Paul McCartney

[GT40Graham]

I like the bass line on Old Brown Shoe but it was played by Harrison on a Fender Bass VI I do believe and not McCartney.

[steve-soar]

[quote name='GT40Graham' post='1019769' date='Nov 11 2010, 10:03 AM']I like the bass line on Old Brown Shoe but it was played by Harrison on a Fender Bass VI I do believe and not McCartney.[/quote]
Hehe, this lad knows his stuff.

[wombatboter]

Bit of a disappointment then but as long as it stays in the group it's ok :-)
Looked it up and you seem to be right..
Nathan East did a great job on "Old Brown Shoe" on the "live in Japan" album of George Harrison

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='GT40Graham' post='1019769' date='Nov 11 2010, 10:03 AM']I like the bass line on Old Brown Shoe but it was played by Harrison on a Fender Bass VI I do believe and not McCartney.[/quote]
For what it's worth, Ian MacDonald's book [i]Revolution in the Head[/i] claims it's McCartney on bass but with Harrison tracking the same line on guitar. But who knows?

Harrison claims it was him on bass in an interview in Creem magazine in 87/88 but seems to agree to the double tracking with him playing both.

Edited November 11, 2010 by EssentialTension

[Hobbayne]

[quote name='KevB' post='1016994' date='Nov 8 2010, 10:39 PM']I read somewhere that Harrison didn't like the bassline at all, too fussy, too many notes. I've always thought it a classic myself though.[/quote]


Thats actually a true story, if you get a chance to listen to George do "Something" on the "Concert For Bangladesh DVD, take a close listen to Klaus Voorman on bass, he keeps it much simpler while retaining some of the melodic runs as well!

[Wil]

I'm just listening to Sgt. Peppers. As it was always on the stereo when I was younger (dad is a big Beatles fan) I've never actually paid it much attention.

So far, Macca's bass is the highlight - not really getting on with the album in general though, bit overrated I think. I've been spoilt by Pet Sounds. Great bass work though.

[chris_b]

[quote name='Wil' post='1019889' date='Nov 11 2010, 11:56 AM']....not really getting on with the album in general though, bit overrated I think....[/quote]
Overrated?

Good grief!!

[lowdown]

[quote name='chris_b' post='1020202' date='Nov 11 2010, 03:09 PM']Overrated?
Good grief!![/quote]

+1

Opions..! just kinda overrated in my book.


Garry

[Wil]

I said overrated, not bad. Is it so strange that I think the Beatles made better albums?

Clearly it was an important album, but looking at it objectively, I wouldnt pick it over Revolver or Rubber Soul. Some great tracks, some mediocre ones. And they left off Strawberry Fields - insane...

Edited November 11, 2010 by Wil

[risingson]

[quote name='Wil' post='1020361' date='Nov 11 2010, 04:36 PM']I said overrated, not bad. Is it so strange that I think the Beatles made better albums?

Clearly it was an important album, but looking at it objectively, I wouldnt pick it over Revolver or Rubber Soul. Some great tracks, some mediocre ones. And they left off Strawberry Fields - insane...[/quote]

I love the Beatles but Sgt. Pepper's isn't the first album I'd pick either. I prefer to listen to Abbey Road or Revolver. It's still an unbelievable album though, Brian Wilson more or less had a nervous breakdown when he first heard it because it was so good.

Edited November 11, 2010 by risingson

[Wil]

My favourite track after listening today was bizarrely the one I thought I hated, "When I'm 64". Brilliant arrangement.

[quote name='risingson' post='1020374' date='Nov 11 2010, 04:46 PM']I love the Beatles but Sgt. Pepper's isn't the first album I'd pick either. I prefer to listen to Abbey Road or Revolver. It's still an unbelievable album though, Brian Wilson more or less had a nervous breakdown when he first heard it because it was so good.[/quote]

Yeah, those damned Beatles are one of the reasons SMiLE got cancelled apparently. Although most of it was Mike Love doing what he does best - being a c*nt.

Edited November 11, 2010 by Wil

[GT40Graham]

I think you have to put the Sgt.Pepper into perspective, when you consider what went before it in terms of albums and recording techniques, it was and still is an iconic album. Remember that it was done with 4-track tape recorders and is a landmark recording. It's now 43 years old so it's not surprising that today, it's not considered quite as awe-inspiring as it was then, things have moved on, it doesn't have quite the impact with younger generations that it has with some of us oldies.

It's not my favourite Beatles album, I prefer Abbey Road and George Martin has said on numerous occasions that issuing Strawberry Fields/Penny Lane as a single and not including them on Sgt. Pepper was one of his biggest regrets/mistakes.

[KevB]

[quote name='Wil' post='1020379' date='Nov 11 2010, 04:48 PM']My favourite track after listening today was bizarrely the one I thought I hated, "When I'm 64". Brilliant arrangement.[/quote]

I heard somewhere that Macca wrote the basic tune of When I'm 64 when he about 15 yrs old as a bit of a joke and only worked it up properly years later when in The Beatles.

[risingson]

[quote name='GT40Graham' post='1020397' date='Nov 11 2010, 05:03 PM']I think you have to put the Sgt.Pepper into perspective, when you consider what went before it in terms of albums and recording techniques, it was and still is an iconic album. Remember that it was done with 4-track tape recorders and is a landmark recording. It's now 43 years old so it's not surprising that today, it's not considered quite as awe-inspiring as it was then, things have moved on, it doesn't have quite the impact with younger generations that it has with some of us oldies.

It's not my favourite Beatles album, I prefer Abbey Road and George Martin has said on numerous occasions that issuing Strawberry Fields/Penny Lane as a single and not including them on Sgt. Pepper was one of his biggest regrets/mistakes.[/quote]

Absolutely. To be honest that makes it all the more impressive, the album itself just stands up as one of the most seminal and historically significant music of all time in basically every respect: songwriting, arrangement, engineering and production. It's very easy to say you don't like the Beatles, and of course everyone is entitled to an opinion, but there is no denying the cultural and historical significance of something like Sgt. Peppers because it's just so, so good.

[quote]Yeah, those damned Beatles are one of the reasons SMiLE got cancelled apparently. Although most of it was Mike Love doing what he does best - being a c*nt.[/quote]

I can't imagine Brian Wilson was doing himself too many favours either at the time either, what with the gargantuan amount of drugs he was taking.

[Wil]

[quote name='risingson' post='1020410' date='Nov 11 2010, 05:14 PM']Absolutely. To be honest that makes it all the more impressive, the album itself just stands up as one of the most seminal and historically significant music of all time in basically every respect: songwriting, arrangement, engineering and production. It's very easy to say you don't like the Beatles, and of course everyone is entitled to an opinion, but there is no denying the cultural and historical significance of something like Sgt. Peppers because it's just so, so good.



I can't imagine Brian Wilson was doing himself too many favours either at the time either, what with the gargantuan amount of drugs he was taking.[/quote]

Very true. Burning the toast would probably have been enough to give him a breakdown. He has a serious mental disorder though, he hears voices telling him he's worthless to this day, every day apparently. He sings to drown them out.

The production is incredible on Sgt Peppers, no argument from me there. I listened to the stereo mix earlier but I intend to listen again in depth to the best mono one I can find.

[Happy Jack]

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='1019853' date='Nov 11 2010, 11:22 AM']For what it's worth, Ian MacDonald's book [i]Revolution in the Head[/i] claims it's McCartney on bass but with Harrison tracking the same line on guitar. But who knows?[/quote]

Drifting slightly off-topic, [i]Revolution in the Head[/i] is easily in my top three books on popular music, quite possibly the best of the lot. A truly superb piece of work.

[Bassman Sam]

Macca is my bass hero, he made me want to play bass. My brother, who is 7 years older than me, loved the Stones. He could not understand that there was no contest between Macca and Bill Wyman the playing stakes.

[Chris2112]

I think McCartney is one of the handful of players who novice bassists should study to get a grasp of what bass playing is all about. He's incredibly versatile and I love the way he just went for it with some of those lines. He appreciated the role of bass in pop music at the time but also saw it as a viable melodic instrument which is a very cool way of looking at it.

[Wylie]

"Absolutely. To be honest that makes it all the more impressive, the album itself just stands up as one of the most seminal and historically significant music of all time in basically every respect: songwriting, arrangement, engineering and production. It's very easy to say you don't like the Beatles, and of course everyone is entitled to an opinion, but there is no denying the cultural and historical significance of something like Sgt. Peppers because it's just so, so good."




Both Pet Sounds and Sgt. Pepper kicked off a new kind of awareness or appreciation of pop music while at the same time costing both groups many fans. Lots of people dropped the Beach Boys as faves once the surfing was over. It isn't just the quality of the music, or the skill, or what have you, that makes those albums great, it's the fact that, when they were made, the writers basically didn't give a sh*t what the public thought or wanted.

[Happy Jack]

[quote name='tedgilley' post='1021288' date='Nov 12 2010, 12:34 PM']It isn't just the quality of the music, or the skill, or what have you, that makes those albums great, it's the fact that, when they were made, the writers basically didn't give a sh*t what the public thought or wanted.[/quote]

I don't know a great deal about The Beach Boys, but I'm certainly surprised by this as a description of The Beatles in 1967/68.

[risingson]

[quote name='tedgilley' post='1021288' date='Nov 12 2010, 12:34 PM']Both Pet Sounds and Sgt. Pepper kicked off a new kind of awareness or appreciation of pop music while at the same time costing both groups many fans. Lots of people dropped the Beach Boys as faves once the surfing was over. It isn't just the quality of the music, or the skill, or what have you, that makes those albums great, it's the fact that, when they were made, the writers basically didn't give a sh*t what the public thought or wanted.[/quote]

Err I'm not sure you could ever say that Brian Wilson or Lennon/McCartney 'didn't give a sh*t' about their audience, the people that take that attitude to music are usually the people you never hear about ever again. It can be said that Lennon outwardly appeared this way but really he was just very clued up on how to be controversial. Don't don't be deceived though, he definitely wasn't stupid. At the same time, George Martin knew how to haul in the reins if he had to. Their attitude to writing and producing music was revolutionary but the song writing credentials were always there, they did care about what people thought.

Edited November 12, 2010 by risingson

[wombatboter]

An American guitarplayer told me once that a local radiostation in the sixties played the entire album Sgt Peppers for the first time when it had just come out.
He was out in the mountains at night with a couple of friends and while they were driving back to the valley they heard the album for the first time through the car radio system.
They all were stunned and thrilled by what they heard that night in their van.. He still sounds enthousiastic everytime he tells this story.

[flyfisher]

[quote name='GT40Graham' post='1020397' date='Nov 11 2010, 05:03 PM']I think you have to put the Sgt.Pepper into perspective, when you consider what went before it in terms of albums and recording techniques, it was and still is an iconic album. Remember that it was done with 4-track tape recorders and is a landmark recording. It's now 43 years old so it's not surprising that today, it's not considered quite as awe-inspiring as it was then, things have moved on, it doesn't have quite the impact with younger generations that it has with some of us oldies.[/quote]

Absolutely. It's a bit like the Apollo. Landing on the moon was amazing enough but doing it with 1960s technology makes it truly astonishing.

[Wylie]

[quote name='risingson' post='1021463' date='Nov 12 2010, 09:20 AM']Err I'm not sure you could ever say that Brian Wilson or Lennon/McCartney 'didn't give a sh*t' about their audience, the people that take that attitude to music are usually the people you never hear about ever again. It can be said that Lennon outwardly appeared this way but really he was just very clued up on how to be controversial. Don't don't be deceived though, he definitely wasn't stupid. At the same time, George Martin knew how to haul in the reins if he had to. Their attitude to writing and producing music was revolutionary but the song writing credentials were always there, they did care about what people thought.[/quote]


I didn't make myself very clear, sorry; what I could have said better was that it was my impression that both groups (or in the case of the Beach Boys, Wilson) were tired of what they had been doing and were ready to do something new without worrying first and foremost about acceptance.

tg

[squire5]

[quote name='Happy Jack' post='1020507' date='Nov 11 2010, 06:26 PM']Drifting slightly off-topic, [i]Revolution in the Head[/i] is easily in my top three books on popular music, quite possibly the best of the lot. A truly superb piece of work.[/quote]

+1 on that.When my last copy got too ragged to read I went straight to Amazon and got another one.A veritable bible of Beatles music!