, I find it hard to believe that anyone could refuse his talent. Especially considering his iconic originality and boundless charisma.

 

Some of his songs are so honest they hurt, where others are filled with fantasy and Lewis Carrol- isms. He always manages to make both styles equally real. His lyrics are amongst the best ever committed to music. The music he wrote was "simple" to some folks and "immediate" to others, but all the while I feel John was just trying to make you listen to his words.

 

You can tell where he was in his life, through his music. Since life experiences are so similar, this allows people to connect with his emotions and "step inside" his songs. That's what songs are for, escapism, storytelling or "word spreading." Songs do it better than books, movies or anything else, for me.

 

No doubt he was surrounded by great musicians in The Beatles, both spurring him on and showcasing the results in the best possible light. McCartney really is the anti-Lennon in many ways, which is what made The Beatles so great. He's an enormously gifted writer, but I find him as charmless as some find Lennon.

 

I guess that's why we could argue the toss all day here, The Beatles are a "super-group" of sorts. Four guys who could have made it on their individual talents, happened to come together.

I'm just thankfull they could work together for the time that they did, their combined efforts have left us the definitive music of our time.

 

One great qoute from John, a question was asked concerning Ringos eligability for the title of best drummer in the world, John quickly shot back, "He's not even the best drummer in The Beatles!"

 

Tea.

[Mudcat]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Teahead:

...One great qoute from John, a question was asked concerning Ringos eligability for the title of best drummer in the world, John quickly shot back, "He's not even the best drummer in The Beatles!"

 

Tea.

 

He also played some neat lead guitar stuff that get's overlooked ("You Can't Do That" and in the three way guitar duel on "The End" in particular).

[Werewolf by Night]

(Teahead- does this thread remind you of a conversation we once had?)

 

On the one hand, if I could be a Beatle, I'd (wanna) be George. That being said, I think that the most important member was _______ . (Add name of any of the four there.) The whole was definitely greater than the sum of its parts!

 

I've always enjoyed entertaining the thought of Ringo just being a cosmic enigma. He's just... Ringo. There had to be a Ringo, Ringo is a Universal Constant; and he stepped up and perfectly fit the assignment. We're just fortunate to have been along at roughly the same time. No matter what he's doing or where he's doing it, he's... just Ringo... !

 

And for Ringo-detractors... could anyone have done a better job? You can't just go and change the parts on any of those songs, they're already perfect covers of themselves!

 

Oh, by the way... I understand that John was suffering through a terrible cold and raw sore-throat when in session for "Twist and Shout", exhausted and frustrated, a stockpile of those "Fisherman's Friend"-type cough-drops near at hand on the piano in the studio; it was getting late on a long-dragging hard day when they did one last take and captured that perfect, classic rendition!

 

P.S.- Marianne! (As opposed to Ginger.)

[NMcGuitar]

Originally posted by Mudcat:

Originally posted by the.circular.motion.rub.it:

i think paul and ringo should team up with daltrey and townshend

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

maybe not...

 

(peace )

You know Ringo's son Zak has been playing with the Who for the last several years. He's the best drummer they've had since Keith IMHO.

AB-SO-LUTELY!!

[Mike Gug]

I like to organize them in alphabetical order.

[fantasticsound]

Originally posted by Caevan O'Shite:

...Oh, by the way... I understand that John was suffering through a terrible cold and raw sore-throat when in session for "Twist and Shout", exhausted and frustrated, a stockpile of those "Fisherman's Friend"-type cough-drops near at hand on the piano in the studio; it was getting late on a long-dragging hard day when they did one last take and captured that perfect, classic rendition!

If I remember my Beatles Recordings book description of this session correctly, there were two takes of Twist & Shout, but by the time John attempted the second it was clear he'd finally destroyed his voice for anymore decent takes.

 

I'll check at home.. unless.. Anyone else have your copy handy?

[Beatnik]

Well, Musically is really hard to say, to me The Beatles were one big monster with 4 heads, and when you are talking about Music made in the "Beatles era" by them, you can`t say one was better than the others.

 

Now telling who is your favorite Beatle is very subjective, because that is based on who of them have more philosophical things in common with you, so he and you maybe have a similar way of thinking, therefore you will be identified with one or more of them.

 

Now my subjective list based on my affinity with their personalities:

1- John: He was a rebel, what can I say, he was an intellectual man, searching for the truth. But he was also a real ARTIST, he always expressed his feelings through his words, music and his activities.

His VOICE: He is my favorite singer of all times

This is why I admire him.

 

2- George: Similar as John, but more introspective. To me he made the best post-Beatles music. Searching for the truth is the key word with George.

The answer: "All things must pass"

 

3- Ringo: I like more Ringo personality than Paul, I think is really hard to find someone who doesn`t like Ringo personality.

Excuse me but I won`t put him as #4, Just imagine they are tied.

 

3- Paul: Don`t like his personality , but I think he was the real musical genius of them all. He doesn`t have to make a big effort to make good music.

[pauldil]

I like all the Beatles equally. Now The Monkees, well, that's different...Mike, Micky, Peter, and Davy.