I have had it up to here waiting for the Beatles catalogue to be remastered

LOL. No argument there!

***

I finally picked up a used copy of the Lewisohn book today. The gleeful clerk at Powell's told me that there's a newer addition out now, but that he personally preferred the original as it has less "day to day" stuff.

Then he looked in both directions to make sure no one was listening, and informed me that he used the book to make his own chronological version of the White Album, and that he had to make several command decisions about the track order because some songs were recorded on the same day.

Hi. My Name Is Nathan Carson and I Am In A Cult. A Really Big Cult.

I give Honey Pie a pass since it contains John Lennon's best ever first take guitar solo.

I'm waiting for the chronological box set to come out.

all the songs in chronological order. $600, 910 copies.

You can't fully appreciate the music of the Beatles until you listen to it in the exact sequence it was recorded.

that clerk at Powells was just ahead of the curve.

Yes, to get the full experience you have to listen to the mono mix, then go eat a sandwich and come back and listen to the stereo mix. Just like the Beatles did.

Sarnie

except for Sgt Pepper where someone else has to listen to the stereo mix whilst you are out, for you to fully appreciate it.

Regarding Music Hall, I would say Paul's best through and through pre-rock pastiche would be "Baby's Request" on his "Back To The Egg" album although that one was of course more Tin Pan Alley than Music Hall.
Otherwise, I like it better when he puts elements of music hall into more time-typical pop songs, such as "Penny Lane", "Fixing a Hole" and "Your Mother Should Know". Queen would later do this excellently too, on tracks such as "Seaside Rendez-Vous", "Lazing On a Sunday Afternoon" and "Good Company".

xpost: also Chronological Box set comes with a 'replica' unpeeled Yesterday And Today. Saliva not included.

I give Honey Pie a pass since it contains John Lennon's best ever first take guitar solo.

― Darin, Sunday, October 4, 2009 7:31 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

First take? Ha, probably because he wasn't going to want to hear it ever again...

Isn't it on one of these formats where it sort of gets faded out earlier? (i.e. either the mono or the stereo?) The solo, I mean...

I think I need serious help because all I want to do is listen to White Album out takes. Is there a twelve step program for people like me?

the cure is probably listening to those outtakes w/ Yoko talking over them. If that doesn't work, you're fucked.

listening to the White album on Saturday night on the lovely big stereo in the living room, 'Revolution 9' bouncing off the ceiling...LOL'ed at my husband wandering in and reminiscing at how he and his housemates used to get loaded and sit on the couch listening to '9', teeth clenched, eyes following the sounds from the speakers from right to left, left to right. and then when 'goodnight' came on they'd all slump over in a heap and pass out.

Square old me has no such recollections. I just listen to it studiously and think, 'I wonder what those tape sections sound like on their own'. fail.

Awwww... :-)

I am currently away and not in the position to listen to my music. The White Album remasters especially is a record I crave to hear! Jeez.

Never listening to the Beatles while stone out of your mind is a pretty epic fail. You should really do something about that over the holidays.

Hello my name is Sharon and I am Fail :)

Just picked up the Lewison book I ordered from the Library.

There's gold in them hills.

Any more news on the repressing of the mono box?

An early skim through the book pushes the mono=true theory quite hard.

Not sure a repressing is urgently needed. Both my local HMVs still have mono boxes, and Fopp had a pile of them behind the counter when I was in last week. I may be coveting one a little too much - I had a dream the other night that the price had been bumped up another £30. At least I hope it was a dream.

Well, I did see the Stone Roses box was now £129 as opposed to £99, so it's possibly true.

It comes to pass that my previously DLed mp3s of the Mono box were less than optimal rips. Have found a DL at decent bitrate and my tepid reaction to the Mono mixes has now turned to agape agape.

Question: in light of the awesome and highly skronky guitar solos Paul pulls on 'Taxman' and 'Good Morning'-- did he do this kind of shit in Wings much? I am pretty much ignorant of Wings except for the hits.

lol... I find it hard to listen that closely to Wings...natural reaction is to recoil and change the radio station :)

yes but I want more fried psych paul guitar!

no he didn't do that in wings at all

that way lies madness

No skronky fried guitar in Wings. What is even stranger, few awesome bass riffs ala "Taxman" or "Come Together."

just bagpipes and keyboards.

Yes, bagpipes and keyboards ;_;

Makes for an interesting topic though. Lennon's records after the Beatles, musically, in hindsight do truly sound like an extension or evolution of his late Beatles work. Working your way back yu can definitely see his development very clear. There's 'logic' to it.
But Paul in Wings? Not so much. Makes me wonder what the hell happened to him!

(Linda? ;_;)

the cure is probably listening to those outtakes w/ Yoko talking over them. If that doesn't work, you're fucked.

― tylerw, Monday, October 5, 2009 10:48 PM (4 days ago) Bookmark

otm

There's loads of greeat Wings stuff

there is just a LOT of Wings and solo McCartney to work through. You can easily put together a few albums of "beatle-worthy" wings and solo songs though; all of S/T and Ram to begin with, "Dear Friend", a fair amount of "Band on the Run". But yeah his playing for the most part went soft. But so did lots of people in the 70's. At least he didn't commit a crime like that sax on "Whatever GEts You Through the Night"

I love the s/t and the weird new wave attempts on II. I still need to pick up Ram.

For Wings guitar skronk, find "Spin It On" off Back to the Egg. Then stop you search, because that's all you're gonna find in that vein from the Wings catalog.

Put it this way, when Lennon and Harrison passed, the song(s) they were remembered by were solo ones.

Even though Macca has had way more post-beatles music (and success) for fairly obvious reasons, when he goes it'll be "Hey Jude", "Let it be" and so on...

Live and let die, Mark.

:)

Well, Paul never worked with musicians as good as Harrison, Starkey, and Lennon again. Plus, Lennon wasn't around to tell Paul his songs were shit.

yeah, paul's songs were shit, of course.

Well, Paul never worked with musicians as good as Harrison, Starkey, and Lennon again.

Haha, many of the members of Wings were and remain some of the best session guys in the music world. I mean, for all that I love the Beatles, very few people were calling up George Harrison to come in and lay down some leads for them over the year.

Um, yeah, but you don't exactly call up a Beatle and ask him to play session man, do ya?

Yoko did.

"Haha, many of the members of Wings were and remain some of the best session guys in the music world."
― a wicked 60s beat poop combo (Pancakes Hackman)

We're getting into the old argument of technique vs. musicianship. No doubt Paul's played with dudes whose chops are much better than Lennon's or Ringo's, but bottom line, there's a huge difference between someone you hire as your ersatz recording session employee and someone whose distinct musical style meshes with yours so intimately they can anticipate your every move.

As far as session work goes, McCartney has great bass technique; I don’t recall too many folks calling him up to lay down some tracks.

Well, Paul never worked with musicians as good as Harrison, Starkey, and Lennon again.

The people who played on "Tug Of War" and "Pipes Of Piece" were way better instrumentalists than George Harrison or John Lennon ever were. Ringo Starr is a great drummer, but he also played on those two albums, that is, the tracks that Stanley Clarke didn't play on instead. Which was hardly a bad replacement.

Hey, wait, I mean Steve Gadd, not Stanley Clarke.

This guy is a way better guitarist than George Harrison, he should have been in The Beatles instead:

http://www.premiumseatsusa.com/concert/Buckethead/images/buckethead_jk02.jpg

lol wackiness

I don't think you can boil it down to mechanics/talent. Not to get all touchy-feely but alot of it was, I dunno, alchemy I guess. Paul practically grew up with John and George...sure not so much Ringo but then again it's a certain kind of alchemy that allows an outsider to fit so well with 3 close friends and stay so well fitted for 10 years. John said to Ringo after he left the Beatles, that he missed the kind of jams where you could give a look and everyone knew where to go. As much revisionism as has gone on since the breakup, it's true to say that a lot of Paul's songwriting was collaborative. Even if John didn't write the lyrics to Hey Jude, he told Paul not to change 'the movement you need is on your shoulder'. Paul goes off into the world to write songs with Linda, or alone, and it's a whole different dynamic. The counterbalance is missing, the competitiveness, the intuition, all the things he had with the Beatles don't go with him when he goes somewhere else.
It's nice to think that they would, given how much he steered the Beatles, but it just doesn't happen that.

Ack. Too bloody wordy and sentimental as per usual.

Nope. Spot on.

I see the idea of counterbalance but I'm not sure you can say Paul's songwriting was collaborative.
It seems clear that by 65 or 66 at most, each one composed alone and presented almost finished songs to the others. of course there are some exceptions.

Maybe. But I think that presentation process was a key part, no matter how brief...seeking that judgement rather than treating it as a finished song is still collaboration of a kind. Hair splitting I know. Where Paul's instincts leaned towards clear language, Lennon's instinct was towards indirect language, metaphors and such...and those instincts, even with a mostly completed song created a push-me-pull-you...I know I keep coming back to this but that line in Hey Jude...Paul was preparing, planning to change it. John said he liked it. And it's a choice that helps the imagery. We've all made it kind of mythological all these years later, but to me that process is huge. Creatively, you always want your stamp on your own work. It's not everyone who would work that way, with a finished song or not. I mean, the Robinson brothers got in HUGE fights because Chris would change Rich's songs around, make verses choruses...that's almost a norm. Collaborative songwriting to me is some kind of weird magic. It doesn't matter about the mix of who writes what, to me it's what that song would look like without the collaboration.

Put that way, I totally agree with you. the presentation part is definitely key and allowing someone to change even details to your work is very important.