The bassline for Penny Lane

[shortscalesrule]

I'm not too familiar with the back stories on The Beatles recordings but I see on Spotify that there are remastered recordings. I was listening to the remastered "Something" and the bass track is definitely different from the original.
Still amazed at their music and the overall quality and sound of their songs.

Spotify often plays alternate versions of things. I don't know where they get them, but we have noticed it with several different artists. Also, I think some Beatles songs came in different versions (single vs. album, for example). For years I thought I was nuts because I was used to the single version of the guitar solo on Let It Be but would hear a different version on more recent media broadcasts. Finally I discovered that there is a single version and an album version, with different guitar solos.

 

[tindrum]

The best answer I've found was written by the engineer who recorded Paul's bass during the St. Pepper timeframe. From Geoff Emerick's book, Here, There and Everywhere: My Life Recording the Music of The Beatles (he was chief engineer on the Sgt. Pepper album), page 170:

"In turn, it was Paul's desire for perfection that enabled me to finally come up with a recording technique that yielded the ultra-smooth bass sound he and I had been pursuing for years. The key was that we would move his bass amp out of the baffles and into the center of the studio; I would then place a microphone about six feet away. With the studio empty, you could actually hear a little bit of the ambience of the room around the bass, which really helped; it gave the sound a certain roundness and put it into its own space. The sound we crafted effectively transformed the bass from a supporting rhythm instrument into a lead instrument."

He continues,

"There was one other unorthodox thing I would do with Paul's bass, and that occurred during the mixing stage. Most recording engineers begin a rock mix by getting the desired balance between the drums and bass--the all-important rhythm section--before adding in the other instruments and the vocals. I got in the habit of bringing the bass track in last. I'd essentially sculpt the bass sound around the other instruments so that you could hear every nuance. Not only is everything in proper balance, but all the individual components that go into the complex sound are carefully shaped to occupy their own sonic space and not interfere with one another."

Emerick covers many other technical aspects of capturing bass and other Beatles sounds. But in addition to his composition and technique, these two paragraphs seem to be the essence of Paul McCartney's Magic Bass tone that captured us all.

BTW, often the bass recording took place during the middle of the night when the studio was deserted. Just Paul and Geoff.

That book is absolutely amazing!

 

[LowendG]

The best answer I've found was written by the engineer who recorded Paul's bass during the St. Pepper timeframe. From Geoff Emerick's book, Here, There and Everywhere: My Life Recording the Music of The Beatles (he was chief engineer on the Sgt. Pepper album), page 170:

"In turn, it was Paul's desire for perfection that enabled me to finally come up with a recording technique that yielded the ultra-smooth bass sound he and I had been pursuing for years. The key was that we would move his bass amp out of the baffles and into the center of the studio; I would then place a microphone about six feet away. With the studio empty, you could actually hear a little bit of the ambience of the room around the bass, which really helped; it gave the sound a certain roundness and put it into its own space. The sound we crafted effectively transformed the bass from a supporting rhythm instrument into a lead instrument."

He continues,

"There was one other unorthodox thing I would do with Paul's bass, and that occurred during the mixing stage. Most recording engineers begin a rock mix by getting the desired balance between the drums and bass--the all-important rhythm section--before adding in the other instruments and the vocals. I got in the habit of bringing the bass track in last. I'd essentially sculpt the bass sound around the other instruments so that you could hear every nuance. Not only is everything in proper balance, but all the individual components that go into the complex sound are carefully shaped to occupy their own sonic space and not interfere with one another."

Emerick covers many other technical aspects of capturing bass and other Beatles sounds. But in addition to his composition and technique, these two paragraphs seem to be the essence of Paul McCartney's Magic Bass tone that captured us all.

BTW, often the bass recording took place during the middle of the night when the studio was deserted. Just Paul and Geoff.

I definitely think I can hear that ambience of the not-close-mic'd cab on some stuff, in particular Sgt. Pepper. But I feel like we're hearing more DI'd straight to the board (and hitting it hard) on later stuff, but admittedly I have not made a deep dive into all that history.
So many cool bass tones throughout the Beatles catalog. One of my faves is his Jazz Bass on "Glass Onion". Man, that clicky pick attack on that is so cool. I try and cop that vibe with my flatwound Jazz quite often.

 

[P. Aaron]

I don't have any insight to address your question but am I only the only one who thinks the first few notes, the way the kick in, are just freaking brilliant? Macca RULES.

We had a trumpet player who could hit those notes so we covered the song when I played in a horn band. I had to work with the drummer to cue the intro just right so I could play those first notes.

It's just a characteristic of a Beatles composition that fortunately wasn't cut.

 

[Fight4Bottom]

I second the enthusiasm for Geoff Emerick's book. It's a fascinating story, not just about recording The Beatles, but about how a young lad with a knack for tinkering got an entry level job at EMI and went up up up.

And it's probably been said a million times, but when I talk about The Beatles with friends, I invariably point out to them than when you're listening to one of their songs, or going over it in your head, the little hook that sticks in your brain or that cool riff you're humming to yourself is most likely one of Paul's bass lines. He was their lead bassist.

 

[salmon256]

One thing I always enjoy with The Beatles was their mindset towards gear at least Paul's. When asked what strings he used he said "Long shiny ones" and if I am not mistaken I believe he had a fight with Roto for claiming strings in his name he used. The Beatles is also on a lot of tracks pure studio magic at times. At this time most likely Paul was almost always using his Rickenbacker, and gonna just say they were most likely flatwounds or the stock Rick strings. Mean Mr Mustard has some hard fuzz on it if you wanna hear some Beatles fuzz bass.

So apologizes I can't be that much help but I always enjoy really The Beatles, they made me fall in love with music in 3rd grade and changed my life, still listen to them, while now I am mostly a Blues and Shoegaze guy these days, they still hold a place in my heart. I also enjoy the school of thought that while some basses do suit certain genres better, they used what they want, Paul used what he was gifted and he was gifted a Jazz bass later on for the white album and a Fender VI as well that Lennon used for Helter Skelter. If he wasn't given his Rickenbacker he probably still be using his Hofner (and he still did use it later on for their last album!)

 

[shortscalesrule]

One thing I always enjoy with The Beatles was their mindset towards gear at least Paul's. When asked what strings he used he said "Long shiny ones" and if I am not mistaken I believe he had a fight with Roto for claiming strings in his name he used. The Beatles is also on a lot of tracks pure studio magic at times. At this time most likely Paul was almost always using his Rickenbacker, and gonna just say they were most likely flatwounds or the stock Rick strings. Mean Mr Mustard has some hard fuzz on it if you wanna hear some Beatles fuzz bass.

So apologizes I can't be that much help but I always enjoy really The Beatles, they made me fall in love with music in 3rd grade and changed my life, still listen to them, while now I am mostly a Blues and Shoegaze guy these days, they still hold a place in my heart. I also enjoy the school of thought that while some basses do suit certain genres better, they used what they want, Paul used what he was gifted and he was gifted a Jazz bass later on for the white album and a Fender VI as well that Lennon used for Helter Skelter. If he wasn't given his Rickenbacker he probably still be using his Hofner (and he still did use it later on for their last album!)

I'm sure all y'all know this already, but in case you don't: Since bass guitar strings were hard to come by in early 60s Germany, Paul was known to swipe strings from the upright piano in the club they were playing in in Hamburg when he needed one.

 

[J Wilson]

Macca defaulted to playing bass after they let Sutcliffe go. So most of the time, his lines were 'busier' than might be expected as a guitar player, but you also need to bear in mind that The Bass Playing Book was just being written.

Consider his lines, and think of Carol Kaye or Joe Osborne's lines, much less Jamerson and Babbitt under the Motown sides. Former guitar players, jazz players knocking out rock and roll sessions to pay the bills, leaves us with a catalog of what to me are far more inventive charts and bass lines than we have today.

Not to mention Macca's lines under 'Penny Lane' or 'Something', Carol Kaye's 'Good Vibrations' part, and certainly Jamerson's twisting push and pull under Gladys Knight's 'Heard It Through the Grspevine' were VERY busy parts that still fit perfectly. Amazing.

 

[Supernaute]

Since this is a Paul thread, I must post the obligatory "favorite bass line" comment.

I can't say why I like this one best but it's just so perfect. Maybe it's just me.

 

[LowendG]

Consider his lines, and think of Carol Kaye or Joe Osborne's lines, much less Jamerson and Babbitt under the Motown sides. Former guitar players, jazz players knocking out rock and roll sessions to pay the bills, leaves us with a catalog of what to me are far more inventive charts and bass lines than we have today.

No kidding. I was just listening to Joe Osborne on the Grass Roots "Midnight Confessions"---there's a lot going on! Herbie Flowers too---he was really quite busy on many of those hits he played on.
I think part of it is as technology changed and people could start getting way more low end in their recorded music, bass started getting simpler as a result--you can't be playing those melodic busy parts with this huge massive low end sound--it just becomes a blur. The overtly simplistic and dumbed-down bass in today's "pop" music - whether its BG or synth - is the extreme end of it. Lots of music listeners today associate bass with "sub" bass, whatever instrument it's coming from--a BG, a synth, an 808, whatever.

 

[StereoPlayer]

I thought this was entertaining.

 

[Aussie Player]

Since this is a Paul thread, I must post the obligatory "favorite bass line" comment.

I can't say why I like this one best but it's just so perfect. Maybe it's just me.

And all played in one position. Its quiet easy if you listen to it. Almost a 10th fret (G) noodle.

 

[frankie5string]

By the time Penny Lane was produced they actually had Fender amps they could jack into at the studio. There were silver-faced amps in their arsenal by then, but they were smaller than the big Bassman Paul eventually got.
Abbey Road studios also miced a lot of stuff with U47s in those days, which had a mellow top-end but a peaky upper-midrange. That probably helped too. There wouldn't have been any Ampeg B15-style amps in the studio at that time.

 

[frankie5string]

And all played in one position. Its quiet easy if you listen to it. Almost a 10th fret (G) noodle.

Yes, and somewhere over the years Paul mentioned that for that sort of work, the Hofner had to be retuned so everything above the 5th fret was in tune in the studio. He had a choice - tune for below the 5th or above it depending on the song. The Ric cured that until he had the neck of his Hofner re-set.

 

[Aussie Player]

Yes, and somewhere over the years Paul mentioned that for that sort of work, the Hofner had to be retuned so everything above the 5th fret was in tune in the studio. He had a choice - tune for below the 5th or above it depending on the song. The Ric cured that until he had the neck of his Hofner re-set.

You're dead right. Hofner's can't bragg about their harmonics but bass players tended to stay in the bottom 5 back then so it was adequate for the time.

 

[frankie5string]

It's interesting to look at how the Beatles worked to quickly get away from the Mersey Beat sound. They used every influence they could get their hands on to do it, too.
Paul grew up listening to the piano-parlour music his parents liked.
Add John and George's affinity for American blues and early rock n' roll and it forced them onto a very creative detour around all of the Mersey Beat sounds.

It's very obvious if you compare their sound to Gerry and the Pacemakers. GP had a huge hit with "How Do You Do It" which was originally offered to, and rejected by, The Beatles and it's fairly obvious, but reluctantly tried it anyway:

 

[Michedelic]

By the time Penny Lane was produced they actually had Fender amps they could jack into at the studio. There were silver-faced amps in their arsenal by then, but they were smaller than the big Bassman Paul eventually got.
Abbey Road studios also miced a lot of stuff with U47s in those days, which had a mellow top-end but a peaky upper-midrange. That probably helped too. There wouldn't have been any Ampeg B15-style amps in the studio at that time.

Sorry, but no. I covered this in a post above. While they had the odd blond series Fenders here and there, perhaps a blackface(plus the Selmer Zodiac, an AC-30 equivalent), well documented photographically in the old Beatles Monthly magazine, their main amps remained Vox in the late '66/early '67 period when the single and Peppers was being recorded. The hybrid UL series had just been issued, and they used them live and in the studio.
Silverface Fenders did not appear until 1968, and as their relationship, via the deceased Brian Epstein, had ended with Vox, only then did they get outfitted with the American amps. It's all in Babiuk's book.

 

[frankie5string]

Sorry, but no. I covered this in a post above. While they had the odd blond series Fenders here and there, perhaps a blackface(plus the Selmer Zodiac, an AC-30 equivalent), well documented photographically in the old Beatles Monthly magazine, their main amps remained Vox in the late '66/early '67 period when the single and Peppers was being recorded. The UL series just been issued, and they used them live and in the studio.
Silverface Fenders did not appear until 1968, and as their relationship, via Brian Epstein, had ended with Vox, only then did they get outfitted with the American amps.

Right... My mistake.. so blonde Bassman horizontally or blackface by then?
Didn't they already have one of the large Showman amps by then?

There's also a lot of those modified Altec limiting amps on virtually every track, and those imparted a sound, too.

 

[Michedelic]

Right... My mistake.. so blonde Bassman horizontally or blackface by then?
Didn't they already have one of the large Showman amps by then?

There's also a lot of those modified Altec limiting amps on virtually every track, and those imparted a sound, too.

Blondes were phased out around 1964, and featured the smaller horizontal 2x12" cab. The slightly larger verticle(but still 2x12)cabs came in late '66 into '67, the Showman went vertical as well(plus going to two 15's, hence the "Dual Showman" name)with an even larger cab. Eventually, by the silverface era, Fender got a clue and went to 15's for the Bassman.
As late as the release of this song/video, they had the Vox UL gear on display, but as they were done with touring, it was just window dressing. Upon Epstein's death soon after, the connection with the company faded(plus, otherwise, their market share was being eroded by the rise of Marshall and the overall change in sound). CBS/Fender eventually seized the moment, and plied them with their all-new gear.

 

[Aussie Player]

It is truely a great thing to see so many people disecting Beatle material because they were so much more than just a pop band.
They were sound and tone exploration pioneers of their instruments capabilities and sound and tones in general. Masters of harmony and the mixing of complimentary melodies generated from novice but sincere exploration in what can be done.
We are so lucky to have it preserved on tape and disc. I grew up listening to them and still learn nuances and unusualness about their playing and recordings. Abosolute genius both individually and collectively.
And they were kids. All under 30 when it fell apart, as is normal human growth and independence.