The Beatles changed the world. We all know that. However, not all that change is necessarily for the better. The old phrase about every silver lining has a cloud comes into its own here. Let me explain. Ok, you’re a musician aiming for the big time in the early Sixties. Your job is to be part of a band, play live gigs, play well and hope that you’re discovered one day. Your job is NOT to write the songs you might record. Your job is NOT to have the first clue about how those songs might be recorded, or how they are musically arranged. Your job is not management. Well, I think a picture is emerging of what you the band member might expect on your magic carpet tide to fame and fortune. There are clear lines cut with regard to how the game works. Then we have the almighty big band of the modern pop era with the boys. Overnight everything has changed in terms of the role an ambitious young musician might have to master. If he wants to be taken seriously, he is going to have to learn to write songs, because it is a learned craft on top of an aptitude in my opinion – no one has a gift from the almighty on that one! Now if you fast forward to this point in time, a young musician will be expected (nay taken for granted) that he is a brilliant writer. If he is not, then he is somehow looked down on. I don’t know what ever happened to the concept of covering a song? Sure it still happens to a degree, but it is scoffed at not only by the industry, but listeners and critics alike. The “oh it’s just a cover” attitude reveals itself very quickly. I believe it still has its place. The Beatles themselves were fine exponents of the cover version, where they exploited the material to make it sound like THEIR version. That same young musician will be expected also to have production skills in their arsenal. Have you noticed that everyone is a “producer” these days? Most new and inexperienced artists have no conception of what production actually is. Experience is the key to it. You can take a song into the studio with an experienced producer and before you know it has become something totally different. Producer of the moment Rick Rubin’s recordings with Johnny Cash are a testament to that which is neat example of covering songs and injecting originality into them. Those songs gained a whole new resonance with that type of treatment. The Beatles are the measurable point where the line between artist and producer, player and engineer really begins to blur. The question has to be asked, does every new credible artist HAVE to be a great writer, a brilliant producer and engineer? I think not. I tend to think that artists who are of that calibre end up in some kind of self imposed alienation. I wonder what The Beatles catalogue might have sounded like without George Martin’s input? He was a very important part of the team and without him, things would be very different across the industry today I think. The problem is that he taught The Beatles well with regard to the art of the studio and before you know it the boys were tentatively taking some sessions with other artists on their own. The cat was out of the bag!
Whilst the Beatles freed the world of the Tin Pan Alley mentality and revolutionised the industry, they also saddled the following generations with the responsibility of becoming uber talented in many fields. It is now not good enough for today’s young artists to just be a good guitarist say; no he has to be a great lyric writer with the ability to write that killer top line melody. He has to fundamentally understand how that record will be constructed in the studio. He has to be able to arrange the song and then direct how for example those harmony groups are nailed down. He has to understand the technology. Further outside the box, he has to be able to understand that he is a product and not just that guitarist who can play a bit. In short he has to be savvy at all levels or his chances diminish. The Beatles showed the world a way; an early clue to the new direction as it were. Not everyone is a Beatle and nor should they be expected to be.
Sunday, 28 September 2008
Wednesday, 17 September 2008
PMC 7067/8
During recent months there seems to have been a bit of a renewed interest in the The Beatles album, given that it is now forty years since its release. On my first listen to the album many moons ago, I found it quite a difficult one. It has to be said though, that I was only nine years old when I did so! Even at that point though, I knew there were some classic songs on there, coupled with some not so classic ones (well, in my nine year old opinion. My grown up opinion has somewhat changed!). As I said, with all the recent interest in it, it begs the question; is the White Album the purest and most honest Beatles album of all? Further, could it possibly be a better album than Pepper?
The White album sounds like a relief to me in some ways. It’s like they were slightly sick of being at the cutting edge the whole time and just wanted to rock out, soak up the zeitgeist and just do what came naturally, rather than make it unique for the sake of it. Although being The Beatles, they still managed to be unique in any case as for them it was a totally natural thing to do with the ridiculous levels of creativity buzzing around that group at any one time. It sounds like a reaction to the previous year of momentous and trailblazing production. That kind of work in the studio must have taken a toll mentally – and so the Indian trip couldn’t have come at a better time one imagines. Space required and much needed no doubt. It gave them the chance to “get it all out” and recharge the Beatle batteries. This is slightly more than apparent from one listen to the excellent Purple Chick deluxe 12 disc set of relevant materials.
What I love about the White album is that there is a sense of the home made about it, and there is great atmosphere in some of the recordings. Martha My Dear certainly doesn’t cut any new ground but it has that log fire burning in the background kind of quality to it and it isn’t a million miles away from one of the directions Mr McCartney would be composing along come the Seventies. I’m thinking You Gave Me The Answer or My Baby’s Request, for example. As I said, The Beatles are also soaking up influences around them with much heavier guitars and less microphone separation apparent in a lot of the songs – think of Yer Blues or Helter Skelter. These are fantastic examples of a band quite obviously enjoying themselves just being a band. The album is simply dotted with classics and in my opinion they are just as revolutionary as Pepper because it’s like the opposite side of the mirror. The band was using Abbey Road to the full with all three of the studios in use at the same time on some occasions. From the sleeve to the content it reeks of class and honesty. However, I am sure there are songs on the album which are not that popular amongst fans. The usual suspects might include Rocky Racoon, Don’t Pass Me By or dare I say it Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da (which certainly isn’t one my own favourites – but it has its place nevertheless)
Of course a big talking point has always been Revolution No 9. I think if you look at it as a “song” included on a Beatles album, then it tends to defy that description. However, if you look at it as an experiment or a soundscape like some kind of audio painting, then its relevance is obvious in that it’s another example of the band pushing the barriers. It is also a monument to drug induced over indulgence of course. It is however not unlike some of the Liverpool Soundcape album! Paul was the walrus on that one and has said many times that he was the avant garde one in the band originally. So, in some respects Revolution No9 is an example of Paul kicking the ball and John running with it.
The tension in the band is evident on this record too. For example, Paul is playing more drums than required really and we all know why that was. The seeds of their demise are in evidence on this record but even in the face of that, they still managed to push out tracks which left the opposition standing. A cursory look down the track list makes their genius obvious. In many ways there isn’t a bad track on the album and I disagree with George Martin’s opinion that it would have made a great single album – it’s just a great album – period! If the goal was to make another Pepper or Revolver type album then yes, he’s probably right. They would return to that type of album-making with Abbey Road. Somehow though, that doesn’t seem to be the point of the White Album. I love the honesty of the record and the fact that it’s not wearing any make up, that there is the odd blemish on there and that the production is simpler, although it has to be said that you get the idea that the band were just shattered by the end of the production process.
Although it was stated on Let It Be that it was a “new phase” Beatles album, I believe that it was this album that was the new phase sound. Straight up, go ahead, punch you right on the nose rock n roll. I think pound for pound, dollar for dollar, the White album is an amazing piece of work. It’s cynical, quirky, full of humour, stripped back to basics, honest, musically brilliant. It’s audacious and out on a limb. It’s envelope stretching top of the heap brilliance. For me the White album is genius. Four sides, four guys and one band. It strips away the pomp and pretension of the previous (and wondrous) year to reveal a band very much at odds with itself but still shaking nevertheless and blowing everything else away.
The White album sounds like a relief to me in some ways. It’s like they were slightly sick of being at the cutting edge the whole time and just wanted to rock out, soak up the zeitgeist and just do what came naturally, rather than make it unique for the sake of it. Although being The Beatles, they still managed to be unique in any case as for them it was a totally natural thing to do with the ridiculous levels of creativity buzzing around that group at any one time. It sounds like a reaction to the previous year of momentous and trailblazing production. That kind of work in the studio must have taken a toll mentally – and so the Indian trip couldn’t have come at a better time one imagines. Space required and much needed no doubt. It gave them the chance to “get it all out” and recharge the Beatle batteries. This is slightly more than apparent from one listen to the excellent Purple Chick deluxe 12 disc set of relevant materials.
What I love about the White album is that there is a sense of the home made about it, and there is great atmosphere in some of the recordings. Martha My Dear certainly doesn’t cut any new ground but it has that log fire burning in the background kind of quality to it and it isn’t a million miles away from one of the directions Mr McCartney would be composing along come the Seventies. I’m thinking You Gave Me The Answer or My Baby’s Request, for example. As I said, The Beatles are also soaking up influences around them with much heavier guitars and less microphone separation apparent in a lot of the songs – think of Yer Blues or Helter Skelter. These are fantastic examples of a band quite obviously enjoying themselves just being a band. The album is simply dotted with classics and in my opinion they are just as revolutionary as Pepper because it’s like the opposite side of the mirror. The band was using Abbey Road to the full with all three of the studios in use at the same time on some occasions. From the sleeve to the content it reeks of class and honesty. However, I am sure there are songs on the album which are not that popular amongst fans. The usual suspects might include Rocky Racoon, Don’t Pass Me By or dare I say it Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da (which certainly isn’t one my own favourites – but it has its place nevertheless)
Of course a big talking point has always been Revolution No 9. I think if you look at it as a “song” included on a Beatles album, then it tends to defy that description. However, if you look at it as an experiment or a soundscape like some kind of audio painting, then its relevance is obvious in that it’s another example of the band pushing the barriers. It is also a monument to drug induced over indulgence of course. It is however not unlike some of the Liverpool Soundcape album! Paul was the walrus on that one and has said many times that he was the avant garde one in the band originally. So, in some respects Revolution No9 is an example of Paul kicking the ball and John running with it.
The tension in the band is evident on this record too. For example, Paul is playing more drums than required really and we all know why that was. The seeds of their demise are in evidence on this record but even in the face of that, they still managed to push out tracks which left the opposition standing. A cursory look down the track list makes their genius obvious. In many ways there isn’t a bad track on the album and I disagree with George Martin’s opinion that it would have made a great single album – it’s just a great album – period! If the goal was to make another Pepper or Revolver type album then yes, he’s probably right. They would return to that type of album-making with Abbey Road. Somehow though, that doesn’t seem to be the point of the White Album. I love the honesty of the record and the fact that it’s not wearing any make up, that there is the odd blemish on there and that the production is simpler, although it has to be said that you get the idea that the band were just shattered by the end of the production process.
Although it was stated on Let It Be that it was a “new phase” Beatles album, I believe that it was this album that was the new phase sound. Straight up, go ahead, punch you right on the nose rock n roll. I think pound for pound, dollar for dollar, the White album is an amazing piece of work. It’s cynical, quirky, full of humour, stripped back to basics, honest, musically brilliant. It’s audacious and out on a limb. It’s envelope stretching top of the heap brilliance. For me the White album is genius. Four sides, four guys and one band. It strips away the pomp and pretension of the previous (and wondrous) year to reveal a band very much at odds with itself but still shaking nevertheless and blowing everything else away.
Tuesday, 9 September 2008
Surely not?
I don’t normally go down this road and quite frankly don’t really want to get into this but I do feel compelled to make a short comment regarding Paul’s ex wife’s plan to write a book! Sky News and other sources report that she is planning to write a book about a famous model who marries “the biggest rock star in the world” with insiders claiming that it will be released as a work of fiction – for which incidentally, I believe she has qualification in abundance.
I mean, come on here!
According to Sky, commentators have said it could help her “side step the court order banning her from discussing her marriage to Paul”. It simply beggars belief that she would want to do anything else but disappear with the divorce booty and live on a very small and tiny island, close the door behind her and hope that the world would forget her. But no! Instead, a good idea would be to write a thinly veiled story about her short and lucrative time with the Beatles bass player! I don’t mean to sound unkind but my hope is that if such a book is planned and subsequently published that it sinks without trace. Unfortunately, in the world we live in, such a book will fly off the shelves at speeds hitherto unmeasured. I was never a fan of the lady from the moment I clapped eyes on her and thought I’d seen it ALL when I watched her live TV appearance on GMTV couch just before the divorce proceedings started in earnest, but this takes it to a new and even frightening level. Paul must be beside himself. She appears to be a loose cannon and worse, a loose cannon with huge funds intent on revenge.
I pretty sure that Paul (like everyone else) is no saint but I’m also pretty sure he just doesn’t deserve the kind of outcome and publicity that his ex wife helped him achieve though I do have faith that most people will see such a publication for it's true value.
I mean, come on here!
According to Sky, commentators have said it could help her “side step the court order banning her from discussing her marriage to Paul”. It simply beggars belief that she would want to do anything else but disappear with the divorce booty and live on a very small and tiny island, close the door behind her and hope that the world would forget her. But no! Instead, a good idea would be to write a thinly veiled story about her short and lucrative time with the Beatles bass player! I don’t mean to sound unkind but my hope is that if such a book is planned and subsequently published that it sinks without trace. Unfortunately, in the world we live in, such a book will fly off the shelves at speeds hitherto unmeasured. I was never a fan of the lady from the moment I clapped eyes on her and thought I’d seen it ALL when I watched her live TV appearance on GMTV couch just before the divorce proceedings started in earnest, but this takes it to a new and even frightening level. Paul must be beside himself. She appears to be a loose cannon and worse, a loose cannon with huge funds intent on revenge.
I pretty sure that Paul (like everyone else) is no saint but I’m also pretty sure he just doesn’t deserve the kind of outcome and publicity that his ex wife helped him achieve though I do have faith that most people will see such a publication for it's true value.
Tuesday, 2 September 2008
Not an ounce of fat on it really!
It’s always good to be back home after a couple of weeks going stir - crazy in the studio which (dear reader) is where I’ve been hiding for the last while. Meeting new musicians when I’m working, I’m always being asked about my Rickenbacker guitar. Oh, you must be a Beatle fan…and following with (alarming regularity)….er.. so what’s your favourite tune? I really hate being asked that because I never know what to say! I seem to go through periods of liking the early stuff and then switching to the later or middle periods without thinking about it. The real answer is that I just love them all really, but it’s on a sliding scale. It does beg the question though, what songs do fans NOT like? I tend to think that they are all kind of classic in their own way. Even the weaker ones - if there is such a thing! I’ve discussed in detail before the boys choices for B sides and how strong they were, so it’s quite difficult to pick one out that I’m not too fond of. “What You’re Doing” for example isn’t a favourite, but even with that there is musical growth in evidence in the drum part…not quite ‘Ticket to Ride’, but leading the way with a drum riff in any case. Chains or From Me To You are good examples of tracks I might fast forward if I’m listening, but that doesn’t mean I don’t like them…I just can’t really be bothered with them sometimes, if you know what I mean? There doesn’t seem to be much of a surprise in them anymore. What I mean by that is that although I’m familiar with every track, some still catch you unawares and sort of take you by surprise, don’t you think? And some tracks have other reasons for forwarding. For example, I can’t really listen to It’s All Too Much because it’s not that great sound wise to my headphone ears.
It is yet another measure of the band being bigger, collectively, than each of the individuals that you can probably find lots of examples of songs you’d avoid listening to. In fact in some cases, for some people even whole albums bite the dust! Whilst I appreciate Yoko for what she is (and isn’t) for example, I find most of her material unappetising. Lots of the material that she recorded with John remains only slightly interesting BECAUSE of John’s involvement. I am not really a big Yoko chap though and some of the same could be levelled at the rest of boys’ solo work. Paul’s work remains pretty strong, but he has had his moments. Strange thing with Paul’s stuff is that I tend not to like it on first hearing and then it slowly infects you until you do like it. But, I didn’t really like Paul’s last album that much and thought that Chaos was his strongest release since Flaming Pie (which is a McCartney classic in my opinion). John’s stuff was up and down. Genius doesn’t cover some of the earlier material he put out though. Plastic Ono Band is flawless and is just raw bottled fire, but Sometime in NY City has moments of raised eyebrows all round. George and Ringo have much more to forward on when listening. Although I have to say a lot of George’s work has got better over the years to my ears. Maybe that just reflects me growing up and understanding the songs a little better? Ringo has only made one pretty good album…although I’m sure many Rich fans would disagree. Again though, sometimes I just want to listen to them in the BBC phase! Isn’t that the great thing with this band? That you CAN do that!
What songs do you never listen to or avoid? I would love to hear what everyone thinks on this.
It is yet another measure of the band being bigger, collectively, than each of the individuals that you can probably find lots of examples of songs you’d avoid listening to. In fact in some cases, for some people even whole albums bite the dust! Whilst I appreciate Yoko for what she is (and isn’t) for example, I find most of her material unappetising. Lots of the material that she recorded with John remains only slightly interesting BECAUSE of John’s involvement. I am not really a big Yoko chap though and some of the same could be levelled at the rest of boys’ solo work. Paul’s work remains pretty strong, but he has had his moments. Strange thing with Paul’s stuff is that I tend not to like it on first hearing and then it slowly infects you until you do like it. But, I didn’t really like Paul’s last album that much and thought that Chaos was his strongest release since Flaming Pie (which is a McCartney classic in my opinion). John’s stuff was up and down. Genius doesn’t cover some of the earlier material he put out though. Plastic Ono Band is flawless and is just raw bottled fire, but Sometime in NY City has moments of raised eyebrows all round. George and Ringo have much more to forward on when listening. Although I have to say a lot of George’s work has got better over the years to my ears. Maybe that just reflects me growing up and understanding the songs a little better? Ringo has only made one pretty good album…although I’m sure many Rich fans would disagree. Again though, sometimes I just want to listen to them in the BBC phase! Isn’t that the great thing with this band? That you CAN do that!
What songs do you never listen to or avoid? I would love to hear what everyone thinks on this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
