The Beatcomber

What to say?

2009-06-26T01:53:00.000-07:00

When all is said and done, what is left is an amazing body of work which will still be standing as tall as it was on the day it was created for as long as music is listened to. As an artist, Michael Jackson was unique and impossible to ignore. May his soul be at peace.

Number 9, Number 9, Number 9

2009-04-07T10:13:00.000-07:00

So, according to Sky News, here in the UK The Beatles albums will be released this year on September 9 to coincide with the release of The Beatles: Rock Band game.
The Applelites have finally got their finger out and may just have helped to save the band’s reputation (in some respects). For I believe that The Beatles name has been slightly tarnished over the last few years and quite frankly it has been an embarrassment to them that their outstanding and distinguished catalogue hasn’t been released in solid gold versions let alone the relatively simple task of re-mastering the audio! Apparently it has taken four years to put this together? I ask the question, what have they been doing? I mean it only took the boys seven to write, record and release the stuff in the first place! I will say however that I cannot wait to see the package as there are some mouthwatering prospects in store. I am particularly intrigued by the ten disc Beatles In Mono project which will stand alongside the fourteen disc set. This is something we have all clamoured for since the discs were released back in 1987. It is shocking that they haven’t been available (legally) since before now. I believe that this is the absolute core of the band’s sound. It is how the vast majority of their records were sold. It is how the vast majority of the records were mixed and it is one of the main reasons they became popular. Stereo ripped the heart and soul out of those recordings, there is no doubt about that at all in my mind. So, to get the chance to hear these recordings straight from the master, shined up to a shiny thing with today’s powerhouse technology and perhaps more importantly to play it back on today’s brilliant players, is a prospect that I for one cannot wait for.
There is a downside to all of this though.
The fact is that there can’t be much more in the can for the band and so we might be close to the actual end of the road, release wise, and it may even be part of the reason why it has taken so long to get to this point, who knows? So we may as well enjoy it as it could be the last of the really big noises The Beatles can make and it comes as something of a relief. Whilst I did kinda nearly enjoy watching the Love documentary, I definitely won’t enjoy the game, because I am not interested in it even from a nosey parker point of view. It is just not what it’s about for me.
The other zillion dollar question for those interested of course is will we see a digital release online? I have been particularly excited by the prospect that the Beatles will take matters into their own hands in this department as it once more will elevate their status beyond the norm and it shows that the band won’t be pushed around by the biggest boy in the playground. It’s a separate issue to what I’m talking about here, but why should artists be held to ransom by the other apple? So, go Beatles, go!

All of that said, fans will ALWAYS want more and hey, I’m no different.

I’ve got two words for you - Hollywood and Bowl!
So, if you’re going to do it, do it absolute Apple!

George Burton's Record Session with Steve Marinucci

2009-02-18T00:12:00.000-08:00

This week's edition of George Burton's Record Session features an interview with Abbey Road website king Steve Marinucci. Steve talks about some of his favourite records and it's not all about the Beatles! Details about the show can be found here. The show will be played out on two other stations over the next few weeks and I will post info here about that when the time comes. Enjoy!

And now...here they are!

2009-02-10T02:17:00.000-08:00

The boys appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show in 1964 is iconic. It’s right up there with the images of the Beatles getting off planes, the suits and the haircut. The impact is hard to understand today when we live an almost science fiction world with instant communications across phone lines and the internet. A world where it’s easy to post moving images up in the next five minutes and for the rest of that world to get access to them. What is more important than the appearance itself is the crater impact of it. I believe it was that single show that made The Beatles untouchable. By the time they finished playing All My Loving, the game was up! From that moment they couldn’t escape from success. All of the development in the preceding years of playing for hours on grimy stages all over Liverpool and Hamburg and then in the wider communities of Britain and Europe would culminate in this polished and irresistible performance. It’s not just the show of course. One has to look at their appearance at the airport. It is a slightly bemused Beatles who realise that they are “on” when they are at that famous press conference. They grabbed the opportunity and took it for all it was worth, but not in an obvious way. Like I say, they appear to be taken slightly by surprise by what meets them. Life would never be the same again for them. From here on in they would be carving out the route that few would follow. They would go on to define what pop would become from this platform. However, you don’t get the impression from any of the source films of the time, that they expected this. The Maysles film is I think the best Beatle film of all. It just captures that first US visit so perfectly. It’s the film of the dream ticket for musicians who want to make it big. It’s the measurement of that success. How many UK bands have tried to do it since? Perhaps more than the seventy three million who tuned into the Ed Sullivan Show!! The point about the Beatles at that point is that although it’s obvious that they are working the press rooms, the radio stations, the photographers and so on, they are not forcing it. That is one of the qualities I think endeared them the American public. They are genuine and real. There isn’t a hint of the pretentious about them. By the time they hit the States, it was game over. I think you also have to look at the often mentioned ‘post-JFK’ state that the US was in. After all of the optimism of that Presidency’s beginning, the impact of his assassination is still difficult to comprehend – even for a 21st century boy here in Blighty. So, when this breezy, striking, long haired, talented, self contained, black suited outfit from Liverpool drops by the Nation, as if by accident almost, it would seem that the US was “taken by enlarge” in a kind of Rutle way, if you know what I mean?
I believe that the Ed Sullivan Show appearance by The Beatles is one of the most important moments not only in rock’n’roll history but as part of the development of the modern world. When you look at the globalisation of the entertainment industry following these events, you have to say that it was The Beatles who lit that torch. The whole British Invasion was sparked by that single appearance. Swinging London, James Bond and the whole Sixties was lit up by that appearance. The chances are that all of the above would have happened somehow anyway, but without that show maybe not quite in the same way. And you know it bears thinking about that following these ground shaking events, Paul McCartney went back to his tiny bedroom in Forthlin Road and somehow tried to comprehend what had just happened, and perhaps more interestingly ponder upon what might happen next. What a trip!

George Burton's Record Session with guest Gerry Campbell.

2009-01-27T00:45:00.001-08:00

"When I was at school, we used to get together in each others houses, bringing along all our latest records which were either bought, borrowed or nicked! It was a case of bringing something to play to your mates that you thought they would love. Each week I aim to have a guest who will bring some records for us and tell us why they picked them!

read more | digg story

Revolution

2009-01-19T23:16:00.000-08:00

As a child of the Sixties I’m very excited about the possibilities of Barack Obama’s Presidency. I have no Beatle comment today. I just wanted to make a brief statement to wish the people of the United States the very best of luck for the future at this time. I have nothing but good feelings about the Obama administration but I also realise that he has one of the most difficult jobs ahead. However, this is a bright man surrounded by bright people and when we look back at this point in history, I’m optimistic that we will see that there was an actual change in the direction this world has been taking. I’m sure I speak for most people when I say that we ALL wish him and his family the very best. It’s food for thought but, you know at the time I was born, the Civil Rights movement was in full swing and a little over forty years up the line the tide has turned, common sense has prevailed and genuine hope returns to the world.
Change can and does happen.

Peace and hope for the future.

Jan. 19, 1994 - Paul speaks at Lennon Hall of Fame induction

2009-01-19T12:20:00.001-08:00

On this date in Beatle history.

read more | digg story

Beatle news briefs: Beatles reunion story has the wrong Spin

2009-01-15T23:59:00.001-08:00

Beatle news roundup

read more | digg story

Beatle news: Howard Stern, 'The View' and Yoko Ono

2009-01-14T23:03:00.001-08:00

Beatle news roundup 1/15/09

read more | digg story

King John?

2009-01-14T11:50:00.001-08:00

Have a look at this short article first....

I want to say straight off here, I am not particularly a fan of Bono or Bob Geldof. I admire what Geldof has achieved and I can take or leave Bono in any circumstances. However, Julia Baird reckons that people like Bono and Bob Geldof have only been able to take centre stage on the activism front because John isn’t here any more. It’s debatable in my opinion that anyone could put Geldof in the shadows! There is a man who won’t be told. It is true however that he is not unlike John in some senses. It’s probable that John was one of Geldof’s role models, although I don’t think his actions were taken just to be like him, like some sort of tribute act. Geldof acted on instinct and out of the same human decency and awareness that is inherent in most people, just as John did before him.
What is certainly more interesting to contemplate is to imagine what John’s role might have been in the Live Aid campaign, or indeed in the post 9/11 world we live in today. Sure, I reckon he’d have plenty to say, but would he have done so? It is my opinion that he would have been heartily involved in quite a few of the big issues that have occurred over the years since he passed. However, let’s get John into some perspective. He was an extraordinary and remarkable man on many levels and there is no doubt that when he talked, the world listened.

Nevertheless some of Julia’s quotes are difficult to second.

It feels to me like Geldof somehow just couldn’t help himself, as if he couldn’t keep his mouth shut on certain issues, if you know what I mean? In other words, an instinctive reaction to what he began to uncover in Africa. Bono, it seems is slightly more controlled in exactly which issues he gets involved in although there is still the sense that he is driven (at the core of it) by the right motive. This is a man using his very public position to raise awareness of issues which otherwise might be pushed under the carpet. I would say however that without the worldwide success of the Live Aid concert and his role in it, it is uncertain how much of that type of stuff Bono would have been able to get involved in. In any case, all of the high profile political manoeuvring that any of the three men got involved in didn’t exactly harm their public persona did it? The latter applying in particular to Geldof and Bono in particular. All credit to them for sticking with the programme as it were. Again, I think Bono would give John credit for “rock-stars” getting political and using their position in a positive way.
Reading the article one gets the sense that Julia Baird somehow can’t see past John and nurses a certain bitterness that others have picked up his mantle. The reality is that the world doesn’t depend on the Beatles opinions any more. John’s comments may be given some sort of extra attention because of the regard he is held in today, but in reality he would just be another rock star waxing lyrical about something “we” should care about. Yes, John was a great man, an amazing wit and an cosmic uber intelligence, but he was a songwriter at the end of the day and the world just doesn’t listen to songwriters in the way that it used to does it? Including Bono and Geldof! For their part, they have never let go of the original ideal. It is now twenty years plus that they have been banging on the same drum, so one has to give them that credit. Julia leaves us with the assertion that “the two of them together don’t make John, in my opinion”.
Er….and…er…your point is?
Further she is "sure he would have been against the war in Iraq and various other things” and that "he would have been campaigning, protesting and marching.”
I’m sure she is bang on the money that he would have been against that and any other war, but would it have been to the same extent as it was during the Vietnam war? I have my reservations about that. John would be a much older and mellower man by this point, so would he have gone out with one fist in the air and a banner in the other? Mm…again, I have my doubts about the marching thing, but he may have taken a more measured approach to protesting and would probably have used the internet to the advantage of his cause rather than hitting the streets.
The gist of the article is that Bono and Geldof ain’t John Lennon and that the two of them combined don’t make a single John. Well, that is right in many respects but the point is, are they trying to be John? No, they are not. John isn’t and wasn’t the “king of the world” for all time; then, now and forever. There is always going to be someone bigger than you in the playground, someone who will take the ball away from you and run with it.

Beatle news - Jan. 13 -- Beatle-'American Idol' connection

2009-01-14T00:44:00.001-08:00

Beatle news roundup for Jan.13

read more | digg story

Exclusive: Ringo replies to 'website silence' stories

2009-01-13T09:04:00.001-08:00

Exclusive statement from Ringo.

read more | digg story

Beatles history -- January 12 -- 'Don't mention it, Ringo!'

2009-01-12T11:23:00.001-08:00

Beatle history roundup

read more | digg story

Beatle news briefs: Beatle movie actor charms audiences

2009-01-12T00:06:00.001-08:00

Beatle news roundup 1/11/09

read more | digg story

Aaron Johnson signed to play young John Lennon in new film

2009-01-08T23:25:00.001-08:00

Beatle news roundup for 1/8/09

read more | digg story

Downloads?...pah!

2009-01-08T08:13:00.001-08:00

A belated Happy New Year to everyone…I’ve been stuck in the studio recording over the holidays and am just getting the chance to surface now! Hope you all had a happy holiday.

I was interested to read Paul’s comments about the i-tunes situation, which led me to wonder just how many industrial Beatle fans care about when the catalogue will be available on the service? I, for one do not give a flying monkey about it! Let me tell you why I don’t care and what I’d prefer to see.
Firstly, the download thing: Yes, I love the technology and convenience of being able to download music because it is instant. You don’t have to travel anywhere to pick up a reasonable sounding file, so for me it’s ok for the less important purchases.
I can just sit in front of my computer and peruse at my leisure. I don’t have to sit in the car, bus or train. I can just download, pop it in the media player of my choice and there it is…sounding….all mp3-ish with no artwork – great eh? In a word, it does a job. No more and no less. In terms of sound quality, it’s not the same, but it IS the modern equivalent of the cassette to me. I really hate the sound of mp3’s and/or anything else close by, like the itunes format. Another point not to like about i-tunes is the hassle of conversion. I bought an album by The Paramounts (who would go on to become Procul Harum) from i-tunes and it was a royal pain right in the neck. I wanted to play it on other devices you see! My punishment was then locating a suitable conversion programme, installing it on my machine, learning how to use said software, then converting the music to the format I wanted and then …well…do you know what? I just couldn’t be bothered playing the album after that. I just wanted to go and lie down in a darkened room, speak to my analyst and try to get over the trauma of it all. I just want to play the music! I DON’T WANT TO PLAY THE I-TUNES GAME. Am I the only one here with this view? I’ve said it before…I used to go to the record store, buy the record or cd, pop it in the player or on the turntable and BANG! … “It was twenty years ago today…”
Music to my ears…instantly!
No software upgrades, installs, learning curve, file conversion. Nothing but sweet music, sweet music.
Which brings me to this issue of the Beatle catalogue on i-tunes. Let me say right off. It is emperor’s new clothes syndrome right here in my opinion folks. Does anyone actually care about the availability of Beatles music for i-tunes? What? You can’t take the CD’s and convert it yourself? Why would anyone want to degrade the quality of the music? Mp3’s and the like are a lossy format and are less than the full dime. I can spot a low quality mp3 from fifty paces. They sound terrible to my ears. If you don’t know the difference, try taking any CD track you like and convert one to say…128mbps MP3 and do an A and B comparison. The high end is all crunchy and sounds like the aforesaid bad old days of the cassette to me. Even the so called higher end ones are detectable.
But I digress.
What I want from the Beatles is NOT availability on i-tunes, or acrobatic shows in places I am extremely unlikely to get to or indeed any of that nonsense. No. What I want is cleaned up, re-mastered, extended releases of the catalogue which changed my life thank you very much. I don’t want drippy “file” versions of the most important catalogue in popular music, I want full fat, all singing and all dancing physical releases which I can play ANYWHERE. I will choose how I want to access that material and what conversion processes I want to put it through to suit my life. If I want to make all the good work the musicians, writers, producers, engineers and mastering engineers sound less than good, then I will choose that route. When you have the physical disc, you have the best range of choices from there. Keep it as is for your CD player at full bandwidth quality, re-convert it for your portable or whatever.
Further, whilst I have no doubt about the impact The Beatles catalogue will make when it becomes available online, the fact is that most of the horses have already bolted. At this point they’ve hedged their bets and held on to the money too long. The race is over already. The Beatles should have been leading the way when the online thing started, not following the pack, which is what they will be doing now. Most of the modern world just won’t care about the releases. As for the Beatles core audience? They want the shiny new improved catalogue with a few extra bells on top for good measure. No more, no less.
Did I say Happy New Year?

McCartney to share his 'Amoeba's Secret' on CD

2009-01-08T00:51:00.001-08:00

Beatle news roundup for 1/7/09

read more | digg story

Close Abbey Road?

2008-11-23T01:10:00.000-08:00

I was in Abbey Road Studio One earlier this week for a music industry gathering of performers and was struck yet again by the personality of the room. It’s such a big room and so many things have happened in it. Not least of all is the televising of All You Need Is Love. For whatever reason I just couldn’t get the images of it out of my head when I was supposed to be listening to some of the presentations and speeches from the event I was attending. Take a Beatle fan into Abbey Road Studio One and it’s pretty much impossible for that fan to be thinking about anything else other than the thought that you are inside one of the most guarded Beatle sites in the world. Not only the Beatles, I might add. It’s amazing how many of the best known film themes and classical works have been recorded there – in short, it’s just an incredible place and without doubt, one of the premier rooms for recording in the world.
So, imagine my shock, when from the podium came the words….and I'm paraphrasing here... “…we implore EMI to keep this studio open” and that it’s one of the few places left in this country that can “accommodate a full orchestra for recording”. I came to life somewhat. What is this chap saying? Are they going to sell this place, is it going to change hands or worse are they going to close it? Reading between the lines on what was being said at a political level here I have to guess that in this current financial climate, both studio and punters are suffering. Abbey Road is an expensive place to work in and of course the technological improvements made to recording facilities in the wider world mean that largely, similar results can be produced in a bedroom. That’s just a fact. Why would a band want to go into Abbey Road and spend many thousands of bucks when those bucks might be best served investing in a comprehensive recording set up which will give them access to their recordings everyday and all of the time? One reason a band would go there would be to get access to some of the fantastic recording facilities available, and a microphone collection which, quite frankly, would knock yer socks off. Another is more fundamental to the studio itself – it’s the one thing that you can ONLY get in that location – it’s the rooms themselves. As soon as the ambient mics placed in the room are pushed up on the desk, it’s like Abbey Road arrives. I for example simply cannot hear a Beatles track without hearing Studio Two- if it was recorded in there. There is a sound attached to the room and it is impossible to take out. That is the one thing that can’t really be replicated electronically in the form of a plugin and even if they could it still wouldn’t BE the room. The fact is that people don’t just go into studios because of who recorded there in the past, although that does give a clue as to the possible continuing life of Abbey Road Studios, should it close, change hands or function. In fact it’s almost unthinkable that one of the most famous recording studios in the world could! The interesting thing is that when you come out of the studio there are ALWAYS people outside, writing on the wall, nudging each other and taking photographs. I hope it never happens but it would have an afterlife as one of the premier tourist venues in the world and that really would be down to the Beatles. I can’t quite get my head about that idea though. Those rooms are living, breathing spaces of creativity where music is and has been crafted and moulded from nothing into recordings that we hear probably more regularly than we realise. This studio should never become a museum and should always do what it does best – record great music.

It's going to the dogs...

2008-11-12T14:40:00.000-08:00

Whilst sitting watching the television last night I realised that we have now moved a generation up and away from the 2nd Generation Beatle Aware. We have now stepped over the line to a point where Beatle music is being used to advertise. It can only be a matter of time until it is being used to sell toilet roll. I hasten to add though that it wasn’t the original recordings, so that’s at least something. It was a fairly ethereal version of From Me To You which was being used to hook the viewers into the John Lewis stores over the Chrimble period. According to this link the track is sung by members of the John Lewis Music Society! It’s actually not a bad version and if it captures the public imagination it may well end up charting because of course it’s a brilliant song. Annoyingly and against my grain, it’s easy to see why the advertisers are desperate to use the boys’ tunes. If you look at the video it fits perfectly and indeed the tune takes on a different and more tender feel. However, all of that aside, in my view these songs should be protected from such interference. It is not like the writers need the money! The only reason they are being used is just raw commercialism. This new route of Beatle-lising the world with rock star games and now TV ads is going to undo all of the good work done thus far to keep it away from such nonsense. This is the slippery slope and it’s all downhill from here in my view. It is a matter of time now before we hear an actual Beatle recording up there. Nothing will be off limits soon. The Beatles are a commercial product in and of themselves so I have no argument with them doing whatever they need to do in order that they sell yet more product, spreading the word to a new generation and so on. However, the questions have to be asked; just what on EARTH are they doing? Why are they not concentrating on putting out the remastered music, the films etc; Who is making these choices and ok-ing these decisions? Something is afoot in Pepperland folks and we might need to employ Old Fred once more to save the music!
My personal opinion is that this is a bad and unrequired move on the part of the Beatles management and can only be motivated by wonga, which as I’ve said earlier I don’t really get. It’s not like they need to tell the public who they are really is it?
The top hats at Apple should be dealing with the core issues and stop concentrating on the Corp issues.

Just get back to the band please folks!

PS

And in reference to Ringo’s latest outburst, (which I can understand to a degree) it would seem to make sense that if you don’t want attention then don’t turn up at an awards ceremony!!

Remaster, Rock Star, Remaster....

2008-11-04T01:01:00.001-08:00

I’m with Allan Kozinn of the New York Times… the bottom line is that The Beatles should be concentrating on the release of their primary product – that is of course the music catalogue, not some daft Rock Star type game. Then closely followed by the Let It Be’s and Shea Stadiums they are still sitting on for whatever reason. It is actually incredible that there is basically no digitally remastered material available from the world’s premier group; is it not? I don’t care too much for the itunes or mp3 formats. What I want is full on, red blooded CD’s. The Beatles used to lead the world in innovation in many ways. Even the Anthology broke new ground…indeed up until then there was nothing like it from just about any other group. In other words, they continued the good work they’d always done. Ground breaking work on the video end of things whilst on the audio end they made the impossible happen with Free As a Bird and Real Love. As a fan I was proud to know that the boys weren’t just any band who wanted to cash in on their past achievements. They took the hard road, carved a new route, raised the bar and set a new standard for the world simply to gawp at. As it stands, twelve years later, it seems that they have hit some kind of impasse. I don’t get it. Just what might be the problem? In a general sense no one could blame them for not getting into bed with the digital download world at the beginning. It could have been a flash in the pan Beatamax (!) moment, so fair enough. However it has to be said that even the most cautious amongst us have to say that this format is here to stay and in fact IS where we are now. I feel that it is embarrassing for them at this stage. This band should still be leading the pack, breaking new ground and turning it to their advantage. It is not as though they have to create new material to convert. They have a complete catalogue ready to go, so again - what’s the problem? It’s obvious that there is a rights argument and financial reasona behind it all, it is the only argument that makes sense.

Also, whilst we’re on this digital thing, I read somewhere that the remixed catalogue will still retain the original mixes. In other words, those same unbelievably BAD stereo images which are murder to listen to on headphones. In fact, I gave up listening to the boys on headphones until the good folks at Purple Chick came up with their brilliant packages because it was such uncomfortable listening experience. Before that, I had to go to the extraordinary lengths of employing a mixing desk with a PAN control so I could route stuff through it to bring the bass more to centre. It was a terrible decision to release the CD’s with those appalling stereo mixes in 1987! If the idea was somehow to preserve the original work then all of the discs should have been in mono with the exception of the albums that were originally put out in stereo. There is just no value in putting out those stereo mixes again. They were a compromise when they were made in the Sixties, a travesty in the Eighties and by now it is plain stupid to put them out in that condition. The Beatles have an opportunity to put out pristine versions of the best work ever put to tape in a way that just blows the opposition away all over again to genuinely improve and polish this incredible work. As it stands, albeit through speculation, it seems that once again, an opportunity may be lost. When this catalogue goes out again under the “remastered” banner, it might just be the most important thing that has happened to the CD since it’s birth and given that they are in a position to do so, wouldn’t it be great if boys once again pushed the envelope just that little bit further?

PS

Best of luck with the VOTE America!

Warning: Peace and Love

2008-10-15T00:56:00.000-07:00

I have mixed feelings with regard to the current Ringo thing. On the one hand I can see what a total nightmare it must be to be followed around with requests for autographs. Especially given that it’s probably been the same for the last forty odd years and as they say (whoever “they” are!) nothing lasts forever. However, I do have to add, that whilst it’s understandable that he may be sick to the back teeth of this tiresome chore, he should realise that for ALL of the time he’s been in the public eye he has lived in a rarefied atmosphere enjoying the fruit of not only his own labours, but the fruit of the fans’ labours too. Yes the Beatles have given their “nervous” systems to a world hungry for anything and everything “Beatles”, but it has been fans that have been the fuel for that car. Without the fans and their massive interest, their mind boggling, eye popping and unquenchable thirst for new products, tickets and pertinently, an autograph, then Ringo might still be drumming down the Cavern on a Sunday night at the charity Beat gigs they put on there these days. It seems to me, and I freely admit I have no idea of what it’s like to be hounded for autographs daily and so I can only guess at how annoying it might be, but surely there are many worse things a person can be saddled with in this life? These are unsteady and difficult days all ‘round. As the credit crunch bites us all squarely in the butt I’m thinking, wait a minute, if all you have to do is sign stuff even if it was ALL day, it doesn’t add up to the smallest percentile of hassle in comparison with what ordinary people have to deal with does it? I mean it’s not like you have stand out in the freezing cold every morning waiting on a bus to take you to work in a place that you’d be happy to never to see again is it? It’s not a difficult job really? Whatever the reason Ringo has decided it SURELY can’t be the one that states he simply cannot be bothered doing it eh? Something else must have happened. I read on the news article the suggestion that maybe there’s been some Ebay activity that’s annoyed him? Perhaps.
It STILL doesn’t help me understand the tone of his request. I was listening to a piece on the BBC’s Radio Four news where they went to ask (some already annoyed) Liverpudlians what they thought of his stroppy tirade (for that is what it is) and I have to say he was roundly savaged by all with the exception of those who work in the Beatle industry (but of course!) who are obviously guarding their connection and giving the man the benefit of the doubt.
Ultimately something has triggered this for Ringo and he obviously feels a strong motivation to make sure everyone understands that he doesn’t want to play the game any more.
Fine – no problem - Peace and Love.
I wonder what the sales of his next album and tour will look like? More to the point perhaps I wonder what the sales of his last album look like?
In summing up here, it may be slightly annoying signing items on a daily basis but there is a reason for those requests. People have a genuine regard for you. You are actually loved and celebrated around the world. However please don’t “warn” us with Peace and Love to politely f*** off with said Peace and Love ringing in our ears!

If you don’t want to do it, then just don’t do it.

No proclamation delivered by video is required. We’ll all get the picture somehow. Peace and Love, Peace and Love and Love Peace.

jimmy or bust?

2008-10-12T10:40:00.001-07:00

In these days of pulling a gig at the drop of a hat, it occurred to me that one of the strangest and perhaps one of the dumbest things that happened during The Beatles history was when they put Jimmy Nicol in on drums when the Boys were to tour Scandinavia, Holland, the Far East and Australia in 1964

What were promoters and management thinking?

Why didn't they simply postpone the tour and do it when all four Beats were fighting fit and available?

It would be an automatic reschedule today if it was known that a key member of a group was taken ill. You would have thought that by that time, when The Beatles were the biggest thing in showbiz history, that THE thing to do would be obvious. George brings that very point to the table in the Anthology when he questions why they simply didn’t take the time out. I know what it’s like when what’s referred to as a “dep” comes in for someone who is suddenly ill, can’t make it or whatever, and it’s not pretty. The whole balance of the group changes. The on-stage sign systems which bands rely on are altered in a way which puts that communication at odds with normality. Subtle things like tempo and pace might be unfamiliar and can unsettle even the best bands. I’m sure Jimmy was a pretty competent drummer, but the pressure must’ve been enormous on him too - right? There are scant pieces of information available about the man who would be Ringo but it is generally understood that once his stint was done, he simply disappeared and never really wanted to talk about his time playing with The Beatles. There would have been a golden opportunity during Anthology for a short interview during the segment on that very subject, but no. I wonder - was he asked to make a contribution and just said no? Perhaps he wasn’t asked; which is even stranger! If it was so unimportant then the information would have been left out of the picture altogether, but again no. Why make the reference in such an important film and not use the actual source? In fact the more you think about this, the more bizarre it becomes. Of course, the simple explanation could be that Jimmy’s time in the band scared the pants off of him at the time and he had no wish whatever to make ANY kind of return to it.

Jimmy’s own view?..."The boys were very kind but I felt like an intruder. They accepted me but you can't just go into a group like that -- they have their own atmosphere, their own sense of humour. It's a little clique and outsiders just can't break in."

I wonder how Ringo took that information? Er…sorry to hear you’re not well Ring and you just collapsed and that but er…we’re putting this complete stranger on in your place whilst we cover those gigs that were booked, so er…. Get well soon and we’ll see you when you’re better! Unwittingly it must have sent poor Ringo the message that he was expendable and that they didn’t “love him anymore”. For example, I wonder if they would have replaced say John if he’d had a similar problem? I strongly doubt it – but hey Ringo’s just the drummer right? . . . . .
They should just have postponed.

It's all too much

2008-09-28T12:02:00.000-07:00

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.

PMC 7067/8

2008-09-17T12:37:00.000-07:00

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.

Surely not?

2008-09-09T23:21:00.000-07:00

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.

Not an ounce of fat on it really!

2008-09-02T13:01:00.000-07:00

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.

How did you become a Beatle fan (part two)

2008-08-12T12:38:00.000-07:00

Come the weekend I was like a cat on a hot tin roof. I couldn’t wait to attend this Beatle convention. Better still it was, relatively, just up the road. I met up with the girl I was telling you about, caught the train and headed up to the venue which was a hotel right next to a mainline railway station. The venue was perfect, full of hustle and bustle and more importantly crowded out with hundreds of Beatle fans. The atmosphere was palpable. As I wondered up the staircase toward the venue, I could hear various Beatle records in the background. The convention had a couple of large rooms at its disposal with one for guest speakers, film screen and audience whilst the other was for the flea market and dealers. I bought a programme at the front door and had a look at what was going on. There would be a showing of the films, some documentaries and concerts. Remember, this was of course in the days before even video was widespread, so although it doesn’t sound like a great day’s entertainment now, I couldn’t wait to get started. Later on in the day there would be a prize winning Beatle expert competition followed by a performance by a live band! Now being a young musician you can imagine what might be going through my head. I wondered what they’d play and if they were going to be any good. I can also remember thinking I’ll never fit all of this in.

As the day passed I wondered around this place just astonished at the kind of things I was seeing. This was the first time I saw the Shea Stadium concert. There they were up on this huge projection screen looking as cool as. The sound was coming from a large PA and it was pretty loud. You know, when I think back on that it brings a warm glow back to the heart…there I was in this room full of strangers, all of them Beatle fans watching Shea on a big screen with big sound and everyone was having a ball. Cheering and clapping like they were actually at the concert. Great stuff! When the films were taking a break, I wondered through to the flea market and again, eyes popping I just couldn’t believe what was available. All manner of bootleg records, tapes and even video - albeit very expensive. I was just a youngster at the time, so I didn’t have a massive amount of money, but I can remember getting a couple of original singles, a poster or two and a bootleg tape which had some studio outtakes on it. These were just too much! It was a case of; so that’s what happened after the fade then!
I had had a great time during this day. I had made a couple of new friends, watched a few films and bought a prized bootleg tape. Could it get much better than this? It was just about to!
There was a break around five o’clock to grab a quick bite. Whilst I was doing this I overheard a couple of people saying that the band that were coming on were just one of the best they’d ever heard. This got me thinking – more on that later. I buried my head in the programme to look for further details on the band. They were from Liverpool – so that was a good start!
As they walked on stage, I thought they looked kinda cool. It turned out that they were cool as they opened with Soldier of Love and then proceeded to play a whole set of rare BBC and Hamburg material. They were just stunning. I sat mesmerised at how good they were. I was in a band at this point but these guys were several leagues above anything I was involved in. That not only had something to do with the fact that they were competent as a group but also the songs they were playing. Songs I’d heard on the BBC just coming to life right in front of me. In short it blew me away. As I sat there, I thought how cool is that? The band in question were Beatle convention legends. They were Mojo Filter and they were brilliant. They just made the music come to life. Their performance painted a vivid picture to me as to just how good these songs must’ve sounded when the Beatles played them. Later, one of the members of that band became part of Cavern, whilst another became a member of The Bootleg Beatles. This gives you an indication of their pedigree. By the time I left that gig, I knew somehow that playing music would be part of my life for the rest of it. At that point I was just treading water and learning the craft. Watching Mojo Filter had a profound affect on me, and one that has stayed with me since. A strong level of performance and one which to aspire to. Later in my life I would play some of those songs live in Liverpool to a crowd of Beatle maniacs and I enjoyed it immensely. However, my band just didn’t touch what those guys did and I’m quite happy to admit that.
As I’ve said in previous columns, the Festivals of today somehow miss the point, though it’s perhaps not entirely their fault. It's a different world now. The conventions I attended had some mystery about them, a sense that you had to somehow “work” at them to find things. People didn’t have the internet, YouTube, Ebay, playstations and x boxes, video, DVD and CD. So when you’d go to one of these gatherings you got a rare chance to see and hear things that were not commonplace. Whilst it’s great to get your hands on all the things you read about in the great Beatle bibles available I can’t help but think it’s taken the voyage of the discovery out of it in many ways. I’m torn as to which I prefer. If you were to have just discovered the Beatles today you could probably complete a collection in a matter of weeks and months as opposed to the organic version I and many like me uncovered.

I’m afraid those days are gone my friend.

How did you become a Beatle fan? (Part One)

2008-08-07T00:50:00.000-07:00

I can’t remember not liking The Beatles. I’ve been into the band for so long it’s like my memory doesn’t go back that far. I can remember seeing them listed on the chart run down on the UK show Top Of The Pops (must’ve been) around 1970 I guess and the reason I remember is because I thought it was a strange name for a group! From the mid 1970’s I really got into it when the BBC ran a season of the films. Again I can remember thinking, I’ve heard all of this great music somewhere? I couldn’t place it and I don’t suppose it really matters, the point is, that the feeling I was getting was that it was somehow “part” of me and that it always had been. Quite a strange feeling, even when I examine that thought now. So anyway, truly infected by the mania, I spent any pocket money I had trying to buy as many Beatle records and products as possible. This is probably similar to how a lot of people, (particularly second generation) get into the band. Somehow, it just sneaks up on you and then you can’t remember not being into them. One of the products I discovered by accident was the Beatle Monthly. For a youngster in the UK to discover reprints of a Beatle fan magazine with updated news section during the height of punk was a revelation to me. I started to get these magazines every month and began to pick up on some of the developments happening in Beatle land. One such important development was the reintroduction of the BBC archive. I can remember reading about it thinking, I don’t know that one, that one or that one…mmm? I wonder what that sounds like? In short it looked like an Aladdin’s cave to me. Couldn’t wait to hear it! Come the big day when the broadcast was due, I sat there with my C120 cassette tape at the ready to record these gems. I won’t go into what I thought of them because the point was that this was the single moment when I realised how BIG a subject, musically, The Beatles were and that there was so much more than just the albums available in the shops. This was the material I wanted to hear. Sure, I loved everything you could hear from the released material, but this was different. There was something about this stuff that I loved. The songs and the banter – fantastic!
As a Beatle fan during this time-frame (post 1981) there was a distinct lack of activity. You had to be a bit of a miner to find new stuff or anything of interest unless of course it came up and bit you on the nose!
So there I was, at a rehearsal with my band, when a visitor came in. One of the guy’s had invited this girl to come see us rehearse. I couldn’t help noticing she was wearing a tiny Beatle badge (as you would from fifty paces!) and asked her if she liked the band…she said she loved them and further that she was going to a convention at the weekend. Further, it was fairly local (and easily within reach). I was quite frankly gobsmacked! How on earth did my Beatle radar miss that one?
“Was I going?” she asked. I answered that I didn’t have a ticket. “I’ve got a spare ticket, would you like it?”. Well, I almost bit her hand off for it. Money exchanged, I was going to my first Beatle gathering. How cool was that?
Now after being the “lone” Beatle fan everywhere I went, this was a truly exciting prospect and I just couldn’t wait – bring it on!

In part two, I’ll tell you what happened next and how it changed the course of my life.

It's that time again...

2008-07-31T13:14:00.000-07:00

In about a month or so it will be Liverpool Beatle convention time again. Barely seems like five minutes ago since I played there last year…time, as you know, just flies by. I noticed this link, have a quick look:

http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-life-features/liverpool-arts/2008/07/29/almost-100-bands-signed-up-for-the-mathew-street-festival-64375-21424060/

It made me think about just how far it’s all come since the first Mathew Street Festival (which originally was an add on to the gathering of Beatle fans at Liverpool’s Adelphi Hotel) in 1993. Then there was only one stage running from around mid morning until around 6pm if memory serves me, and it was located in the car park at the top of Mathew Street on the site of the original Cavern Club. The street was busy throughout the day and I can remember thinking at the time that it was quite big, as gigs go. There were ambulance crews, film crews, police crews and of course road crews by the plenty. I felt even then that it was somehow missing the point of a Beatle convention. The 1993 convention, it seemed to me, was one hundred percent pure fan based. The people were there to celebrate the band and being a FAN of the band. This of course was pre-internet days. At that time you’d most probably get your helping of Beatle news through the Beatles Monthly (Jeeeez remember that!?!), bootlegs were fairly hard to come by and there was a bit of an underground movement underway with the second generation Beatle aware. All in all, they were exciting times. The convention of that year reflected this and I, for my own part in it, had an absolute ball! I couldn’t wait to get back down the following year and was fairly depressed that it would be another year before I could be in that environment again.
Fast forward to 1996 and I got some news that the flea market part of the convention was going to be made “official”…so no more bootlegs or under the table deals with the rarest items. No, everything would be above board. That was coupled with the fact that by this stage the Mathew Street Festival had become an event on its own and had grown to an obscene scale. Attendances were beginning to lean upwards of 100,000 and beyond.

Boo-hoo indeed.

This is where the Liverpool convention lost its way. It was no longer just about The Beatles. It was no longer just a gathering for Beatle fans. That “intimate” atmosphere of the 1993 and 1994 gatherings was lost. The festival, as it was now known, was about money. Suddenly the Beatle fan part of it became diluted with the “official” message when the copyright police and background presence of Apple got involved. Very few (if any) of the bands ever got paid for the huge amount of work they put in. Organisers seemed to be taking advantage of the performers. They were playing on the fact that there was some kind of kudos to be gained for an act to be on the bill there. Sure there was to a degree, but without the bands, it would be nothing more than a record session right? In short the Liverpool convention has lost its way these days. As I said, I was there last year and it was more about the generic fan, the nearly fan, the casual passer by and the general music fan without any catering for "professional" (er... read diehard!) fans amongst us. Personally I didn’t enjoy the experience. It seemed that there was something missing and whatever it was, that was the vital ingredient for me at the beginning. Apart from my own group and a couple of other diehards (bless ‘em) every band was doing the same set, wearing the same suits and speaking with the same daft accent. It was commercialism at its worst. There was no sense of “how lucky we all are” to be gathered here, listening to these great bands, playing interesting sets, paying a PROPER tribute to the best damned band ever and it’s just “us lot”!
Oh, how lucky we were at the start.
Money wasn’t the point to getting involved. We played ourselves into the ground in those early years and were happy to be there because it was concentrated Beatle people who would want to hear something different and go out of their way to seek out new things. You don't mind the odd rendition of one of the biggies, but you want something precious and rare too right? It’s just not like that now. The community is lost and diluted in a sea of plastic beatles. We didn’t get paid in the early years and accepted that because we were happy to take part and be involved with something very special, lasting and memorable. I’d still love to take part and feel that. Sadly though, it’s just not possible to do that these days because you the fan, you the band, are nothing more than a number heading towards a 300,000 tally of people attending – in other words – the sound of 300,000 wallets and purses rattling! And do you know what? No matter how big the “beatle” festival gets, the bands still don’t get paid!
Funny that!

Live Today

2008-07-24T12:49:00.001-07:00

The continuing progress of studio equipment in the mid Sixties came at just the right time for the Beatles. Since the late Fifties, the boys had done nothing but play live for hours on end in the sweaty dives of Hamburg and Liverpool. Later, as success arrived, that hard slog was transferred to bigger stages throughout the world where the level of their musicianship dropped a couple of degrees and the hours on stage became minutes. It’s no wonder that they got severely bored of the circus. What they probably needed more than anything was a break. A proper break like bands do today. A couple of years at a time, where they can relax, regroup and perhaps come back with a renewed passion. Of course the music industry was making it up as they went along during that time. There seemed to be no limits to what could be done and what might be achieved next. If you think that The Beatles were playing UK tours in cinemas to a couple of thousand at a time and then imagine what the impact of going from there to say Shea Stadium was, then perhaps they could be forgiven for thinking, what IS the point of this continual nonsense? I doubt that George was alone within the group in thinking that touring and concerts were a total waste of time where all that was achieved really was the treading of water in order that they didn’t drown. Let’s not go into the Jeez comments, Manila or any of that stuff. Imagine it, night after night (er…after night) of the same set, the same reaction, the same one horse town, the same problems getting “down” from show mode? In short they must have come to the conclusion that the shows were pointless. It’s not like they needed to sell more records or get more famous at that point really is it? By that time they could have broken wind and sold a million. My own thought is that it must have been just awful towards the end when they made that decision to end touring.
And, further to that, the recorded output was now getting in the way of being able to transfer from studio to stage. The progress in the technology was responsible. Let’s say two of the boys are singing at the same time putting down a lead vocal and harmony part on one track. Then they have the opportunity to double track that same part. Now two voices become four. With the right balance, this thickens the voice up to an unnatural degree. A great move forward for their recordings of course. You can see that even by using this simple technique, it would be impossible to re produce live, unless you had four voices which could emulate it. Paperback Writer is a prime example of this very point. Even in the studio outtakes you can hear that the opening gambit isn’t quite “alive” until the double tracks arrive – and then BANG! It’s irresistible and of course brilliant. Now compare that to any live version? The live thing can’t compete. That must have been soul destroying as musicians, for them to realise that they weren’t in the position to be as good as they were in the studio. By using string quartets, backwards effects, double tracks etc, it simply ruled out any possibility of being included in their live set. So, going down that road, how long could they realistically continue to play She Loves You and I Want To Hold Your Hand on the road when they’ve got Strawberry Fields and Walrus in the bag at home in the studio? Whilst the technology was helping them in the studio, it hadn’t transferred out to the real world and the reality of the stage. The Mellotron is a fine example. Basically a Mellotron is the father of the sampling keyboard and without it we may not have the samplers today. However where we use micro chips to replay recorded sound in any which way we choose, the Mellotron used small sections of tape. So when you pressed the key down, it was akin to pressing play on a tape recorder. Brilliant idea! But, what would happen if it broke down? Brilliant in the controlled environment of Abbey Road, but what about when twenty thousand people are expecting to hear Strawberry Fields and it’s dead? Er….sorry but we can’t play that song tonight..er…
The point is made. The progress in the studio came at a price. Today, most equipment does what it says and is reliable. However, I myself have still had that problem where you might do something in the studio and NOT be able to reproduce it live, or the synth refused to work because it was too hot. I remember playing a show in the 1980’s where the synthesiser we were using just (out of nowhere) started to lose its tuning very badly and very rapidly. Can you imagine the effect of that during a song? It’s a bit like jumping from a great height onto a blown up bag pipe! Not pretty. The equipment of today is uber reliable and can do things that quite frankly blow your mind. Like live harmony generators which give full blown double tracking effects or four part harmony – live and instant. Live backward guitar parts present no problem. What is strikingly obvious to me, is that what the Beatles were doing in the studio in the Sixties, was unwittingly creating presets for technology to match and for musicians (including themselves) to aspire to. These days that technology is here and is functioning beautifully and there are few songs in the recorded output of The Beatles that wouldn’t be possible to reproduce perfectly today if any.
It really is lucky old us thanks in part to them.

Is there anybody there?

2008-07-20T23:36:00.000-07:00

A few years ago I came across a guy on the internet claiming to be channelling John. His name is American Lesley Jane and a strange life this man has too! Initially I listened to what he was saying as “John” and the fan part of me, desperate to hear anything more of John, was willing to give him a chance. On his radio interviews at least he successfully “talks” John well. On initial inspection he does the voice well enough that after a while you feel you really are kind of listening to a John. That is partly down to what he talks about – some of it scarily like stuff the actual John might talk about. And so you are drawn into this bizarre world where, since 1985 when the disembodied Lennon found him (!), Lesley Jane has “become” John. For about a nano-second I was really buying it and then I started to hear bits of well known John dialogue in his speech and then I thought…you’re busted mate – well and truly. Of course, the final nail for me was when George died and he tastelessly brought him into the “channelling” charade. Apparently they are all part of this band called Beatlesex (as in Beatles EX, named by “John” apparently) …and it is then that the penny drops…this is a guy desperate to BE a beatle, with a small b…a guy who can only be one of three things:

1 - an ordinary chap who has been channelling John Lennon since 1985

2 - a guy trying desperately to sell “his” music– I say that because it’s unbelievably beatlesque - at all costs

3 - a fraud

I know which one my money is on!

Over the years I’ve kept an eye on what American Lesley Jane is up to, mainly for my own amusement, but also because there is something compelling about the whole tasteless thing. Mrs Beatcomber and I laugh out loud when we decide to watch a Lesley channel (ooh sorry about that one!)…better than a night out at the cinema it is….well ok then…maybe not – but watchable in any case as he “makes an ass of himself”.
Lesley (and John) make it quite clear in several interviews that they are (both) ready to be tested out and have apparently thrown down the gauntlet to none other than Yoko Ono and Paul McCartney to pop by for a chat, who have both, unsurprisingly perhaps, failed to return his calls.
However, it seems that he has recently scored with a background character in the John Lennon story. On his my space page (and unbelievably so) there is this:

“….in this slideshow, two of the pictures shows me channelling John Lennon for the BEATLESEX record "Freezer Bird" while John Lennon's boyhood pal and co-founder of the original Quarrymen, Pete Shotton, sits on the couch observing the whole amazing thing. Pete said to John, "You bastard! You knew, didn't you? You knew that if I saw you work I'd know it's you!" and John replied "I've only been trying to tell you that for 2 f***ing years, Shotton". AND THAT'S The TRUTH.”

So, what is going on there with Pete Shotton? Why would someone of his knowledge be a part of this? Is it simple curiosity or a deep desire to believe that his boyhood friend carries on in some way or another? You know, that such a vital life force cannot have been extinguished completely, right?

What are these people trying to gain?

I would love to hear your thoughts on this one folks…here are a couple of links to get started on

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=23379248

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=431747

Gold

2008-07-14T01:24:00.000-07:00

So, who else is up there with the Beatles?

In terms of sheer pop genius I doubt there can't be much more than a coat of paint separating Abba and the Beatles. Of course, it’s comparing apples and oranges here to some degree because of the different eras involved. However, just taking the songs as measurement, I think Abba are definitely up there. There is a clamour to see them reunite often and it’s reminiscent of the constant Beatle reunion nonsense which dogs Paul and Ringo even to this day. It was whilst watching the recent television coverage of the Mamma Mia movie premiers across Europe that it became obvious to me that Abba had joined the ranks as major major artists. Abba fans would already know this anyway. The sight of the four members of Abba together (albeit at opposite ends of the balcony) made me think what a shame it was that The Beatles didn’t take the chance to do something similar before they started popping their clogs and heading to the great studio session in the sky. The quality of songwriting within the Abba repertoire is super slick. Songs like S.O.S, Mamma Mia, The Name of the Game, Knowing Me, Knowing You and a whole host of others are certainly (well in my mind anyway) up there with almost any of the Beatles material in terms of writing ability, performance and production.

So who else is worthy then?

For me the line which measures the seismic changes, the line which defines the fault lines goes something like this, Frank Sinatra, Elvis, The Beatles, The Sex Pistols, then maybe The Smiths. Now, that’s not to negate many of the other incredible artists we’ve been fortunate enough to have in our memories…people like Brian Wilson, Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye (and a host of others) because their music is important, strong and it helps to define the eras they were from. Abba are like “new money” within this club. They seem to have captured something which has continued to grow beyond themselves and their era – a sure sign that standards have been written. The band broke up in the early 1980’s and you would have thought that was that. In my memory, they were an extremely uncool band, and although they sold millions and millions of records, I didn’t know a single Abba fan at the time. These days that’s changed. They've probably sold more records now than they did then and there seems to be an Abba fan in every doorway. The difference between a band like Abba and a band like the Beatles though is that just about everything the Beatles did took the music world up another notch; to another level. Abba didn't really do that. They tended to polish up what was already around and just didn’t have the gravitas nor the consistency of back catalogue that the Beatles did. That said though, they’re a right good listen pop-pickers I’ll tell you and well worth digging out the hits albums for a spin, but er..maybe leave the clothes out though eh?

Come On (Come On)

2008-07-09T01:00:00.000-07:00

I noticed that Pete Best has got a new album coming out!
Pete has eventually done quite well out of the Beatles in recent years has he not? …the Anthology project certainly has made him a “few bob” no doubt and who would grudge him a single penny? I most certainly wouldn’t. However there are a couple of things in the press releases that bother me. One is this comment, I assume from the record company, and it beggars belief really:

"What can I say, this album far outreached my wildest expectation., I just didn't expect what I received. It's as good as anything The Beatles did at their peak, unbelievable. I'm blown away," says Arnie Holland, CEO of Lightyear Entertainment.

Oh well, easily pleased then Arnie yes?
I’m sure it’s a competent album but come on….It’s as “good as ANYTHING the Beatles did at their peak”?
Puul-eeesssee!
Do us a favour would you?…it’s bad enough saying it in print and it’s even worse to USE it as part of the publicity!
There are very few things (if any) as good as anything the Beatles did at their peak.

It’s get a grip material it really is.

The other thing apparently is that, “The album in true Liverpudlian flavor, shows Best as one of the cornerstones of the original sounds of the Beatles”
I mean really.
One of the “cornerstones of the original sounds of the Beatles”?
It could be argued that the Beatles sound didn’t arrive until they had Ringo Starr playing drums. It’s just a personal opinion here, but I think the Beatles were a fairly appalling band pre-Ringo times. There is just no spark in any of the totally flat and lifeless recordings that were made and the drumming is awful to my ears. It’s no wonder they were rejected by every record company up and down the land.

Don’t get me wrong here, I applaud anyone who gets their hands dirty, gets down to the nitty gritty of getting some songs together and then putting them out as an album. It’s a very difficult route, especially in this day and age when the population at large just doesn’t give a flying burrito about buying music anymore.
The truth is that the easy bit is making the album.

I wish the very best of luck to you Pete.

Sweet Dream (Baby)

2008-07-06T12:59:00.001-07:00

I consider myself quite lucky when it comes to being a musician. I’ve gotten to actually play in some of the venues I’ve read about as a Beatle fan. The first time I played at a Beatle convention, it was in Liverpool, with the first venue being The Blue Angel club. I’d read about it in Allan Williams’ book, The Man Who Gave the Beatles Away. More on that in a bit, but first some background on the Convention itself. When I played at this particular gathering, it hadn’t got too big yet; it wasn’t too corporate – in short it was a REAL gathering of people who loved all aspects of the Beatles. People who were happy just chatting in groups late into the night in the hotel bars, whilst others provided unplanned, off the cuff acoustic sessions as everyone basked in a Beatle glow in Liverpool.
What could be better than that?
When our band arrived at the convention, we were lucky enough to be able to rehearse in the Cavern for two afternoons on the trot! That just wouldn’t happen now as there would be groups playing wall to wall and noon till midnight in there! I have some great home movies from those sessions and I still can’t quite believe we did that as generally, rehearsals are off limits to the paying public, for obvious reasons! For example, we might be just running through some songs or goofing around on stuff we’d never play and hey, that is what rehearsals are for. But, we kept wondering why all these people kept turning up, sitting down, having a quick drink and heading off! Of course, unbeknownst to us, the Cavern had slapped a poster outside saying “TODAY, LIVE ENTERTAINMENT ALL AFTERNOON”!!!! Talk about taking a free slug whilst you’re not looking! I always tended to think that the people who were watching those rehearsals must have thought that we were just rubbish, because we kept on playing the same song over and over again! But, looking back, it was off the cuff, relaxed and, like any band, we tended to raise our game a bit when people came in, so in some ways, it actually helped our cause. We were rehearsing because they were our first gigs, both in front of a Beatle crowd and in Liverpool, so we were keen to make the right impression. For us, what made it special was the fact that we were going to play in some of the original venues that the boys had played in, so we didn’t quite know what to expect, but one thing’s for sure, it was a mixture of excitement and straightforward fear to put it politely!

Another thing about that first time was that we had been assigned a crew of roadies and our own transport. We had brought all of our own equipment so that we did need transport to get around town. What we didn’t bargain on was that some of that gear would get used elsewhere…like the morning I woke up after a late night, bleary eyed, hearing the live sounds of Get Back full on LIVE and blaring down the street being played on the balcony of the hotel RIGHT next to our bedrooms! I went to check on my guitar and noticed that not only were our amps were missing, but so were our crew! The penny dropped of course when one of them came in to wake us all up and said “have you heard this band -they’re great!” I said, “Where are the amps?” He just laughed and headed back to the balcony! Putting two and two together I went out to see the band from behind the “stage” – sure enough there were our amps being used to blow half of Liverpool down!
Anyway, back to the Blue Angel…we got in to this dark, cold and grimy and cellar and couldn’t believe that this was where the Beatles had done that audition for Larry Parnes and here we were about to play similar kinds of songs on the very same stage! That was a big WOW for us and trust me, it is a memory which will live with me until I pop my clogs, I promise you. As the crowds began to come in, some unexpected guests arrived. I just couldn’t believe it – none other than Allan Williams himself with his mate Tony Jackson of the Searchers…Now we’re beginning to get nervous…of course we channelled this into the performance, which went like a DREAM. The crowd were really enthusiastic and were out to have a great time. This just fed the band which in turn fed the crowd – yada, yada, yada! At the end of the first half we were astonished that both Tony and Allan had come up on stage with us…For the record, Allan told a few rude stories about the Beatles whilst Tony did Sweets For My Sweet…we were really made up! For myself, I had gone from reading Allan’s book and being totally inspired by it as a kid, to standing on stage with him. It still amazes me that. Yes, no doubt about it, the big fan gatherings of today just can’t compete with that type of thing in my opinion. As I said, this was a fairly small, concentrated amount of people all into the same thing and all wanting to have the time of their lives – which, incidentally it seemed to me - they did! Today some of these festivals are SO out of control because there are so many people and something is lost because of it. It’s like a victim of its own success, not in fact unlike the subject they choose to have a convention about. The convention I am talking about had no more than a few thousand people throughout the week…which granted sounds does like a lot, but it didn’t seem that way, because they weren’t all there at the same time! In later years it’s not been unknown for up to 250, 000 (and beyond) to have turned up at some of these giant street gatherings which in my opinion have long diluted the whole point of the Beatles convention in Liverpool. I’ve played both the huge ones and the small ones. There can be no doubt in my mind that the smaller, concentrated, slightly quieter fan gatherings are best. I’m still in contact today with some of the people I met then, which gives an indication of the fairly intimate nature of the gatherings of the hard core fans who stayed in the same hotels as the bands who were there to entertain them. Some of those later festivals just seemed faceless to me, plastic and official, with all of the oomph taken out of it. I’ve only scratched the surface of that convention here and at some point I’ll probably come back to it because it truly was life changing stuff and my memory of it can only continue to bring a warm and contented glow every time it comes to my mind.

Stream a Little Dream

2008-06-25T11:25:00.000-07:00

When I started playing guitar and joining bands it was pretty much the same route to follow if you were looking to make it (whatever that means!) You would learn to play, join a band hit the road and hope you’d be discovered, somehow. A lot like the story as told by Paul in the song Take It Away. Well, pretty soon you discover that ain’t gonna happen brother! You realise that making it is relative to what you consider success is. The Beatles success to a large extent was obscene. Let’s face it. With their type of success I’m surprised they stayed even remotely sane and as George quiped, they gave their nervous systems in the process! As I’ve said previously, the Beatles had a blank canvas to paint on and their success was perhaps slightly easier for them as they kicked down all the closed doors they found….like let’s turn up the bass (on paperback writer), let's have all night sessions (like on Pepper)….let's use this instrument, that orchestra ….in some respects the guys ended up kinda doing what they liked, whenever they liked and with that came creative freedom and therefore a certain ease and opportunity in which to break new ground. It was an evolution from eager and hungry school boys to lean athletes…well musically and professionally speaking anyway!….I wonder though if a band like the Beatles would have, or indeed could have broken through given the kind of constraints and pressure there are on bands, (nay, products) today? How many times have you said, there’ll never be another Beatles? Have you ever wondered why? How would they have cut through I wonder?
Today, the quality of your written product is not the point. Potential isn’t something that’s taken into the equation. No, today, bands have to be their own self contained label, production and management team waiting to be cherry picked by big companies. Bands have to work their own fan base through social networking sites. They have to be au fait with the My Space generation. They need to be able to communicate and fully understand the internet and its social integration with their demographic. To be able to understand who’s going to buy their tee shirts because one thing is for sure, no one is going to buy your music are they? No, it will be stolen. It’s just a fact of modern musical life. So, where the emphasis was once on the quality of your song writing its value is now less, because as a commodity, there is no real value in it on its own. Sure, as one part of a “whole”, it has some value but not like it was in the Beatles day. There are tens of thousands of bands out there all vying for success. Most of them won’t succeed. Sure, there was a lot of competition in the Beatles day too, but nowhere near as much as now. I’m sure that the Beatles would be worthy by any measurable standards here today and way beyond tomorrow, but I’m also sure that they couldn’t have made it in the same way. In some respects it’s partly because of the Beatles huge success and massive cultural impact, that bands don’t have the same kind of chances. There are still some huge acts out there, but none that cut the ice with such precision as the Beatles. Forty years up the line, the band is still under the microscope to an unnatural degree, such was their impact. Few, if any from today will be on the same slide. Which one of the Beatles would have nurtured their my space site searching for friends, uploading photographs and answering the mail I wonder? Which one of them would have said, lets just give the music away and concentrate on t shirt design? Would they have had the gigging opportunities that they did in order to develop as a live act? I’m not sure a place like Hamburg’s scene exists for a band anymore. Today, if that kind of place did exist, they would probably use a hard drive full of stolen files to fill an eight hour all-nighter – cheaper that way right?
I’m not saying that the band wouldn’t have made it, because I think they would have. Cream as they say, floats to the top. But, it’s doubtful if they’d have made it in the same way with the same sort of impact because the business is so over subscribed and is so much less important to what was its core audience – the record buying public.
The music industry to a large extent is in deep, deep trouble…well for now anyway, until it recovers and finds a new business model to adopt. To a large extent it only has itself to blame. In this day and age, most people see music as some kind of free commodity with little or no value, somehow only put here to entertain people for a few minutes at a time with no remuneration for the artists who trust me, still put their life, and soul into the creation process. Watch for example how the music business reacts to a new feature soon to be, if not already available on the Real Player – a function that allows the user to record the streams they listen to! All this going on whilst, kids in bedrooms up and down the country begin the journey of learning to play, (maybe) joining a band, learning how to record on a computer, (maybe) hitting the road and opening up a my space site, developing their websites, opening an online shop, designing their t-shirt, nurturing their fan base, understanding their demographic, meeting with their legal team and hoping to be discovered.

Rock 'n' Roll Music

2008-06-23T11:11:00.001-07:00

Much like the moment in John Lennon’s life when he saw Elvis for the first time and thought “that’s a good job!”, the same could be said for me when I first saw The Beatles. As a youngster I was amazed that you could get paid to play a guitar and sing - in fact if truth to tell, I'm still pretty amazed you can get paid for it! Of course, it could be just my working class background coming into play because it didn’t seem to me to be a real job of work. However as I have subsequently found out, it is a real job of work and a challenging and at times difficult one at that. It is one of those jobs all too easily misread as glamorous and perhaps only for the work shy. With cries of “get a proper job” still reeling in my ears, I realised that even John had that problem. I had not the faintest idea at the beginning that I would still be playing the guitar and singing all these years up the line and for that I am truly thankful. It has definitely been a journey. Without trying to sound like some tortured and pretentious artist, there is almost a “calling” with music. It’s something you just can’t get out of your hair. It can and has got me out of my bed in the middle of the night to write something down before it’s forgotten – and that’s something Mrs Beatcomber appreciates a lot I can tell you! They are the times when I’ve asked myself, why do I still do this? ‘Cos you know, I’d kinda rather be sleeping right now…and then my head drifts to The Beatles. I have to say, they have never let me down in terms of inspiration. My Beatle discovery not only provided me with brilliant music to listen to over a lifetime, which is amazing enough, but they also unwittingly offered a route that I would follow in my career. Much as Elvis, Gene Vincent, Carl Perkins and Little Richard did for them. I was never involved in the music game to get famous though - I just wanted to write and record. I wanted to learn the craft of production and even to this day I look at how they did things with genuine amazement. I have a million tracks at my disposal and they had a mere four! Astonishing!
Isn’t it amazing that listening to something as inconsequential as a “band” at a certain period in your development can have such a profound effect on your life? I can say, hand on heart, that The Beatles are directly responsible for the route I followed - straight into the music industry. And with that, all of the great people I have met and the great experiences I have had.
One minute you are listening to She Loves You with your tennis racquet and hairbrush and the next you are on stage at the Cavern Club, Rickenbacker in hand, rocking your head off in front of 500 people squeezed ever so tightly together right in front of you! Those are memories I just wouldn’t be without. Being involved in music hasn’t been easy and, as I said, there have been lots of time where I have considered knocking it on the head…but one listen to The Beatles and the stubborn creative little fellow that lives in my soul dictates that I should carry on no matter what.

How have the Beatles influenced your decisions?

1973

2008-06-20T01:56:00.000-07:00

There can be no doubt that the Beatles were diluted in the years following their break up. The sum of the four parts being stronger that the individuals as the cliche goes.

However, taking the best of the solo releases from the year 1973, it is possible to suggest that The Beatles would have released some of their strongest work. I think it may have been John who suggested that if we all can’t get over the split, then we could take a track from him, a track from Paul etc etc…So, going down that road we get a tantalising insight into what the band may have considered to be album worthy. In fact using this approach, it allows fans to second guess what may have been released in terms of new Beatle product throughout the Seventies, but for now 1973 seems to be a particularly strong year. Just for talking sake, The Beatles could easily have released two strong albums, taken in the James Bond theme and had a string of hit singles. No different in fact to when they were a functioning band really.

Look at these candidates as an example and they’re in no particular order:

My Love
Band on the Run
Jet
Bluebird
Let me Roll It
No Words
1985
Mind games
Out of the Blue
Tight A$
Intuition
One Day at a Time
Give Me Love (give Me Peace on earth)
Photograph
You’re Sixteen
Living In The Material World
I’m the Greatest
Oh My My
Try Some Buy Some
Live and Let Die

That gives out the following ratio: Paul with 8 songs, 6 John songs and 6 between George and Ringo. This seems to me to be similar to what you’d expect from them as the band and in fact it’s quite a strong show from George and Ringo.

Of course what that list doesn’t really do, is to demonstrate how they would have been inspired and cajoled by each other in the studio environment. Whilst I’m sure there was a competitive streak between them as solo artists, I’m sure there would have been that added dimension of “The Beatles” acting like a fifth member. In other words, there probably would have been other tracks which would only have been written if the chemistry of the “Beatles” was present. The 1973 output would have been no surprise to people at the time. I think it would have been a case of business as usual for the record buying public. With the quality of product as listed above, it’s likely that their sales would have been through the roof and it would have been another vintage year for them. I think the band would have scored big time with Live and Let Die, which is a monument to song writing, recording and production in any case. Apart from the Bond theme, in terms of potential singles, Give Me Love (Give Me Peace on Earth), My Love, Mind Games, You’re Sixteen seem like a particularly strong set for the year to me. B sides could easily have been made from the rest of the tracks from the solo albums.
I think what this demonstrates is that by 1973 the guys had recovered somewhat from the impact of the break up and begun to claw their way back to a commercial and pop footing. Now, that doesn’t negate their previous releases in anyway whatsoever, but it has to be said that some of their releases previous to this year were pretty personal and not put together with a Beatle ethic in mind.
So, just for fun, I’d love to hear your suggestions as to how the 1970’s would have panned out for Beatles albums using the solo albums as a guide. Could the Beatles have kept the momentum of their Sixties output going throughout the Seventies? Would they have found and broken yet more new ground? Or, was it better that they ceased to be when they did? Would they have left the 1970’s with their reputation as the greatest band of all time intact?

What do you think?

Elvis, Johnny and Mickey

2008-06-17T11:19:00.001-07:00

As I wondered through the supermarket yesterday filling up the trolley with the usual essentials, I noticed a rack of t shirts. One had Elvis with some irrelevant nonsense written on it- “Heartbreak Hotel”… and right next to it, one with our Johnny on it with the immortal words “Working Class Hero”, all next to a t-shirt of Mickey Mouse! I’m thinking who would wear such a garment with such a proclamation on it? It's just plain not cool. I almost heaved my cookies when I looked at this total crass use of image and the company Johnny Rhythm was keeping. somehow my heart sank a little. Now, I don't particularly mind Elvis...but somehow the Mickey one said something to me.... It brought to mind a question…who gets permission for these gross product and more importantly perhaps, do they get permission to use such an image?
I appreciate that Yoko Ono has had a tough job walking the line between keeping John’s presence current, making money and keeping the fans happy with new releases. However, apart from the excellent Anthology CD box set from several years ago, I think she has totally failed. She has succeeded though in turning him into nothing more than some kind of corporate brand on the scale of Mr Walter Disney! I just wonder what the man himself would make of some of the nonsense that is available!! That t-shirt with its Working Class Hero slogan sums it up. The myth of that phrase is just gross. John Lennon was no working class hero. Fans and scholars know this. It’s an insult to Joe Public that is thrust upon them. Say it enough times and perhaps people will believe it right? John Lennon was a great man, but a flawed genius and he certainly wasn't some kind of Saint. I believe history yet to unfold and perhaps not in this generation will see that he had a forward thinking and clever mind. Forget all that Imagine no countries idealism stuff. Think about the untaught, raw musical genius he actually was. That’s where his true image lies. John was as sharp as a tack at all levels and his ripostes were legendary. However this was a person, NOT a product or a brand name to sell anything else but his own self generated music and art. Sure buy the records, the books and drawings and stuff, but perhaps not the baby clothes eh? We don't want Elvis Lennon now do we? It's one step away from canned McBeatle breath folks!

A Lucky Face

2008-06-13T11:51:00.000-07:00

Why did the Beatles become so big? Why was their music so amazing?
Well, they had a blank canvas for a start. When I say that, I mean that pop music hadn’t quite entered the modern age yet. The Beatles form the line where this boundary is crossed I believe. They came to perfect the art of what became known as the three minute pop song. Not an ounce of fat on any of them. By enlarge, small but perfectly formed pieces of work to which the world of music could merely gasp and listen to in awe. This is a catalogue of work which is unlikely to be matched for sheer ingenuity and for the scale of it’s effect on the world both musically and culturally.
The Beatles were also lucky with their timing.
In 1962, Britain was waiting for something to lift the gloom of post war austerity, to turn the black and white world of the newsreeles into a blaze of Sixties colour. Then these funny Liverpudlian guys with really long hair turn up. I wasn’t around then unfortunately, but relatives have tried to impress upon me the significance of their hair and their overall look initially. It seems like a trivial detail now. It's difficult to imagine a hairstyle having that much significance. There was no one else like them. Then there’s the music. It’s perhaps not the most original thing ever heard at the beginning, but there’s something about it. Something about the way they crowd around a microphone stand. The harmonies. John Lennon's "leather tonsils". It’s just, well…plain different.

They were lucky too when they went to America. The US was still dealing with Jack Kennedy’s demise and they must've been a ray of pure sunshine upon arrival; a really big deal, with their funny accents and nice suits (and that!). They seem to be so different. Again, don’t underestimate the hair. It grabbed the world’s attention and gave them that thirty second platform to impress. So, they had unwittingly got the timing of their arrival just right. Then you have to look at who they accidentally hook up with after they’d been knocked back from every record company up and down the land.
They’ve got George Martin in their corner to tidy up their compositions, adding and subtracting as they went. Today, it’s likely that a producer of his stature would be in on co- writing credits for a band in their position. Again, they were lucky meeting him. They found someone who could give them ideas for free in a sense. This is an educated musical mind, working way above their level. However, they too, no doubt would have come up with ideas because of their lack of musical knowledge. So again, in finding Mr Martin, it’s another lucky break for them. It is a marriage made in heaven. It is hard to imagine for example that Yesterday or She’s Leaving Home would have been in the same league but for his contribution. I don’t just mean string sections here. I’m talking about the bare bones of the song, the structure and arrangement. As producer, George would have had a big say in how Parlophone’s products were presented and I can imagine that once an idea was around, he would have been right on top of it to make the best of it. That coupled with the fact that the boys were eager to make the best product possible surely make a recipe for success? George Martin’s contribution is simply enormous to the band. It’s like he was a silent member of the group. Didn’t quite have the hair for it though! The band not only benefited from him directing their songs, but they learned directly from him, and how! The sheer speed of their development is breathtaking. A friend mentioned to me the other day, that it’s almost impossible to equate the band that played Love Me Do with the one who created the regal majesty of A Day In The Life just five short years later. It’s a quantum leap in song writing. It does defy description in some ways. Their work rate is simply terrifying. The Lewisohn books illustrate this only too well. It is day after day after day and they make it count just about every time. And, all of this happening against a background of a world on the cusp of change in every way and a new generation, sick to the back teeth of the old order.
Yip, The Beatles were in the right place every single time they needed to be and their music changed as often as their hairstyles. Probably one of the reasons why there is unlikely to be another Beatles is because the canvas isn’t blank any more and the genie is out of the bottle.

Supposing, supposing

2008-06-11T11:17:00.000-07:00

Have you ever noticed the fact that whenever there was an opportunity for the surviving Beatles to get together, there was always something in the way?
Up until 1980 it seems that all members of the band were resolute about not being seen together post break up. However, following John’s “thing” this was a more regular occurrence. We do know that there were guest appearances on each other’s albums and tracks. George’s All Those Years Ago, where the Threetles made their forced debut due to the sad events surrounding the song. Then there’s the Ringo album of 1973. The whole band appeared on that album, but NOT together on the same track. That would have been a reunion wouldn’t it and that just wouldn’t do!
What do you think?
It is almost as if a further decision had been made. Is it possible that they came to some kind of business agreement to not reunite in any kind of form? Or at least not to be seen to be reunited, just to keep the game bubbling over and keep the fans hoping for the aforementioned Holy Grail? It’s not as though they didn’t communicate with each other during the post break up period at all is it?
Or perhaps it was simply just bad blood, pain, loathing and familiarity having bred a terrible contempt?
It’s well documented about John and Paul getting together in New York during the late Seventies or during the infamous Lost Weekend period. You would see Ringo and Paul together in the Broad Street film? You would see George and Ringo together on TV shows like (here in the UK) the Michael Aspel Show or the wonderful Carl Perkins and Friends special. This is a good example of what I mean. It’s quite obvious that Paul was a big Carl Perkins fan as Carl’s guest appearance on Tug Of War with the song Get It underlines, not to mention their 1993 get together as witnessed on the video My Old Friend released in 1998. It does beg the question why didn’t Paul play on the Carl Perkins and Friends show? Was it because Paul and George had some insurmountable problem with each other or was it to perpetuate the “Beatles will never get together again” myth?...Well that is until the Anthology project where they could then milk it for all it was worth? Even recently at the Anfield concert to celebrate the Liverpool City of Culture event, there seemed to be an undercurrent of something not quite right between Ringo and Paul. All those, “that was never on the cards”, and “that’s just not going to happen” type comments seem to illustrate what appears to be an ongoing problem. It has been said that Ringo’s nose was put out of joint because he didn’t get the nod from Paul to join him onstage at the Live 8 concert? To be honest who could blame him? It was the biggest concert for years and Paul was, shall we say, VERY represented at the event (to use some badly written England). Why didn’t Ringo play that show with Paul I wonder? It’s not like they hadn’t played together over the years is it? At the Concert for George there didn’t seem to be any problem about them getting together. It seems to me that it is a bit of a prickly place inside the Beatles world. That said, how often have we seen Paul and Yoko together or Yoko and the lovely Olivia together recently? Quite often I’d say and further, it seems a lot more than it used to be. Who would have thought that? The best example of this is the recent Larry King special on the Love spectacular where uniquely, they were all seen together in the one place at the same time. I just wonder if they’d have joined forces like this if John and George were around?
Whilst I don’t dispute the “family” element of relationships between the band members and the “deep regard” they have all had for each other, I’m not convinced that all is that well. I’ve always felt it to be quite sad that somehow, they couldn’t all just be in the same room showing a united front in public during the time when we had all four, post split. This does seem to illustrate the strength of bad feeling that ran deep in Camp Beatle not only following the split but indeed right to this day. As I think I’ve said before, join a band – it’s the best place to lose your mates.

just a b side eh?

2008-06-08T08:28:00.000-07:00

Something that always impressed me about the Beatles was the quality of their B-sides. I liked their value for money approach which after the Please Please Me included not repeating themselves elsewhere or taking the easier option of putting out an album track. There always seemed to be a strong product identity; albums were albums and singles were singles. Quality was high resulting in the plain fact that most of their B sides would have been a lot of other bands A sides. One of the great B’s was She’s A Woman. This is a top tune and a major part of their live set which is a testament to the strength of the work. I’m trying to imagine the bands of today having that kind of ethic – putting a so called b side into the live set! Ho hum! Most groups today might use acoustic versions of their hit songs, or worse, an instrumental version of the main track. Other offences include the use of the extended remix and in most cases it is just self indulgent rubbish full of its own self importance. That kind of easy way out attitude just doesn’t cut it for me. It’s short changing the buyer. The Beatles didn’t do that. There was always a strong tune on the flip. Don’t Let Me Down, Revolution, Yes It Is, Things We Said Today – all somehow B-sides? You know the phrase “B-Side” somehow gives the impression that it’s not as good. This tells you how strong their singles were when tunes like these were relegated to the less important side. Today, we live in an era where the single means nothing. In their day, the single was just that, it was a SINGLE product with two unique tracks on board. Then, somehow the single became a leader for the album from which it came – in other words – merely an advert for the album. Using it as a device, a hook to make you buy. Now of course, in this world of the download you can just buy the track you like and ignore the B-side. I’ve said it before, there is something lost about that kind of consumption. The Beatles sold singles and albums by the truck load BECAUSE of the strong song writing and originality of product. Who wouldn’t bet on some of those B sides becoming hits in their own right due to the download phenomenon? A single wasn’t just bought as a collectable, never to be opened or played. You know, it’s the “Oh, I don’t need to play this anyway, ‘cos I’ve got it on the main album anyway” attitude, which begs the question – WHY buy it? If only Mr McCartney’s people had thought how it used to be done in the Beatles period during the Press To Play campagn. That was the time which ended my need to buy all of the formats. One of the singles (“Press” I think?) had NINE different versions available. Unfair to the loyal collector(like me) that. Shelling out left, right and centre for basically the same tracks again and again. More like RIP OFF I’d say now.
So, candidate for the best EVER b side? What do you think? I’d love to hear your thoughts – feel free to drop me a line on the subject.
My own favourite? Surely it must go to I am The Walrus! How that song ever got be a b side is inexplicable to me.
What was that about the quality of Beatles B sides?

Take some time

2008-06-02T22:48:00.001-07:00

consider this....if the Beatles had taken strategic breaks throughout their career, would it have extended the life of the band? Most bands these days do so. In fact, George brought this very point up during Anthology interviews. Or perhaps does the ‘die young stay pretty' argument hold more water by keeping them burning in the memory lamps as being at the top of their game?

It is hard to stay in a band. It is the best way to lose your mates. It is like a marriage. It can be a painful set of relationships to maintain. The political manoeuvring inside a band like the Beatles must have been totally draining. The sheer hassle of creating new works can drain the energy of everyone around it, from the epicentre outward. Norman Smith famously quit as full time engineer as the bickering between John and Paul during the Rubber Soul session became more of a regular occurrence. George Martin was no different, during the torturous sessions of 1968 and '69. Closer to the band though, witness George during the Let It Be film. It's quite easy to understand Paul directing George in order to draw out what might be good for the song. Paul quite easily slipped into the producer's chair and I believe did so more often than not. After all, he is a talented producer as well. However, there is a fine fine line between producing and being seen to be bossy, overbearing and dominant. It gets peoples' backs up and raises their hackles. Now if you've already got a bit of beef with how someone works and then they start telling you what to do, the results can be catastrophic for that relationship. George obviously couldn't stand the sight of Paul during this time and their personal and working relationship was on the verge of breakdown. I know they overcame their differences later in life, but their relationship was probably never the same. Paul must have become quite reticent to offer an opinion thereafter, in case it might be construed that he was trying to take over. So, fundamentally, things had changed. Would an extended holiday following the dark, horribly dark Thirty Days sessions at Twickenham been of benefit? I think so. Time is a great healer as they say. I doubt that the building animosity of those sessions would have been relevant to them after say, six months; a year apart. I believe those particular sessions to be the straw that broke the camel's back, directly accelerating the final break up. And there were earlier signs of the relentless juggernaut pounding forward. Witness when Ringo was getting his tonsils out and the totally BIZARRE episode when Jimmy Nicol was put in on drums. What were they thinking? It may be easy to say, especially in retrospect, but perhaps the tour should have been postponed! A break should have been put in place, thereby ensuring that Ringo (who was after all SICK) was given time to recover. It would have eased the pressure on the band, and Mr Nicol in particular. The poor man was not only asked to fill Ringo's shoes - a hard enough task in itself - but step in to do filming, press conferences and interviews for goodness sake!! He had to become a Beatle for this short period! I think that was an amazing decision to have made. They were the biggest band in the world,. Their reputation would have been intact had they postponed the tour. Sure the fans would have been disappointed, but it is not like they would have organised Beatle record burning sessions on that basis! Surely, no one came out on top there, not least of all Jimmy, who quickly scurried under the nearest rock for cover and was basically never heard of again!

I think an extended break would have been great for the band and would most probably have extended their creative life and preserved their personal relationships. Would Paul and George have fallen out in such a spectacular way? Perhaps a more important question arises if you consider that John only went to America following the complete breakdown of the band. So, could a break have changed his course? Is it possible that he would have remained in the UK to continue working with them? If he did there is a possibility that he may still be alive today. There is chit chat going around that John wanted to get the band back together in the mid Seventies. I'm sure Paul would've done that in a heartbeat. George may have been a slightly tougher nut to crack as he probably still hadn't got over the years of what he might have considered to be "George bashing" from Paul. He had also given John short shrift as the legal case for partnership dissolution came to its conclusion. This was recently discussed by May Pang who witnessed John's 'no show' at the crucial meeting! Maybe, just maybe, he was giving it that final extra thought before the legal end of the world's greatest band was made absolute.

All of the petty arguments, all of the pressures, misconceptions, backstabbing, perceived slights and so on which brought the Beatles to their knees and to breaking point in 1969/70 may have been alleviated with some proper breaks during the turbulent years of the mid Sixties. As a result, the band might have gone on for years, still producing further classics. Imagine the Beatles album that could have been released in 1973 for example. Arguably, it may have been their best album to date by that point, given some of the absolute classics from that year, with all four releasing strong product. One senses a bit of a creative recovery following the trauma of break-up and subsequent divorce. More importantly though, the personal costs to the boys themselves may have been drastically reduced, which in turn would've allowed the band to continue.

Giving It Away

2008-05-31T01:13:00.000-07:00

The one thing I like about being a Beatles fan is the level to which you can mine to find new gems. Once the BBC recordings were out of the bag, it became obvious that there was more to the catalogue than just what the band put out. I'm talking here about the catalogue of songs they gave away. There are some obvious gems in this oft forgotten part of Beatledom. Songs like Bad To Me and I'll Be On My Way for example. In the case of Bad To Me it's difficult to understand why they didn't do themselves? It could easily have fitted on a b side, or indeed on the first couple of albums. Whilst With The Beatles is fairly strong overall, Please Please Me could have dropped Chains in favour of say, Love of the Loved? I can understand that by giving these tunes to others, it created a scenario where it was advantageous for them to spread out the publishing to make a few extra bucks. It was also good for the receiving artist, many of whom were new names and breaking into the market. Perhaps more deviously though, it also allowed them to add to their already dominant position in the market place by putting tracks out that didn't have The Beatles brand name directly on it. It also gave them the chance to develop their reputations as tune smiths; "bigging up" on the Tin Pan Alley muscle. Songs like Nobody I Know, World Without Love and From A Window. These are solid and competent examples of a writing style obviously under serious and rapid development. They are becoming professionals. There is such a wealth of material that they have spawned albums in themselves, like the excellent "Unheard Melodies" set which includes most of the good ones. For me, it was a must have. Whilst I was learning to play the guitar, I (of course) bought a couple of Beatle chord books. Quite a few of these books contained songs I'd never heard, like Love Of The Loved, Step Inside Love and That Mean's A Lot and I was desperate to hear them. P.J Proby's version of That Mean's A Lot is just amazing! Which voice will he use on this tune? He had a gift, a fantastic set of pipes, but man what a ham!! The way he sings that song MUST have had the boys on the deck laughing their heads off! So bad in fact, that it's great!
When I first heard I'm In Love, I was floored by it's simplicity. John's demo of it is simply beautiful. I love the line when he sings "according to my friends - I'm In Love". A good early example of John using a device in the lyric to stand the song on it's head. I'm in Love is one of two personal favourites, the other being It's For You released by Silly... sorry.. Cilla Black in 1964. I can't understand why that one wasn't kept in-house? It's such a well produced piece of work and seems to be more developed than most of their 1964 output. Granted it probably wouldn't have been at home on say, A Hard Day's Night, but it might have made a brilliant single or E.P track. A song of this calibre left out and released in the same year which brought some of the dubious content of Beatles For Sale seems to defy artistic logic. There were a couple of suspect decisions made around that time, witness putting Mr Moonlight (a C side if there ever was one) on the album as opposed to Leave My Kitten...I mean WHAT?...(knock, knock) HELLO?? ...any one at home here? Surely a crazy idea?
The songs given away probably give more of an insight into the business end of things rather than the artistic. Perhaps a song like It's For You might have been seen as being not being poppy enough, not Beatley enough? Maybe it may have been too sophisticated for the average fan at that time? No doubt Ms Black's audience were probably just that little bit older than the average Beatle fan in 1964? So, perhaps it was the right business decision. In most cases maybe it was the right thing to do i.e. give the songs away. However, it doesn't stop you wanting to hear a Beatle version does it?

The National Trust

2008-05-30T00:17:00.000-07:00

I read yesterday that one of the custodians of the National Trust Beatles properties in Liverpool has now lived in the house longer than the original Beatle! In this case John Halliday, who gave up his job as a machine fitter to take up residence at 20 Forthlin Road in Allerton, Liverpool. Reading this made me think about my own visits to all of the Beatles original houses in Liddy over the years. Until the National Trust acquired Forthlin and Mendips they were still private dwellings. It's amazing that the residents lasted so long against the constant flow of people visiting. Can you begin to imagine what that must have been like? It must have been hell. Having a gazillion visitors arriving by the bus load, standing outside every day pointing, staring and photographing your house like it was some sort of a public monument?
Yip...must have been hell.
I can't help but feel a tad guilty because over the years I've been one those visitors. My first visit to Mendips was during my first safari to Liverpool nearly 30 years ago. The Liverpool of then and now is totally different. Thirty years ago Liverpool was, by and large, not particularly interested in Beatle fans and to be honest there were probably less fans willing to make the pilgrimage to the city than there are today. Nor was it set up like it is today, with it's Beatle museums, it's Cavern Quarter and it's City of Culture tag. Not by a long chalk. Liverpool is a tough place - let there be no doubt about that and as a result it can be quite intimidating. This is more noticeable when you start straying away from the city centre which is what you need to do when heading out to the Beatle houses. In those days there wasn't a Beatle tourist bus offering guided tours. So it wasn't quite as easy as buy a ticket and get on board whilst a nice man tells you to look left and oh, by the way if you look to your right...etc. My first visits to these places was done by local bus and taxi. Then you had to seek out the place you were looking for. Eventually after finding Mendips, I can remember approaching the gate with some trepidation, thinking, this is all a bit silly and why am I doing this? I could see the (then) current occupant looking out of the window as if to say, don't you DARE stop at my front gate you Beatles fan you. Grrr..! I must have looked that obvious! Looking back though it may have been the collarless suit, winklepickers and Rickenbacker guitar I was sporting that gave the game away:-) Anyway, I decided to walk by as slowly as I could without stopping, but at the same time trying to take in as much as I could about the house where John lived...wondering what it was like beyond the gate, in the back garden, the porch, what was the inside like and all of that kind of stuff. After passing by several times I crossed the road to take a photograph. That was all I needed. Then I walked back to the gates at Strawberry Fields which is a stones throw from John's house. Again, a quick photo and back to town by bus. Somehow, I felt as though I'd gained a bit of insider knowledge having "visited" Mendips. My imagination of what life might have been like there, enhanced by seeing the house and being able to place it in its environmental context.
Now cut to a couple of years back.
When I heard that the National Trust had restored the property back to what it had been when John lived there and better still, that there would be public access, albeit limited, I couldn't resist completing the circle and just had to book a visit. Heading to Mendips this time was a lot easier. You would be picked up in town by minibus and taken there. As I waited my turn to enter, I remembered all of the times I had stood outside, beyond the front gate just wondering and no doubt looking like a lurker! All of that was about to change. A lurker no more - I had a ticket! Quite oddly, you enter the property through the side door to the left of the front entrance and make your way into the "morning room" which is a little public reception room where probably most people would have gone rather than to the spotless front door! I looked around the whole house and was left with a bit of an odd feeling. I felt somehow as though I had intruded. Not sure why really. I've never quite been able to work it out. Looking through the window of John's bedroom out on to Menlove Avenue, I got a shivering sense of what John would've seen from the same spot all the way up to the time when Mimi left the property... partly I suppose, due to people coming to stare outside of Beatle John's house! All in all a fairly strange experience but it did complete a circle for me. It was much easier again with this further layer of knowledge to imagine the laughs and tensions that must have existed in that house during the crazy years of the Sixties. It's easy to forget too, that when the boys came back home to Liverpool to see their families from conquering the world, it would be to these houses that they went. Almost beyond belief, Paul's council house at Forthlin Road in Allerton was the place he came back to rest his head after the groundbreaking, all engulfing trip to America in 1964 for example! Can you imagine the culture shock of that? From New York razzmatazz to the "what are you looking at?" attitude of the downtown council run Allerton estate. It must have been very strange to deal with. It also, no doubt, must have helped the boys to get their feet back firmly on the ground after reaching such lofty heights.
Sitting back on the minibus waiting to go back to Liverpool city centre, I felt I had gained something unique in Beatle tourism. Yes, these places are important to the Beatles story overall, but more importantly, they are places which evoke the atmosphere of a time before ALL of that. They give you much more of the real picture. The background to how the story would develop. You are struck by the sheer ordinariness of the opening chapters of what was to be a pretty unbelievable tale yet to unfold. The houses relay much more of the atmosphere of how such a story could have occurred in the first place. You also come to realise that real people lived here, and that when they closed their door at night, they had a private and ordinary life just like the rest of us.

Red Hot!

2008-05-28T00:22:00.000-07:00

John Lennon used to wonder if the Beatles concerts "were any good"! It is a valid question because, as the musician up on stage, you don't really get a sense of what the audience get. You can't "see" yourself whilst you perform. Furthermore, whilst on stage the sound can be pretty appalling, even today. If you are right next to the drum kit for example, it is quite difficult to hear what you are playing. It sounds a bit odd given the volume rock'n'roll bands play at, but it's the truth! One loud sound cancels another loud sound! Sometimes, the whole band blends into a kind of mush and you don't know if you are singing flat or if your guitar is out of tune. Bands get over these obstacles by rehearsing and playing regularly. Familiarity in this case breeds confidence and well, familiarity! Sometimes, just knowing the song VERY well is enough to get you through a very bad stage set up. I say all of this from a view which takes into account todays fairly high tech stage set ups, which includes something that the Beatles rarely had (if ever): on stage monitors! The monitor on stage is there to assist with the melee which comes from raw rock'n'roll. A good monitor can make all of the difference! So, with that in mind were the Beatles any good?
There are stark differences between their live performances of say The Star Club in 1962 and the Budokan in 1966! My own personal opinion is that they were a GREAT live band with great swagger, drive, power and plenty of Mach Shau! Undeniably though they were at times affected by the madness of cicumstance and of course - various substances . However, you do have to look at that Japanese gig and think WHAT was going on there? and, don't they sound WILD at the Star Club?
The footage of the 1966 gigs in Japan shows that they were very "relaxed", sorry...er.. completely stoned on stage. In fact SO relaxed one might conclude that some "Jazz" ciggies were used before hand? From the footage, George looked completely stunned during the incredibly slow performance of If I Needed Someone...and I might add as flat as a pancake on vocals - though he seemed to be more amused than bothered! However, there is still a bit of a swagger underneath, which indicates great ability albeit laced with boredom and familiarity. Witness the version of Rock'n'Roll Music at the "dark suits" performance.
It was a different story during the Star Club performances.
One word folks - "Prellies!"
Some of those tracks are played with high octane rocket fuel on board! Witness "I'm Gonna Sit Right Down And Cry Over You"!!! A thousand miles per hour and it's coming atcha!
I tend to think that their performances were "assisted" in order that they reach those kinds of nose-bleed tempos! However, cutting through the poor sound quality of those recordings it is obvious that there is a hunger and ability within the band that is just breathtaking.
In Hamburg, they tore it up. They blew the back wall down.
The Hollywood Bowl album didn't seem to go down too well with critics of the time of release. It has still not been released on CD and it is one that divides the fans. My own view is that it would take something unique to beat their version of Long Tall Sally from that gig! The band are set on stun during this blistering performance. Doesn't sound like there are too many "medicines" assisting them at that point! It is just pure, honest to goodness brilliance on display. It is bottled fire! They are yet to lose their enthusiasm and one senses there is still a hunger there waiting to be fed. That one live performance captures all of the swagger, confidence and their sheer ability in bucket loads. Remember they were playing through backline amps with no monitors and were relatively miles apart on stage. It must have been hell trying to hear each other. This is an indication of how good they were. Even when they couldn't really hear each other or themselves with dreadfull equipment and no proper P.A, they still managed to work on instinct and sound "pretty darned good". I think there can be no question of if they were "any good". They were good. Sometimes though, perhaps the boredom of repetition set in and the various "medicines" got in the way.
There can be no denying it, there are some dreadful examples of the Beatles live credentials out there. However at the core, I think the Beatles were an extraordinary live band which came from playing "millions" of gigs, great natural ability and of course the explosive shared chemistry found only once in a lifetime.

This Boy

2008-05-26T01:37:00.000-07:00

Something that really sticks in my craw is people who undermine the ability of the Beatles and their level of musicianship. Ringo seems to come in for particular criticism. During the recent 40th commemoration and celebration of the Sgt Pepper album, a project was devised to get modern bands to recreate the album, track for track, with Geoff Emerick at the controls. Most of the bands did a reasonable job in covering the songs, but it was interesting to get Oasis songwriter, Noel Gallagher's view. Firstly, being Oasis, they insisted their version was recorded in Studio Two at Abbey Road. Fair enough I can relate to that. In one throwaway comment he said, "Look, you can have the studio, you can have the same mics and desk, you can even have the same drum kit, but you've not got the drummer!" His drummer at the time?....Zak Starkey!! Reading between the lines, what he was saying was that they were about as close to a proper recreation of the circumstances of that particular track and it STILL wasn't quite right.
Great pop music is built from the bottom up, with perhaps the most important part of a band - THE DRUMMER. If the drumming isn't right, the production is sunk. It has been astonishing to me just how many people seem to undermine the man's ability for the job. After all, Ringo Starr was handpicked for the job by the boys themselves. Witness the differences in the Beatles sound when Pete Best was playing for them. They weren't cohesive; a tight unit. It just didn't sparkle. Something not quite right. They needed a solid beat, a definitive crack from the snare drum and pow from the kick drum. Ringo brought this with him into the Beatles. If I were to hazard a guess on what that might have meant to the guys themselves in the band, I'd say first off that the difference would have been night and day. They would have felt a collective sigh of relief and it would have been smiles all 'round, just knowing, just feeling that the final piece of the puzzle was in place. Great songs would be made greater still. Why? Because the platform on which they were built was solid. A good foundation for the house of Beatle.

It bugs me no end when it's said that Ringo was just some lucky so and so who jumped on the bandwagon at the last minute. It wasn't an accident. The Beatles CHOSE him because he gave them that extra edge. Ringo's great gift apart from his unbelievable timing, is his musicality. Strange thing that eh? A musical drummer. Drummers just beat things loudly don't they? Ringo's parts in the arrangements belie a sensitivity to the song. He recognised the importance of the song and not to overplay but to simply underline its best qualities. This is essential to an arrangement achieving it's objective. Try to imagine a guitarist just widdyling all over the place, having no regard for the song. It would be irritating and messy right? Less is best and if in doubt? Less is best! He also understood the sound of his drums. His tuning is great. An out of tune drum kit is as bad as an out of tune guitarist or vocalist. In short Ringo PLAYED his drums, he didn't just batter them in time. Those familiar with the Beatles outtakes will have noticed that by and large, the Beatles played songs right through, and then maybe played the ending again, or the solo section again if it was required. Take after take after take. At which point George Martin and the team upstairs would edit the takes together to complete the recorded performance. This wouldn't have been possible but for Ringo's immaculate timing. These days that job would be done using a computer generated "click track" set to tempo to ensure stability. For the Beatles, Ringo was the click track. I've played Beatles tunes many times with various drummers. Almost to a man they will come the table, thinking that it is an easy gig! However, they always leave with a new found respect for Mr Starkey and not because it is difficult to recreate what Ringo played. They learn that it is difficult to sound that easy, to play with that type of subtlety and yet retain the power and drive. It could be argued that Ringo was the first of the modern pop drummers, and to this day his name is synonymous with the drum kit. If the Beatles were a firework, then it was Ringo who lit the touchpaper.

The Industry of Music (part two)

2008-05-24T06:08:00.000-07:00

As I discussed previously, the creation of the CD has changed how we get and use our music almost beyond the imagination...well certainly that of the original consumers of music - the people who bought vinyl records. The data held on the compact disc together with the rapid development of personal computers and software, has meant that we can both use and listen to our music in a huge variety of ways hitherto not possible. It has become portable and sturdy in ways that the LP record simply could never have been. Cassette tape was just tragedy. The biggest change of all is the ability to download those files, again, only possible through the rapid rise of technology and broadband connections.
Perspective time...How quickly?
Just three to four years ago, most of the UK was using a dial up connection to access the internet. That would not have been cost effective to be able to download some of the larger files available. As I said previously - the genie is out of the bottle now.
So, what does this mean for us Beatles fans?
Whilst it was possible to build up a reasonably decent collection of illicit goodies in the pre internet era on cassette tape and vinyl, new additions to such a library were a rare treat, usually bought in some slightly shifty manner at a fan convention from under the counter or perhaps even through the post. Whatever method one came across these "products" there was always a tendency to feel good about hearing something most people hadn't. Now whilst I loved the official catalogue, I was always on the look out for something I hadn't heard. There was always something you'd read in some book or other, alluding to the possibility that there was some secret stash of classic unreleased material held in the "long dark corridors" of Abbey Road Studios. Clues and snippets of information coupled together with the sometimes stark differences between the UK and US releases, or even the mono and stereo versions meant that it was highly likely that there was indeed a "secret vault" which might require say, Indiana Jones to release?
It was in the days when Beatle news was delivered by good old Johnny Dean at the Beatles Monthly that I came across something that really turned me on and clued me up - the first article unearthing the Beatles BBC archive written by the right royal Mr Lewishom. I just couldn't believe that there were all these tracks I hadn't heard. I wondered what Soldier of Love might be or what their version of Dream Baby would sound like. So, the scene is set then - for me it became a bit of an obsession to find out more about the outtakes, rare tracks etc and please bear in mind, that this is all pre internet so real progress was slow!
The first bootlegs I heard that I felt were of any real interest, were the quite stunning Unsurpassed Masters, which a friend had given me. I was blown away by the quality of these recordings even if they were on "mind expanding" cassette tape! These recordings were fascinating to me. As a musician even more so, as you could hear the band making mistakes, chatting and so on...can it be true?....the Beatles are human?
Cut to the present day. No longer does a friend somehow happen by these recordings because they are now widely available online. Of course, there are many sites out there offering a bewildering range of unofficial "products", many of which rival the official releases. These products are created by the demands of the hard core fans. Books like John C Winn's "Way Beyond Compare" publish lists that few completists could ignore. Some people are absolutely hell bent on trying to have a complete.... and I mean complete and total catalogue.
I admit it's not really for me to say, but I don't think these recordings threaten the Applelites, the Beatles or anyone else. It's not as if they were going to release the breakdown of take 7 of any of the tracks anyway is it? It's educational and more to the point just plain fascinating for the scholar, the serious fan or indeed the casual passer by. Stuff you'd read about for years is now suddenly VERY available. So, as I said before the internet is not ALL bad where music is concerned.
The Beatles, who have been at the fore front of many developements in the music industry through the years have missed the boat in a lot of respects. No doubt the official catalogue, all polished up and shiny, will make a big noise when it finally becomes available to the iPod generation. All indications are that the band's sales will go through the roof and that there will be dearth of new number ones sealing their position as THE band of bands once more. But, will it be enough to help save what is a crumbling industry? An industry that now has to consider it's business model, re think its strategy. Or is it pay back time from the consumer? The consumer who is genuinly hacked off and feeling ripped off? The consumer who reckons that music is free? It's a tough question and one which has no straight forward answers. Although I would say that while piracy was a problem before the internet, it just wasn't on the same scale as today - after all you couldn't send a vinyl record down a phone line could you? Going back to the beginning of this article in part one, I described the "tea ceremony" of going to buy a new record. That kind of process just doesn't exist anymore. I can't help but think that in a lot of ways, it's a bit of shame for the generation who miss out on that type of excitement. Then again, for the generation who DID do that, how many are complaining when all they really have to do is a spot of google-ing to find riches Way Beyond Compare?
The question is.... how can anyone compete now?

The Industry of Music (part one)

2008-05-22T23:29:00.000-07:00

It can be argued that when the Beatles exploded into consciousness in the Sixties, they practically invented the modern music industry. They created massive sales, enormous public interest, unprecented viewing figures, stadium tours and the list goes on and on and then some. When the Beatles released a new record, it was an event. It was a reason for saving up your pocket money. For the ordinary punter there was a kind of "tea ceremony" in gaining this valuable new artifact. Heading into town, perhaps on a bus, going into the record shop, maybe asking for it to be played in the shop, asking the assistant for the record and the inevitable exchange of wonga, spondoolies - the cash sale - ker-ching!! Then perhaps, back on the bus, looking at this sacred and tactile purchase, checking out if there were any scratches on the vinyl, the sound of static from the inner sleeve, looking at it over and over again in case you missed some small but vital detail...jeez...even the smell of it meant something! From studio to Dansette in one neat operation. No confusion there then - a direct hit in every way for everyone involved. Today we (annoyingly) call that Win, Win! A purchase made of say the She Loves You single in 1963 here in the UK most likely still exists today, and if it was looked after, probably still does what it was charged to do in the first place, that is ... play! Now that's value for money isn't it? If only things were that simple today.
In this world full of high tech equipment, instant information and the ever increasing demands of the consumer hovering over everything, there is a quite bewildering range of methods in which to "consume" music... (you know even that phrase, "consume" music says something doesn't it?) ...When the Beatles released the Anthology in the mid 1990's, the method of releasing music wasn't too much different from the time of She Loves You, though there were signs that we were on the cusp of something and that things were changing...there was a bit of a preamble with build up promo on radio and magazines, a release date and a physical product (albeit a CD as primary release in that case and not the artform that was the vinyl product) and then hopefully a chart position in, what was and still is fast becoming extinct - the singles chart. A song could take a few weeks to get to the top, then building slowly in the nation's mind en route to becoming a classic. Whilst at the time of Anthology, if a release didn't hit number one in the first week of release, then somehow it had failed?

For me, at the time, this whole thing was quite strange; odd.

Something had changed and looking back now it might be regarded as the death knell for the music industry as we had known it. The personal computer and the internet were both just around the corner for most people. Few people can argue that the advent of the CD changed everything. With it came the word DATA and then data extraction. There you have the problem. When you take the emotional beauty of an artform such as The Beatles music, convert it to a series of 1's and 0's and marry it to a computer connected to the internet, you were surely asking for trouble. Trouble, that in my opinion will eventually and surely kill the music industry as we know it. To briefly go back to vinyl, one must remember that although bootlegs existed, they were harder to come by, nowhere near as easy to reproduce and there certainly wasn't the mass "theft" of product that exists now. The genie was out of the bottle when music ceased to be a physical product and became something measurable on a data sheet. There are some up sides though and it's not all bad....it's just different. In the next column, I'm going to look at what we've gained by these developements and specifically what impact this has meant to Beatle fans in particular. I started this piece by saying that arguably it was the Beatles who started the modern music industry as we knew it and were at the forefront of it's developement even as far up the line as the groundbreaking Anthology in the Ninties, where it was the Beatles who replaced the Beatles as the biggest band on earth. The question is, can the Beatles somehow set a new bench mark and save the industry we all know and love?

Fab and Gear!

2008-05-21T23:16:00.000-07:00

One of my favourite releases, perhaps of all time is the Concert For George. I wasn't fortunate enough to attend in person, but the concert disc gives a great account of what must have been an absolutely incredible event. The sheer love for the man is vividly displayed by the 5000 souls in the audience and by the musicians on stage. The great thing about the performers is that it's obvious every single one of them is there to bat for the team. It's a joyous celebration of the man who played such an underrated role in life and as a musician. His songs probably never sounded so good and the real tragedy is that he wasn't there to lead the band himself. In some ways it's a kind of greatest hits concert; a "best of" compilation. What it shows is the strength and depth of his work particularly post Beatles. Songs like Isn't It A Pity, All Things Must Pass and Beware of Darkness just shine and stand up as solid pieces of work which would have made brilliant additions to the Beatle catalogue. His body of work is littered with classics. Give Me Love...as poppy as it gets and just fantastic stuff. The Beatle material is played very well and with love by an incredible array of musicians. I think Mr Clapton did well with that job, given that there wasn't much time to get the whole thing together. I mean doesn't Old Brown Shoe for example just come in like a truck?

There is a glimpse of the Beatle "family" on display here too. When Paul and Ringo are playing on For You Blue, it's nice to see them remembering in jokes that must originate from when the song was written. There is a kind of "bubble" around both of them on stage during that song. It's kind of like, "we were in the Beatles by the way!" Notice how Paul hangs around at the end to ensure Olivia is escorted off stage, or how his obvious pride in the young Mr Harrison is displayed when he mentions how much like his Dad he is? It's also an unusual view of Paul as we don't get to see him in "someone else's band" type situation that often, (if at all actually?) Apart from his obvious main contributions, we also see Paul just being a musician in the band...witness how he is checking Eric out on stage, giving him that look musicians often give when playing together - one of "I played a great bit there - did you notice?" Nice to see. By the time Joe Brown steps up to do I'll See You In My Dream (er...and not a dry eye in the house I might add) you realise that a life has passed and his songs live on as a permanent reminder of the man. George's life unfolds in front of you throughout the set, from the boyish throws of I Need You to grown up and cynical Horse To The Water.

Again and again you get this feeling of the high regard in which George was held at a personal level. One of the great touches is that George's guitar is sitting on stage, on a stand, throughout. A nice, understated touch to give some kind of physical presence of the man and serving as a reminder of his understated brilliance.

Yes, decidedly fab and indeed gear!

The Conventions

2008-05-20T22:26:00.000-07:00

It's Abbey Road on the River Fest this weekend. It got me thinking about conventions and fan gatherings generally. I've been to quite a few myself as a musician and have enjoyed them immensely, though I've also been infuriated by them too. When it comes to bands at these get togethers there seems to be two types - the look-alikes who try to be the Beatles and the fan types who want to represent the Beatles in the best and honest way possible. I have to say straight off, I'm always embarrassed by the look-alike thing...because with that always comes the acting like them too, it then becomes "we are them" and then they call each other by Beatles names...it's toe curling for me! There are I suppose, maybe one or two places where this is ok (well....ish).... say...the BIG theatre tour or stadium show, where it's "biographical" and the main art form on display is acting and not some self fulfilling ego. The other place where it's fine to think you are the Beatles is er...in your dreams!
I've seen bands dressed up in the 1964 suits for example, coming on stage in make up and wigs, looking immaculate, paying attention to detail, playing the same guitars through the same amps and to all intents and purposes being the Beatles...and then the quasi Liverpudlian accents, then the Hollywood Bowl rhetoric, and before you know it, it's a bad movie with a terrible soundtrack set up inside a grimy pub where it's really out of place. Perhaps that's why it might be more believable to accept from half a football field away. Then it's easier to suspend your disbelief, and that's supposing the band are cohesive and have half a clue about the music. The sight of four tiny suited and booted figures, with Gretch, Rick, Ludwig and Hofner for company MIGHT have you with them then- hell, you might even enjoy the show! No. For me, if you see a kick ass band ten feet away from you playing Rock'n'Roll Music or While My Guitar Gently Weeps, who are really giving it large, sounding great and having a good time on stage just being themselves, then it's game over. There is no competition and it serves proper justice to the songs, which are after all, what it's all about. I've always said it - be inspired by it, don't try to BE it! There's nothing worse than sitting there thinking, "he's not a bit like Cagney is he?"

Paperhack Writer

2008-05-20T00:47:00.000-07:00

Without naming the journo or the newspaper that created it, the recent list of the 50 best British songwriters separated John and Paul. George barely got a look in. In a list where, "Led Zeppelin" and "Coldplay" exist, it's annoying that the greatest songwriting team to emerge from the human race so far, gets the surgical treatment...In my opinion, that's a fairly low blow and is done only to spark debate and underline this sort of unwritten code certain journos have, John was a genius, Paul was just a pop star tat.

John was a genius. Paul is a genius.

Of course if you said that to the journo...he might come back with the usual, McCartney? a genuis?...oh yeah? ...how about the Frog Chorus then?....to which I'd have to come back with, well yeah...how ABOUT the Frog Chorus then?....Do you know a child who doesn't like it? It's part of a soundtrack for a kids cartoon. Clearly, it was never meant to be Helter Skelter was it?...It may not be my favourite Paul track, but it's a large scale piece of work nevertheless which works very succesfully for the purpose for which it was written.
It's a soft and tired target.
I admit it's difficult to come up with a top 50 anyway, but I'd argue Lennon/McCartney should have joint number one based on achievement, influence and longevity alone. It's not like he uses John's solo material to put him above Paul...no, he uses Beatles material to do that of which Paul most certainly had a big input!
So, who is in between these two giants that splits them up then?
It's Kate Bush!...now, yes she can write, boy can she write and I have enormous respect for her...but how about overall body of work?, how about extended and continued influence? It's not like she overshadows anything is it? Not seen too many Kate Bush conventions around the world recently have you? Then we come to Morrisey/Marr...again, yes, yes it's great stuff...I personally loved the Smiths....but to paraphrase Paul talking about Radiohead here; is it that great?
Certainly, this author doesn't think so...ok, it's notable and yes it's influential, but will it still be referred to in say 100 years time? I think a very long "mmmmmm...." whilst-stroking-my-chin type reaction required.
George Harrison should have made the top ten in this list simply for writing Something, which is about as complete as a song can be written in almost every measurable way - end of story.
Lists like this come along every now and then for whatever reason I simply don't know. The Beatles are always on there as they simply cannot be left out - doesn't that tell you something? They were the blue print for the modern music industry. Thirty eight years after they ceased to be, they are still at the top of the tree, top of the heap -"A" number one!

Everybody knows that right?
....nuff said...

Actually In The Studio

2008-05-18T23:56:00.000-07:00

As a musician, I get to travel around which is sometimes a bit tiresome, but there are occasions when my Beatle soul is lifted when my quest to visit as many of the sights I've read about collides with my everyday job. In the last year I've been lucky enough to "be required" to be in New York and at a London studio by the name of Abbey Road! (You know, even as I write that down I get a feeling of excitement!)
At the tail end of 2007, I packed up my guitar and headed out to New York to play a couple of engagements. I'd been there once before, but never to play my own music - so, a scary prospect indeed. Walking around in Manhattan is a bit overwhelming, so I thought I would add a couple of ticks to my "places visited" list and head up to West 72nd Street to the Dakota, out of the centre of the city. It's quite a walk from Times Square but a pleasant one heading up towards Central Park, past Carnegie Hall and the Plazza Hotel. These are sights on their own merit and as I've said previously, it's sometimes like the colour drains from your view to reveal some black and white movie!..Looking at these places you realise that the Beatles were indeed a long way from home and the Cavern! You know they must have found all that stuff hard to take in at a personal level. As I said, overwhelming enough when you're just there to do a couple of small gigs and no one knows who you are! Eventually, I get to the Dakota and it's then you realise where you are....this is the place that the late great Johnny Rhythm lived and died..."died" being the word which echoed around my head....the Beatle fan in me began to shrink somewhat as the straight forward member of the human race took over and I began to think why am I here?... looking at this place, what am I? some sort of ghoul? There was an (unexpected) impact on me. I suppose as the time has passed since that news broke in 1980, time has taken over and there is now some kind of "historic" significance at that spot...I mean is it much different from visiting say, Dealy Plaza? Maybe it's because I remember the impact of the news like it was yesterday that I feel a bit "odd", because it's unlikely that I'd feel that way about Dealy Plaza...that in fact would perhaps be number one on my to do list if I was visiting Dallas. Soon though, the thoughts pass and I decide to go visit the Strawberry Field remembrance garden across the road. It's there that I find a bit of space to think and reflect, to gather my thoughts and send good vibes skyward to Johnny Ace. It was a great idea to have this peaceful spot just there.
It's time to head back to the madness of Manhattan.
On the way back I'm pleasantly surprised to unexpectedly come across the Ed Sullivan Theatre and all I can think of is the Maysles Brothers film which so brilliantly captures the moment of Beatle impact in the States. All of it inside that building. Because it was inside that building the Beatles came face to face with the inevitability of their destiny...and somehow, in doing so, my own and perhaps yours too. All of that said, I still had a gig to do...and just because of what I'd discovered during my visit, I thought I'd just throw in a couple of Beatle related tunes for the hell of it....so I played If I Needed Someone and threw in Besame Mucho at the end with a dedication to George and John...the audience (thankfully!) seemed to like it and all was well. The gig was a success and it was mission accomplished.

So it's back to the UK and time to work on the latest project.

I can barely believe my luck. I'm going to record in Abbey Road Studios and better still, it's going be in Studio Two!
As you walk up to the studios, it's like walking straight into an album cover - nothing has changed. You walk up the steps to enter the building and it's hard not to remember the interviews with the boys on "that very spot" during the Pepper period.
I'd been to the studios on a number of occasions before, but never to record there, to set up my Vox amp and Rickenbacker on the floor and watch it being set up for recording by the studio engineers. As I walked through big blue doors downstairs the Beatle fan in me just wanted to scream like a kid at a concert, but the "cool" musician in me soon took control and I walked in trying very hard not forget that "it's just another studio". Fundamentally, that is what it is. But the room has got an atmosphere all of it's own. First of all, it's quite a tall room with a pretty high ceiling, and although quite big, it's also quite intimate at the same time...As I set up my gear, every now and then I'd remember what I was doing, where I was and try to take it in. Looking over my shoulder at the drummer who'd set up in the corner at the back wall with the doors and the big clock where Ringo set up. Looking at the famous staircase and thinking about the incredible range of legendary individuals who walked up and down them. 'Tis mad! Then a sound which was hard to comprehend. The studio engineer's voice boomed out of the big studio monitors whilst my back was turned and I got this bizarre experience...the dreamer in me woke up realising that I wasn't listening to some tape here...I was "actually in the studio!" Being very familiar with a lot of the out takes from that studio, one gets used to hearing phrases like "take 7", "take 48" booming across the room and so on. It's got a sound all of its own. It's the sound of that room. So to hear that sound... er...LIVE! in that room at your session, well...the shivers went down my back! It was like transporting yourself into those out take tapes but without the hiss. As the band went through some sound checks and run throughs, I quickly settled down and the professional in me came out to play.
A consequence of being in that room with a band, is that I can really hear the ambiance of the room on all of the Beatle tracks I hear that were recorded there. I now really appreciate, and with startling clarity I might add, the importance of that room and how it helped to shape their sound... At the end of the session, it struck me that this studio is a working studio and not a museum. It's a place of great importance. It's a roomful of ghosts....but above all, it's a great studio where amazing music has been born.

Arrive without travelling

2008-05-18T00:43:00.000-07:00

As a young fan I was totally intrigued by the locations and backgrounds to the Beatles story I was reading about...Liverpool....Hamburg....London....the U.S...It became an ambition that I would try to visit as many of the places as I could. Reading books like Allan Williams', "The Man Who Gave The Beatles Away" was the first step on what's become a lifelong journey. He described in great detail places like The Jacaranda (The Jac) in Liverpool where the boys hung out in some sort of terminal boredom, staring aimlessly into the street at the passers by...eventually, I did get to the Jac and most of the other places in Liverpool featured in that book. As a result, I now have a much better understanding of what the atmosphere might've been like around that time. In some respects it's like stepping straight into a black and white photograph.
I still do travel and tend to try to visit as many of Beatle locations as possible. I was in London recently and decided to go to the Linda McCartney photographic exhibition in Saville Row...I'd never been there before. When I turned into the street, I immediately recognised the building of course. What was odd, was that somehow I thought that the building would be occupied; which it wasn't. It looked a bit sad somehow. The famous front door was covered with a very small sign on it saying that a particular security company is looking after it...mm, I thought, now there's a place where tons of stuff happened in Beatledom and look at it now...not derelict as such, but empty and appearing to be unused. Of course within a few minutes of looking, I noticed that there were about 30 people coming towards on the Beatles walking tour of London, where they stopped on it's steps...THEN I had an idea of what it was like at the time, with people constantly hanging out on the steps waiting for a glimpse somebody important...I was also struck by the location and it's relationship with the rest of central London and therefore just how big the rooftop concert's impact must have been on that very cold January day in 1969...now that was a stroke of genius!
I have also had the great privilege to go to the National Trust houses in Liverpool at Menlove Ave and Forthlin Road. These two places are in my top five Beatle locations as they really (really) convey an important part of the story which up until they were made museums (effectively) were off limits as people still actually lived there. The differences between the two properties is stark and gives a further insight into John and Paul's relationship. John was no working class hero. His house (even by today's standards) is in a nice area and is very comfortable thank you very much. Paul's place is different...the estate where Forthlin is is VERY much working class...one visit to either of these places and you instantly get a more informed view of their teen years. The areas are as dramatically different as the houses themselves. One is in an nice suburb of a blue skyed Liddy, the other a council estate - not quite Fort Apache. Paul's house is somehow, more "real", there's a bit more dirt, it's a bit more worn and lived in, whereas Mendips is shiny, almost smelling of fresh paint...somehow I think there was more pain in Forthlin than Mendips. I would recommend all fans who go through Liverpool to book a ticket. What you have is in some respects, less of a Beatle sight and more a slice of what helped to make the Beatles set against the atmosphere of the post war years . Totally fascinating.
I will continue my journey for as long as I'm able to travel and will always gravitate to those Beatle locations....look out for another slice coming soon, where I will talk about my visit to the Dakota and my own personal Holy Grail - Abbey Road Studios!

The Authors

2008-05-15T23:22:00.000-07:00

These days' I'm fairly picky as to what new Beatle or related products I'll buy. This is due, mainly because of the sheer amount of complete and utter garbage that has been released or published. Leaving the audio and video side of things out for now, I'd like to talk about what I consider the essentials from the literary world. In reality there are really three genres to look at. It's either going to be a memoir type, a research type or a technical type. For me there are a few authors of whom I'll just instinctively reach out for my wallet. John C. Winn, Doug Sulpy, Bruce Spizer, Keith Badman spring to mind. Between them, these guys have sorted the wheat from the chaff, laid down the actual background with dates and times, providing an informative and definitive timeline of events.
There are a few other guys out there also worth a mention. These are the guys who have written and researched "one off" books like The Beatles Gear by Andy Babuik. A superb book for fans and in particular musician fans who really understand and appreciate the detail he has gone into regarding the differences between the various Vox amps, guitars and gadgets....and it's also a book with a very spooky photograph taken in a German music shop of John Lennon's future Rickenbacker BEFORE he purchased it! Looking at it is odd; the poor instrument had no idea what it was in for!! It went on to be one of the most famous guitars in the world...and you know, having owned one myself, they're not even that great, as guitars go. They just sort of have something only a Rick could give you. Other notable tomes include the definitive Hamburg releases by way of Hans Olf Gottfriedson's "From The Cavern To The Star Club". A mighty piece of work and a free record into the bargain (a 7" vinyl reproduction of My Bonnie) Of course the average fan could tell you it would take a huge book to tell you about the amount of times we've been ripped off by the Polydor recordings from Germany!
One of the very best books I think I've ever seen comes in a reproduction 2" EMI Tape box and is entitled "Recording The Beatles". What an amazing piece of work. This book is very technical and even with 25 plus years of sound engineering experience is quite difficult to follow and completely understand, as the language of recording has changed so much since EMI Abbey Road were in the music making business during the early 1960's up until now. However it provides a totally fascinating glimpse into how those brilliant records were made. It's one of those books which is a must have in my opinion. It's also very expensive and very big and very heavy...in short it's just ...er...very!
I've left the last author until last as it was he who ultimately defined the "new" generation of respected writers and created the genre in which most of the authors above now exist. It can only be the mighty Mark Lewishom. From his early writings in the The Beatle Book Monthly, he has systematically changed how not just Beatle fans but (modern) musical historians and archivists think over a period which must be coming up towards 30 years now. He was the guy who wrote Sessions and The Beatles Live as well as many other landmark works. He is currently preparing the "definitive history of the group" and I for one simply cannot wait to get my teeth into it as it will, without doubt, be the most exhaustively written account yet published. By the time all three (yes three!) volumes are in the public domain, an unbelievable 17 years will have passed by! The first volume, which will take the reader up to the end of 1963, is expected in stores by 2010. God only knows what it will unearth, but one thing is for sure, Mr Lewshom has an eye for detail, and if it's in there, it's probably been corroborated over and over across many primary and secondary sources. As he has said himself, the "time is now" to complete such a project as the band and it's first hand witnesses are fast fading into history. Sad but true. However, we are promised "thorough, balanced, comprehensive histories", and not just another sensationalist rip-off rehash retelling of the same wrong facts with a couple of pics thrown in. The Beatles were the ultimate band - warts and all! Therefore, ultimate book telling their story should reflect that. Bring it on I say, bring it on

Just a little song

2008-05-15T01:06:00.000-07:00

I saw a trailer for the new Beatles film "All Together Now" which is a close look at the development and roll out of the Cirque de Soleil's amazing production of "Love"...in it, there's a bit where Paul McCartney and George Martin are just sitting in the auditorium with Paul remarking how small and "little" the process was to create the songs, with "yer little guitar, paper and pencil", and "look what happened to it"...referring of course to the sheer scale of the Love show in front of him, but also underlining the world changing phenomenon of his old band; them Beatles. His comment about the writing process is right on the money. As a songwriter myself, I have often wondered where "it", the song, comes from...you know you could be sitting one minute, with your guitar just drinking a coffee and then you play a particular chord. Now there's something about that chord, you've played it a million times, but this time it switches a light on in very small room in your head and compels you to find the next one and then the next one...before you know it, you're humming along. Then the humming starts to sound like a bit of a word which again somehow compels you to find the next one and so on...As this process continues, the shape of a song has somehow, magically presented itself to you...you weren't looking for it, but there "it" is, standing there right in front of you, just you. No one has heard it before, no one knows it, it came just to you, it just sort of popped out your head on to your "little piece of paper" and out of your "little guitar". Is it some kind of voodoo? Because in essence, a song is just a thought with a backbeat as Johnny Rhythm once said right?.....As you try to rationalise it, you realise that it is that same single thought in your head physically, but the real mind blower is how, and perhaps more importantly why, did it manifest itself with you? Is it like you are some kind of "radio tuner" and you just turned the dial to find something no one has ever heard before? If you thought too much about it, your head would explode it really would!
No, Mr McCartney is right on the money with that comment that it's a "little" process, because for a time it is just you and "it"...the real trouble of course starts when you let other people hear it and then they form opinions about it, they want to buy it, they want to own it, they want to know about every single "little" detail about "it" before moving on to you... or in the Beatles case - planet altering events. They are just small pieces of work in and of themselves, but songs somehow can and have changed minds, opinions and even this world. Yes, it's a very powerful "little" process from start to finish is the writing of a song.

the bootleggers

2008-05-14T00:19:00.000-07:00

Bootlegs open up a private world to the listener where one might get the chance to hear things the artist would rather you didn't...snippets of conversation, bad versions of well known tracks, early versions and so on - so as fans it's very difficult to find anybody who doesn't or wouldn't want to hear something different, something out of the norm, something you shouldn't have - a back stage pass with access all areas basically. This must be a nightmare for the artist..as a musician myself, when you see something up on you tube or hear a recording someone might play to you saying "I came across this the other day...sounds great", you tend to feel in some small way violated there is no doubt about that. I've had some small experiences of this myself due to the dreaded camcorder at a gig syndrome and it's not particularly nice. However, as a Beatle fan, "it's historic innit?", so therefore somehow ok?...it isn't really, but you can't help but want to hear it anyway right? Better still, if you can get it on a silver disc inside some well designed packing - EVEN better! This is where the artist and fan collide. The artist would rather keep their "dirty washing" in the wash house thank you very much, whilst the fan is desperate to hear that extra 6 seconds and studio chat after the fade! It's fairly bizzare when you think about. There's the artist putting blood, sweat and ears into making the track sound the very best it can possibly be, and there's the fan wanting to hear the first take break down after the verse was played badly! Again, is it different for the Beatles? The recent (and I may say brilliant) series by the shadowy figures of Purple Chick are a great example of 21 first century (er..schizoid) fans, the modern bootleggers and the band. Those of you in the know will instantly understand this. For those unaware, here's an example of they might do with a release. Let's use the album Please Please Me as an example. Officially, The Beatles (in the modern era of CD etc) put out the mono version of the same album released on record in 1963. This is great, but simply not enough for the discerning mega fan...Purple Chick fill the substantial gap like this - First of all they whett your appetite by creating an expanded version of the album and call it Please Please Me - Deluxe editon. As a fan you're hooked right there, wondering what might be on that album and what makes it "deluxe".
First thing you notice is that there is specialist art work with expanded and extensive information about the sessions concerned. Next up there are TWO discs containing the best possible versions in the best available quality of both mono and stereo versions. That in itself is perhaps good enough, but the good folks at Purple Chick then reckon you'll maybe want to hear other tracks from the timeframe, the b sides, the unreleased? In this example, How Do You Do It? makes an appearence, different mixes of the tracks with dates times, room numbers, trousers, outlines...nothing left to the imagination!. So what could be on disc two then? Well, here are all the available takes of each song in the best quality (for example, There's A Place contains all the takes from 1 to 10) It's astonshing to me coming from the time when the vinyl was it and was all she wrote!
Overall it's a package the fan CAN'T ignore...it's the whole damned thing in one place in a nice box! The question is, why don't the Applelites understand that people want it and that ilk of presentation? OK, so the market probably doesn't cross over to the general public and mass sales on the scale of the "1" album, but surely it's better that they control these types of release and taking up the revenues as opposed to leaving it in the hands of the bootleggers who basically do what THEY want in terms of the presentation and content..and worse they give it away under the "made by the fans for the fans" banner...it's the word on the street, it's a groundswell of opinion, it's a FACT...there is a market for the material and there are two routes for the artist....First, go for the bootleggers down the legal route? No, it's expensive and messy and you don't look good for it or cut the supply off by releasing it your self? Makes the most sense. In other words, give the fans (and history) what they want and take the money (honey!)
All of this is easy for me to say as I don't control a multi million pound industry!
The fact is though, you're never going to stop people putting up their phone films of your concerts on you tube, or stop people having the nerve to be interested in the whole studio tape are you? No is the answer. If you can't beat(le) them? then you may as well join them.

Hello from The Beatcomber

2008-05-13T00:57:00.000-07:00

it's another Beatle based blog...oh no!!...ok...let's lay out a line on this...I am a Beatles fan and I have been for a long time.
So why this blog?
Well, I would simply like to occasionaly share my views on the best band in the world with other like minded souls - simple as that. I've been a collector, I've been to the Conventions, and damn it I've even played the songs live on stage! I'm very aware of the Beatle "scene" (man!) and what people want ...mainly because it's probably the same as myself...you know the score, let's trot out the usual suspects then...a DVD of Let it Be would be nice, a remastered back catalogue blah blah...look you've heard it all before, so I'll probably steer clear of all that sort of tosh. Those products will come out when they (the Apple-ites that is) are happy with the TERMS of sale, what's in it for them and obviously walk that fine line between keeping bottom line healthy and giving the people what they want. In other words, we'll get what we want when they are ready and we'll just have to like it or lump it. In saying that though, there hasn't been much in the way of headline grabbing releases though eh? Although that might change fairly dramatically with the change of head honcho's at the Apple HQ...one thing I've heard recently alarmed me greatly - please god no beatles tunes in adverts of any description..never ever....as the band themselves have said, those tunes weren't written to sell daipers or anything else! Those are great works of art in their own write and in my humble opinion, would be the beginning of the end of their status as the greatest pop songs yet written. Any suggestion of going down that route surely, belongs in a daiper and that's the bottom line! (ooer...sorry for that last one)
it's a blog in folks