• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

All Things Must Beat. Share Anything Beatles!!

My favorite on MMT is Baby You're a Rich Man.


I won't say "favorite", but I really like "Blue Jay Way" on MMT. I really enjoy the musicality and the flanging effects of it. George said in an interview that it was literally about some non-Beatle friends driving, in fog, to a house in L.A. he was at. Yeah, right. Sure, George. "...and my friends have lost their way" is not at all about John & Paul, your creative oppressors, huh? OK, George, whatever you say. ;);)
.
 
This article contains a graphical guide to the carnage Capitol did.


There may have been a technological concern over "groove crowding" at first, but it really got out of hand. I suspect some xenophobic tendencies in Capitol rejecting the "Please Please Me" album in 1963, as well, which eventually compounded the so-called backlog "problem".

It doesn't single out any particular Beatle, but I too can imagine Paul being the most artistically offended, just like he was with Phil Spector's overproduced version of the "Let It Be" album.

I lived in blissful ignorance of this tragedy for decades. But, now, in retrospect, I feel cheated and lied to. Capitol Records was my favorite label because of The Beatles, and a few others. Now, I feel a greater empathy to John, Paul and George over what their Northern Songs publishing company did to them, and what many record companies did to many, many other aspiring artists. :sigh:


* These "butcher cover" links are just two of the many interesting things on your All Things Must Beat. Share Anything Beatles!! wiki page.
.
Thanks for sharing that article on the US Albums. That was very informative, interesting and helpful. The difference between the UK and US albums can be quite confusing!
 
I won't say "favorite", but I really like "Blue Jay Way" on MMT. I really enjoy the musicality and the flanging effects of it. George said in an interview that it was literally about some non-Beatle friends driving, in fog, to a house in L.A. he was at. Yeah, right. Sure, George. "...and my friends have lost their way" is not at all about John & Paul, your creative oppressors, huh? OK, George, whatever you say. ;);)
.

I always heard it as being literal. The music was always more interesting than his lyrics, at least until Abbey Road.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G-Dog
Thanks for sharing that article on the US Albums. That was very informative, interesting and helpful. The difference between the UK and US albums can be quite confusing!
Yes I agree.

I did my top 5 from the Aussie CDs I have which I assume means they are the same as the British releases.

BTW my first Beatles album was that Rock & Roll Music compilation mentioned in that article. It was more my style for The Beatles. Back as a teenager I preferred the Stones and the R&R Beatles over the later Beatles. I really learned about the Beatles songs from that cartoon series which was a ‘must see’ for me as a primary school kid. I hope they issue a dvd set of those… though perhaps I wouldn’t be so keen now I’m in my early 60s. :laugh:

As I’ve aged and mellowed (I guess) I prefer The Beatles over everyone (but love a wide variety of acts and genres now). My first real Beatles album was the White Album, which I guess accounts for its high ranking in my list. I also have multiple books on The Beatles and surrounding events.
 
Last edited:
... ... ... I really learned about the Beatles songs from that cartoon series which was a ‘must see’ for me as a primary school kid. I hope they issue a dvd set of those… though perhaps I wouldn’t be so keen now I’m in my early 60s. :laugh: ... ... .


I was in high school when The Beatles cartoon TV shows were broadcast from '65 to '67. But I was not "too grown up" to watch them for the actual Beatles musical content! Though the music progressed, the caricatures seemed to be stuck in "A Hard Day's Night". :roflmao:

* Another link on your All Things Must Beat. Share Anything Beatles!! wiki page.
.
 
Last edited:
John definitely brought his own talent and creativity to the band, but I think Paul really stepped up and became the leader and really held the band together.


I certainly agree. John definitely brought a great talent for straightforward rock & roll, his eccentric wordplay and his bold, even brash, leadership in the beginning. Paul brought his melodic music hall upbringing from his dad, his storytelling lyrics and, in the beginning, his almost shy politeness. George was the consummate guitarist with good vocals included, and Ringo the required steady timekeeper with good novelty vocals. They were too well matched a group for anyone else to compete!

Over time, though, I believe Paul developed more confidence and took on more leadership functions, especially after Brian Epstein's passing, while also growing musically and professionally. Meanwhile, John's admitted laziness took over, once they got rich & famous and, though he still loved his rock & roll, he added more introspection and mellowness into some of his songs. And George learned from them how to write his own songs.

Yes, Paul may have kept them together a bit longer than they might have gone if he hadn't kept calling them into the studio for the next album, and the next. But, inevitably, the exchange of leadership roles grated on them, not to mention George's growing, but continuously oppressed, compositions. Ringo, too, occasionally felt neglected.

In the beginning they were galvanized together as starving artists with a common goal of rock stardom. But, with that achieved, their individualites began to drive them apart. Then, regrettably, the legalities of splitting up, with all the financial bloodsuckers abounding, generated a rancor that took a very heavy toll on their intrinsic friendship. A very sad, but not unusual, tale. :oops:
.
 
Last edited:
I certainly agree. John definitely brought a great talent for straightforward rock & roll, his eccentric wordplay and his bold, even brash, leadership in the beginning. Paul brought his melodic music hall upbringing from his dad, his storytelling lyrics and, in the beginning, his almost shy politeness. George was the consummate guitarist with good vocals included, and Ringo the required steady timekeeper with good novelty vocals. They were too well matched a group for anyone else to compete!

Over time, though, I believe Paul developed more confidence and took on more leadership functions, especially after Brian Epstein's passing, while also growing musically and professionally. Meanwhile, John's admitted laziness took over, once they got rich & famous and, though he still loved his rock & roll, he added more introspection and mellowness into some of his songs. And George learned from them how to write his own songs.

Yes, Paul may have kept them together a bit longer than they might have gone if he hadn't kept calling them into the studio for the next album, and the next. But, inevitably, the exchange of leadership roles grated on them, not to mention George's growing, but continuously oppressed, compositions. Ringo, too, occasionally felt neglected.

In the beginning they were galvanized together as starving artists with a common goal of rock stardom. But, with that achieved, their individualites began to drive them apart. Then, regrettably, the legalities of splitting up, with all the financial bloodsuckers abounding, generated a rancor that took a very heavy toll on their intrinsic friendship. A very sad, but not unusual, tale. :oops:
.
Yes.
One thing I got from Let It Be was a what if? What if they took a break for a year or two to pursue other interests? George could have got his neglected songs out, and the others could also have done whatever they wanted. Then come back together as The Beatles.
It may have avoided the rancour. Or maybe it wouldn’t have. We will never know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G-Dog
Yes.
One thing I got from Let It Be was a what if? What if they took a break for a year or two to pursue other interests? George could have got his neglected songs out, and the others could also have done whatever they wanted. Then come back together as The Beatles.
It may have avoided the rancour. Or maybe it wouldn’t have. We will never know.

They seemed too eager to start doing new things. Paul especially. I love his solo work anyway though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedVee
John definitely brought his own talent and creativity to the band, but I think Paul really stepped up and became the leader and really held the band together.


I just heard an audio quote from Ringo on The Beatles Channel of Sirius XM Radio to the effect of, "yeah, Paul being the workaholic probably got us to put out more records than otherwise"! :thumbsup:

Mom bought our first Beatles album: The Beatles Second Album (US release...obviously) She watched them on Ed Sullivan with me too...


My mom managed a store that also sold records! December '63 she brought home the 45 rpm "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" and asked "if" I liked it. Wow! I didn’t have anything to compare it to, with my top ten 45s and a few Beach Boys & Ventures albums. She soon brought home the "Meet The Beatles" album and I got busy learning every song until they appeared on Ed Sullivan in February '64.​

They seemed too eager to start doing new things. Paul especially. I love his solo work anyway though.


I believe Paul was the least enthused about splitting up! His wife Linda said he just stayed drunk all the time at their secluded farm, until he started playing around with his home recorder. Fortunately that led to the first McCartney album, where he played all the instruments. Then, when the other three wanted him to delay releasing his album, first because Ringo had just released his "Sentimental Journey" (which didn't need any competition), then too Phil Spector's overproduced "Let It Be" was coming out with the movie next month!

Paul told 'em, not just "no" to the delay, but "xxxx, no", and released his album with the PR "interview" that people took as the official end of The Beatles, thus giving him the blame for the split! I read where Rolling Stone Magazine waged a personal and professional vendetta against Paul, preferring to laud John as the innocent misunderstood artiste, for many years!
.
 
Last edited:
Paul recovered well from the breakup is what I meant, even if he was the most reluctant initially.


Workaholics gonna work. Like haters gonna hate. Yeah, not everything Paul writes or performs is a masterpiece, so haters got plenty to hate. But he keeps on working and often makes a hit! I don't think he's ever taken a long hiatus, like the other ex-Beatles have. His is a long and very prolific career. :thumbsup:

Yet he has stated that Peter Jackson's "Get Back" movie(s) is(are) a great relief to him, to see them all actually having some fun now and then, as he thought he was the only one to remember, unlike the totally miserable time that the "Let It Be" movie portrayed. Some aspects of recovery can take a very long time. ;)
.