The Beatles APPRECIATION THREAD

[Cool Chris]

And let's not forget the mostly inaudible f-bomb in Hey Jude.

Crap, I've never heard that!

I have mixed feelings about these types of things in music. On the one hand, you are in the studio, you've had time to rehearse, you have control over your environment. When shit like this happens, cut and start over. On the other hand, music, like all art, should have a level of spontaneity to it. If it becomes too sterile, it starts to feel, well, sterile.

One of the greatest rock songs of all time, Louie Louie, has both a flub, and an f-bomb. And they both sound so integral to the song it is hard to imagine it without those moments.

[PuffyPat]

recording is a very spontaneous environment, and personally, i'm a huge fan of leaving in things like that. there's a lot of little stuff like that in beatles songs. there's one, can't quite remember which, where there is just a fraction of a second of feedback from a guitar. almost unnoticeable unless you know it's there.

[sneakyblueberry]

recording is a very spontaneous environment, and personally, i'm a huge fan of leaving in things like that. there's a lot of little stuff like that in beatles songs. there's one, can't quite remember which, where there is just a fraction of a second of feedback from a guitar. almost unnoticeable unless you know it's there.

That's where the soul of the music is I recks.

a day in the life is a weird song. they were both writing separate songs, and couldn't finish them, and there some lines that make it seem like they could be related, so they just put them together.

I think HAWG is similar in that sense, just mashing together different ideas like a collage.  pretty cool

[Outcrier]

But I stand by my McCartney preference.  He gets a lot of shit, but tbh he wrote most of the Beatles' classic songs, and stayed consistent when Lennon was doing his trying-to-be-edgy shit.

If he wrote your personal favorite Beatles songs, fine. But wrote most of the Beatles's classic songs? I don't think so since both of them were pretty consistent (though i give Lennon a edge because i think he wrote the strongest tracks).

[erwinrafael]

I think I mainly just don't get all the praise Lennon gets.  He wasn't anywhere near the god-like figure people make him out to be.

My praise for John Lennon is because of I Am The Walrus, Come Together, Across the Universe, Dig A Pony, Strawberry Fields Forever, I Want You (She's So Heavy), I'm Only Sleeping, Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, In My Life, Help!, Norwegian Wood, Rain, Tomorrow Never Knows, and The Word.

[Orbert]

Lennon always stuck with basic 4/4 rock.

I agree with most of your post Orbert, but I think this is an unfair statement. 

Lennon had some awesome stuff like Happiness is a Warm gun which shifts into alternate 9/8 - 4/4 patterns (it may be 9/8 and something else, its been a while since I've listened or looked at the score), but his real strength lies in the way he would add beats to common time to fit the lyric. Don't Let Me Down has that awesome vocal line that stretches over the bar in the verses, same with All You Need is Love. 

In terms of manipulating bar lengths, Lennon was a master and making the music fit what he had to say, which is extremely rare.

I forgot that John (mostly) wrote "All You Need Is Love" and it does have some crazy meter changes, and I even commented on it earlier.    But when I was talking about the straight 4/4 thing versus Paul getting a bit "out there" I was talking about their respective post-Beatles solo careers.

"Rain" is a fave, and it has that weird cadence to it.

Okay, fine, I take it back.  There are a lot more Lennon songs that I like than I realized.  His solo stuff still does nothing for me, though.

[erwinrafael]

I think I would agree that in general, McCartney had better songs post-Beatles than John Lennon. But in terms of individual songs, I personally can't think of a McCartney song that comes close to my love for Imagine, Jealous Guy, Woman, Grow Old Along With Me, and Beautiful Boy. Then there are the second-tier songs like Give Peace A Chance, Working Class Hero, Starting Over, Instant Karma and Nobody Told Me, which are also very good.

I proposed marriage  to my wife by giving her a letter printed with the lyrics of Grow Old Along With Me and our picture. 

[sneakyblueberry]

I think I mainly just don't get all the praise Lennon gets.  He wasn't anywhere near the god-like figure people make him out to be.

My praise for John Lennon is because of I Am The Walrus, Come Together, Across the Universe, Dig A Pony, Strawberry Fields Forever, I Want You (She's So Heavy), I'm Only Sleeping, Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, In My Life, Help!, Norwegian Wood, Rain, Tomorrow Never Knows, and The Word.

Great list of songs (mostly), but that isn't what I was getting at.  Towards the end of his life, his attitude (especially towards the Beatles and Paul in particular) was pretty appalling.  That Playboy interview, he just comes off as a whiny twat, and from what I can gather he was just a bit of an asshole, beating on women, being extremely possessive of Yoko.  Of course that's mostly from second hand accounts but still, leaves a bad taste in my mouth.  I'm not denying that he wrote great music. 

But I stand by my McCartney preference.  He gets a lot of shit, but tbh he wrote most of the Beatles' classic songs, and stayed consistent when Lennon was doing his trying-to-be-edgy shit.

If he wrote your personal favorite Beatles songs, fine. But wrote most of the Beatles's classic songs? I don't think so since both of them were pretty consistent (though i give Lennon a edge because i think he wrote the strongest tracks).

Yeah, sorry I should have said the bolded part.  Most of the classic Beatles songs that immediately spring to my mind are sung, and therefore most likely written by, Paul.

[KevShmev]

It's hard to pinpoint their most classic songs down to just a few, but I am pretty sure if we had to list the 10-15 most classic Beatles songs, based on popularity and enduring longevity (as opposed to our personal preferences), Lennon and McCartney would both have about an equal amount in there.

[Outcrier]

In RateYourMusic, there was a Artists Top songs. Here is the one they had for Beatles (with near 200 voters):

1. A Day in the Life
2. Strawberry Fields Forever
3. While My Guitar Gently Weeps
4. Tomorrow Never Knows
5. In My Life
6. Eleanor Rigby
7. Hey Jude
8. I Am The Walrus
9. Happiness Is a Warm Gun
10. Here Comes the Sun

11. Something
12. I Want You (She's So Heavy)
13. Across The Universe
14. Let It Be
15. Norgewian Wood
16. Helter Skelter
17. Come Together
18. I'm Only Sleeping
19. Penny Lane
20. Lucy in the Sky With Diamons

So, in short (and accounting A Day in the Life for both):

Lennon: 12 songs
McCartney: 7 songs (counting Yesterday, which was 21º)
Harrison: 3 songs

[Outcrier]

Still, i think that, if counting the rest, it evens out a bit but i agree that Lennon had the most important songs.

[KevShmev]

I don't buy that list.  I remember years ago hearing that Yesterday is the most played song in the history of FM radio, yet it doesn't make that top 20?  Also, no way is I Want You... one of their most classic and iconic tunes.  Gun to my head, if someone asked me the five most iconic Beatles songs, I'd say:

Hey Jude
Yesterday
A Day in the Life
In My Life
Let It Be

[Calvin6s]

My personal point was never about which was the "better"?  Nor was I using post-Beatles to make further distinctions about which was better.  It was that the better was them working together.  Anybody that has written music can tell you working with others almost always produces better results.  And it doesn't have to be some sharing, but something as simple as changing one note, chord, a simple variation of a repeating pattern or a general suggestion like adding or deleting an instrument.  Those little things can make a world of difference.

And when you have two great songwriters, they take each other to milestone levels.

[sneakyblueberry]

why do all of these lists exclude early beatles? lol.  Hard Days Night, She Loves You, I Want to Hold Your Hand, Help, All My Loving etc.  All of those songs are just as iconic imo. 

[Outcrier]

I don't buy that list.

Proceeds to cite 5 songs, 4 of them are in that list 

why do all of these lists exclude early beatles? lol.  Hard Days Night, She Loves You, I Want to Hold Your Hand, Help, All My Loving etc.  All of those songs are just as iconic imo.

Because they are great and all but not really top 20.

It can be if you include popularity and iconic status but that list was made by near 200 people voting exclusively for their personal favorite Beatles songs, not what songs they thought were most iconic (which never was the intention to begin with).

[Outcrier]

"sorry, accidental double post"

[PuffyPat]

if we're talking most iconic, hey jude is def #1 followed by yesterday, and after that i'd have to say hard day's night because that first chord is probably the most iconic chord ever.

[Calvin6s]

Every time I try to make a top 20 Beatles list, it quickly ends in disaster.  The songs are just so varied that there just isn't a pinnacle song for them.  So instead, here's my lifetime Beatles journey.

My mom had the Sgt. Peppers tape in her car when she took me to Kindergarten.  I recall vividly because I'd race into the car so I could dig through her audio tape bag just to find that tape (ok, 8-track) and slam it in the car deck before she could say no.  Loved it from beginning to end, but because 8-track had the equivalent to CD track skip, I believe my favorite from that at the time was Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.  But the Bee Gees/Frampton had a Sgt. Peppers movie and Get Back was the big ending, so of course I loved that being a kid.  My father had the rest of the library and would blast the Beatles and many other classics on the weekends.  So the melodies are like breathing to me.

Jr. High to most of High School, I viewed the Beatles as "baby stuff" because for me, it literally was.

I started to rediscover them when I picked up guitar in high school due to guitar idol interviews.  But they didn't make a full recovery until an early 90s Lynch Mob concert.  The concerts would start with the lights going down and the Beatles "Tomorrow Never Knows" as the warm up / intro track.  At concert volumes, it was nirvana to me.  Obviously, I recognized it as the Beatles, but I didn't know the name of the song because that wasn't one that either my mom or dad played in my formative years.  It instantly became my favorite Beatles song.  It was beyond cool.

So Revolver was then my favorite album.  Now I'm at Musicians Institute and my MI band needed a cover song (and two originals) to compete in the battle of the bands.  Clearly TNK was going to be ridiculously difficult to make "your own" while not totally destroying the song.  So I created our version of Eleanor Rigby.  Mostly orchestration for drums, bass, two guitars and synth. 

I even still have the orchestration I presented to the other guys
Eleanor Rigby soundcloud

Keep in mind, this was 1993.  Guitar synth patches were horrendous and the synths were "multi-timbral", but not in a good way.  So I just used a staccato string for guitars and keys, the drum machine bass for bass guitar and of course the drum machine for drums to represent what we'd be playing as a sketch.  I recorded the whole thing and just their *stem* track and had to hand write out their parts (just print out the MIDI to staff, in 1993?  Easier and cheaper to just break out the mechanical pencil and staff paper).  Then we took that sketch to get the core down and then branched out in practice.  I still wish I recorded the actual band rehearsals, but we figured we'd have time later (which never happens).  Oh, and our recording device was usually a $30 tape recorder that made everything sound awful.  And I probably pick up my guitar less than an hour a year these days, so the opportunity has passed.

Mid to late 90s, suddenly everybody was covering Eleanor Rigby, so that went into the dust bin.  But it was really fun back in 1993.

So LSD to Get Back to Tomorrow Never Knows to Eleanor Rigby.  I think my favorite song now is A Day in the Life, but tomorrow it could be Strawberry Fields Forever, then Because, Golden Slumbers/Carry That Weight, or Come Together.  They easily have more than 20 "this is the best song ever" songs.

[Stadler]

I think I mainly just don't get all the praise Lennon gets.  He wasn't anywhere near the god-like figure people make him out to be.

My praise for John Lennon is because of I Am The Walrus, Come Together, Across the Universe, Dig A Pony, Strawberry Fields Forever, I Want You (She's So Heavy), I'm Only Sleeping, Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds, You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, In My Life, Help!, Norwegian Wood, Rain, Tomorrow Never Knows, and The Word.

Versus Yesterday,  Let It Be, Hey Jude, I Saw Her Standing There, Got To Get You Into My Life, Lady Madonna, Eleanor Rigby, Back In The USSR, Golden Slumbers, Get Back, Paperback Writer, Penny Lane

Personally, if you look at the Beatles work and post-Beatles work up to 1980 (let's be fair, though that cut off works both ways) it's hard to say that they aren't at least equals, and for my money, "Jet" and "Band on the Run" (by way of example) blow the bumper sticker jingoism of "Instant Karma!" and "Power to the People".  Yes, there is "Imagine", but... what else?   I like the slick pop of his later work ("Woman", "Watching The Wheels", "Beautiful Boy" are just gorgeous) but I just feel McCartney just has more breadth and depth.

Having said that, The Beatles don't exist without Lennon, and they don't even get to the point of doing Revolver without Lennon.   He was the boosters that got the lunar module into orbit around the moon, and McCartney was the LEM that got the Beatles down to the surface of the moon. 

[Stadler]

I have mixed feelings about these types of things in music. On the one hand, you are in the studio, you've had time to rehearse, you have control over your environment. When shit like this happens, cut and start over. On the other hand, music, like all art, should have a level of spontaneity to it. If it becomes too sterile, it starts to feel, well, sterile.

I'm sort of the same opinion, but especially with the Beatles, I love it.  There are some bands that make their bones on the tightness and perfectness of their playing.  I love DT, but I don't think it's the same if you have a unison run between JP and JR, there is a flub in bar 15, and the air conditioner goes on midway through bar 9.   Mike's playing is sublime, and I don't need to hear the squeak of the drum pedal (ala Bonham in "Since I've Been Loving You") to make it special.   

But there is something timeless about knowing that Hey Jude, one of the most iconic songs of all time, was a first take, and it has even more resonance when you know about the fractured relationships at the time (by all accounts, McCartney was a douche during these sessions, arguing so much with Harrison about the lead guitar track that Harrison stayed in the control room during the recording of the master track). 

Put a different way, these aren't technical virtuosos like a Malmsteen; these are guys that have logged 10's of thousands of hours of playing together and much of the magic is in the innate nature of how they play together.   All the "fucking hell"'s and ""Cranberry sauces" contribute to this, in my opinion. 

[Calvin6s]

Yes, there is "Imagine", but... what else?

They each had their moments post-Beatles.  For McCartney, I feel it was Maybe, I'm Amazed.  That song is grade A stock.

But both also had more misses than hits, and the Beatles was practically all hits.

[Outcrier]

Yes, there is "Imagine", but... what else?

Instant Karma, Working Class Hero, Jealous Guy, Mother...

[Cool Chris]

Lennon and McCartney are like Gilmour and Waters to me. After they split from their respective bands, neither pair did much for me as solo artists.

[KevShmev]

Every time I hear a McCartney solo song with Linda singing harmonies or something, I always think that was Paul's way of saying to John, "See, my wife/girlfriend can sing, too!"

This of course ignores the fact that Yoko One was a wretched singer.

[Orbert]

Actually, so was Linda.  In the studio, with Paul right there and taking as many takes as necessary, she was okay, but live is another story, and she was always the first to admit that.  She said that there was only one reason why she was in the band, and that's because Paul wanted her in it.  He's Paul McCartney, it's his band, and he wanted his wife there with him.  So she was.

[KevShmev]

Oh, definitely. 

I just always got the impression that Yoko One fancied herself an actual musician, while Linda, like you said, knew she herself wasn't one.

[Orbert]

I think she really fancied herself an artist, doing something profound with the primal screaming and other horrible auditory sins.  I, and many, many others, thought she was just plain dreadful.

[sneakyblueberry]

I think she really fancied herself an artist, doing something profound with the primal screaming and other horrible auditory sins.  I, and many, many others, thought she was just plain dreadful.

It was profound... ly shit.

[Orbert]

Hey, here's something to appreciate.  On April 4, 1964, The Beatles made history by having all five of the Top 5 songs on the Billboard Hot 100 chart.  It had never been done before, and I'm pretty sure it will never be done again.  Music listening is just too fragmented today.  There is no single group or artist with the popularity to have that many songs all that hot, all at the same time.

[hefdaddy42]

That's pretty awesome, and yes, I'm sure nothing like that will ever happen again.

[Zantera]

One of the most impressive things about The Beatles is not necessarily the amount of good music, but the amount of good music in such a short time period. They were only really around for a decade, and still put out more music (and more great music) than a lot of bands do in 4-5 decades. They just kept pounding out good material and I think that helped contribute to their legacy. Sure, quality is the key, and dropping 2 mediocre albums per year wouldn't have done much for the band, but releasing so many albums in such a short time really helped their popularity.

You don't really see that kind of frequent releases anymore, and it's fascinating to see some bands struggle to write a good album every 5 years when Beatles put out two a year or something. I don't love all their albums, but it's still impressive.

[PuffyPat]

a lot of the reason you don't see frequent releases anymore is that labels simply won't allow it. they're really committed to the 'album every two years' structure, and don't want to deviate from that.

[Stadler]

Regarding Yoko, it's worth seeking out the video of John Lennon playing with Chuck Berry, and about halfway through the vid, she starts caterwauling off to the side into the mike.  Chuck gives John a death stare for the ages, and you can tell he's thinking, "You need to shut that b**** up, bro."

[Orbert]

That sounds awesome!

[Outcrier]

Gun to my head, if someone asked me the five most iconic Beatles songs, I'd say:

Hey Jude
Yesterday
A Day in the Life
In My Life
Let It Be

The thing is, while songs like A Day in the Life and Strawberry Fields Forever are generally viewed as some of the best Beatles songs, they aren't well know such as Hey Jude or Yesterday in the eyes of the public, suggesting that there are others more iconic songs even if they aren't actually better (Twist and Shout, I Wanna Hold Your Hand...)

Or maybe i'm simply confusing iconic with popularity