Topic: What You're Doing (Read 6065 times)

raxo · « **Reply #20 on:** February 05, 2007, 10:41:06 PM »

Quote from: 197

[...]
but im fed up of people putting down mr.moonlight, coz i like that song a lot

Well, I like Mr Moonlight too ... and What You're Doing (I hadn't said it here yet)!!!

P.S. 197 was lennonlegend :-/ ...

ringo rules · « **Reply #21 on:** February 06, 2007, 01:00:48 PM »

i'm yet to hear raxo's opinion over this BFS bashing

raxo · « **Reply #22 on:** February 06, 2007, 01:54:55 PM »

Quote from: 307

i'm yet to hear raxo's opinion over this BFS bashing

Have you got a chair with you?

Seashell Eyes · « **Reply #23 on:** February 06, 2007, 04:03:54 PM »

While reading all of your comments to this, I was surprised by some!

Considering, What You're Doing is in my top ten songs that I love by the Beatles. Althought it might not be another "A Day in the Life" or a "Penny Lane" this song is very catchy. It has one of the purest sounding drum riff's out of all the Beatle years and it is one song that I enjoy hearing! Completely underrated.

raxo · « **Reply #24 on:** February 06, 2007, 04:49:09 PM »

Quote from: 581

While reading all of your comments to this, I was surprised by some! Considering, What You're Doing is in my top ten songs that I love by the Beatles. Althought it might not be another "A Day in the Life" or a "Penny Lane" this song is very catchy. It has one of the purest sounding drum riff's out of all the Beatle years and it is one song that I enjoy hearing! Completely underrated.

Yeaaah, very very welcome, Seashell Eyes, a-gain!!!

Hello Goodbye · « **Reply #25 on:** February 08, 2007, 09:11:04 PM »

Quote from: 158

Beatles for Sale is one of my favorite Albums.
I agree, alot of filler stuff, due to the hectic touring etc, but it glimmers supreme talent.
I just like its raw yet soulful approach to songs, with hints of Dylan emerging.
The tracklist, is impressive, and a real move towards the later stuff (first signs of real change, bar Hard Days Night having all Beatle Songs)
I really admire the Album Art work, with the simplistic yet moody cover shot.
A really cool and hugely underated Beatles Album.

Well put, Indica. For those of us who were around when this album came out, it was apparent that the Beatles were headed in a unique direction. Beatles For Sale caught our attention and and oomparisons to other British Invasion groups ceased. As you said, there were glimmers of supreme talent evident in this album. Of course at that time, none of their later work was available to us which could prejudice our opinions. It was so evident that this was a special band.

Quote from: 395

Paul's vocals are slighly weak.....

I don't think Paul's vovals were weak at all but rather plaintiff in tone. in keeping with the subject of the song.

I like Beatles For Sale "yesterday and today." What You're Doing remains one of my favorites.

raxo · « **Reply #26 on:** February 08, 2007, 09:43:14 PM »

Quote from: 59

[...]Of course at that time, none of their later work was available to us which could prejudice our opinions. [...]

Sadly not everybody can say the same ... I'm refering to the prejudices!

Hello Goodbye · « **Reply #27 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:28:15 AM »

Quote from: 297

Sadly not everybody can say the same ... I'm refering to the prejudices!

Well, yes raxo, in the broader sense. But I was referring to what we knew at the time. The Beatles' music was indeed getting better all the time. At least I saw it that way. With Beatles For Sale, they started to lose some early fans. But they discovered Herman's Hermits.

Kevin · « **Reply #28 on:** February 09, 2007, 10:02:47 AM »

Quote from: 158

Beatles for Sale is one of my favorite Albums.
I agree, alot of filler stuff, due to the hectic touring etc, but it glimmers supreme talent.

To resurrect an old debate, but BFS has the same amount amount of covers (what I assume is meant by filler) as Please Please Me and LESS than With The Beatles. Format wise BFS is a normal Beatle album (for the time), AHDN is the abberation. As I've said before the I think covers don't fit because as Indica says their sound was moving on, making old rock and roll covers sound tired and out of place.

The End · « **Reply #29 on:** February 09, 2007, 11:16:52 AM »

I don't think the rock 'n' roll covers are out of place on their pre '65 LPs but I think the opposite is true for their Help! LP - Act Naturally and Dizzy Miss Lizzy stick out like sore thumbs. I happen to love DML but it just doesn't fit, as Kevin said.

Bobber · « **Reply #30 on:** February 09, 2007, 11:28:29 AM »

Quote from: 360

I don't think the rock 'n' roll covers are out of place on their pre '65 LPs but I think the opposite is true for their Help! LP - Act Naturally and Dizzy Miss Lizzy stick out like sore thumbs. I happen to love DML but it just doesn't fit, as Kevin said.

They must have realised they were improving their own songwriting skills and that in fact their own songs were better than the covers. Is there anything known about their decision to not record any covers anymore for Rubber Soul?

The End · « **Reply #31 on:** February 09, 2007, 11:44:17 AM »

George Harrison was contributing more too.

Bobber · « **Reply #32 on:** February 09, 2007, 11:48:38 AM »

Just listening to the Swedish Radio Show from October 1963. The Beatles play seven songs. Four of them are covers. Obviously, it was their background. Were they insecure to play more of their own compositions live in those early years?

The End · « **Reply #33 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:18:58 PM »

No, I don't think they were ever insecure about their own compositions - it was just the norm in those days to include covers, they also used to enjoy playing them of course! They included cover versions right up until their final tour and even during Let It Be they were doing cover versions of the songs they loved.

Kevin · « **Reply #34 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:28:39 PM »

Quote from: 63

They must have realised they were improving their own songwriting skills and that in fact their own songs were better than the covers. Is there anything known about their decision to not record any covers anymore for Rubber Soul?

I'm guessing there wasn't some moment when someone said "hey let's not put any covers on this one." I think it probably reflects the general ground shift in music at the time.

An Apple Beatle · « **Reply #35 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:31:26 PM »

I reckon they understood their publishing deals better or had just found out how much royalties were not going their way. lol

raxo · « **Reply #36 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:33:42 PM »

Quote from: 185

To resurrect an old debate, but BFS has the same amount amount of covers (what I assume is meant by filler) as Please Please Me and LESS than With The Beatles.[...]

I had always thought that those three albums had 6 covers and 8 originals ??)

raxo · « **Reply #37 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:35:14 PM »

Quote from: 360

[...] They included cover versions right up until their final tour and even during Let It Be they were doing cover versions of the songs they loved.

exactly ... I think they LOVED each cover they made!

raxo · « **Reply #38 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:35:58 PM »

Quote from: 15

I reckon they understood their publishing deals better or had just found out how much royalties were not going their way. lol

I think that they were making more money with the tours than with the records by those early years!

The End · « **Reply #39 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:36:28 PM »

Quote from: 297

exactly ... I think they LOVED each cover they made!

Absolutely!

News:

Author Topic: What You're Doing (Read 6065 times)

Bobber

Bobber