As a comparison here's The Stones on TOTP in '69. Also an instrumental backing track (I'm pretty sure. I hope ) from what was supposed to be the best live band in the world
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Jbi7iDNA0

Quoted from Kevin

As a comparison here's The Stones on TOTP in '69. Also an instrumental backing track (I'm pretty sure. I hope )* from what was supposed to be the best live band in the world
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Jbi7iDNA0

*It is. No leads

Thanks for that Kevin.
They showed Revolution on Top Of The Pops too (once!).
So they must have been taken in by the live vocals.
It seems silly now.The two best groups in the world having to use such subterfuge.

Quoted from zipp

Well I'll have another listen but if you have Lewisohn's Chronicle then the filming of the Revolution and Hey Jude clips is fascinating reading.
They took place in Twickenham Film Studios on Wednesday 4th September.David Frost went there to present them and pretend they were on his show live.(The show actually went out the following Sunday!).
Lewisohn says :
"The two clips for Revolution were largely identical to each other but had some lighting differences.These were exciting versions,the Beatles ADDING A NEW VOCAL TRACK TO THE PRE-RECORDED EMI BACKING TRACK, blending the fast style of vocals from the B-side version with the lyrics from the slow White Album recording."

He doesn't mention Paul's bass being recorded live.
Where do you have that information from?

I got that info from a previous post. Someone said the only thing live was the singing and Paul's bass playing. I don't know where they got it from.

Also, about the blending of the vocals thing. I think what he's saying is that they sang it in the style of the B side track but added the shoobie doo wops. I don't think it implies that they used their prerecorded voices at all. It says they used the pre-recorded backing track. Doesn't that mean just the music? Anyway, I'll listen to the promo version I have again, but I know I don't hear the John scream. It's just not there. They put it in for the Anthology or maybe when the Frost show went out they added it or something. Either way, I think they could have pulled off a pretty good live version of Revolution. I think most bands these days are expected to play live. If they start using pre-recorded stuff then it turns into something like that Ashley Simpson fiasco. They've got enough electronic things to supplement their sound now anyway, so it's not necessary to do what the Beatles did.

I thought everyone lip-synched on TOTP. Perhaps just nowadays. Cause I remember when Avril Lavigne was on TOTP (Or maybe it was All That) and she refused to lipsynch. There was a bit of ruckus over it.

Quoted from Sandra

1.Also, about the blending of the vocals thing. I think what he's saying is that they sang it in the style of the B side track but added the shoobie doo wops. I don't think it implies that they used their prerecorded voices at all. It says they used the pre-recorded backing track. Doesn't that mean just the music?

2.They put it in for the Anthology or maybe when the Frost show went out they added it or something.

3.Either way, I think they could have pulled off a pretty good live version of Revolution.

1.No.it's even clearer when Lewisohn talks about Hey Jude : "Paul sang live to his own PRE-RECORDED VOCAL during the body of the song then sang entirely live in the long refrain."

2.The whole point is that Frost had nothing to do with the music here.The Beatles controlled the whole thing.

3.They didn't want a 'pretty good' version of Revolution.They were perfectionists and wanted the best version.

I'm not trying to start anything here or act like I'm an expert when I'm clearly not. I was just going by what I can actually hear on the promo video. I really cannot hear pre-recorded vocals, but maybe it's very subtle. If Lewisohn says that they are there, then they're there. Although the paragraph from before sounded ambiguous to me. Like it could mean one or the other. That's all I was pointing out. I don't think it was necessary to put "pre-recorded vocals" in all caps. That was kind of condescending. As if I couldn't comprehend otherwise. The other paragraph didn't say that, so I was pointing that out as a possibility. I don't have the book, so I haven't read about it indepth. Which is why I posted here in the first place. Maybe I should just get the book and not worry about having actual discussions. Also, sorry to sound ignorant, but are Lewisohn's statements absoulutely undebatable? I'm not being sarcastic, I really don't know. I supposed I could just look it up.
I know Frost didn't have anything to do with the music, I said maybe they fixed it up before it went out. Again, the version I have is very raw. You hear feedback a few times, talking, and breathing. I don't hear that on the Anthology at all. So I figured they cleaned it up a bit. Not Frost, them.
Also, that's great that they wanted the best version. I know what they were like. I just think from a fans point of view a total live version would have been really cool and would have sounded not 'pretty good' but probably awesome. I just saw Stone Temple Pilots do a live version on a John Lennon tribute and it was excellent. They got a standing ovation even. And yeah, the guitar wasn't as powerful, but it still sounded amazing. I don't think it would be the hardest song to pull off live. That's all I'm saying. Nothing against John, Paul, George, and Ringo's decision not to do it live. Obviously they knew what they were doing. I just would have liked to have seen a live version of the song and think they would have sounded damn good. Anyway, thanks for all the information.  

Quoted from zipp

1.No.it's even clearer when Lewisohn talks about Hey Jude : "Paul sang live to his own PRE-RECORDED VOCAL during the body of the song then sang entirely live in the long refrain."

We're talking about 'Revolution' and not 'Hey Jude'. If you listen to the 'Hey Jude preformance its obvious Paul is singing to his own pre-recorded version. You can hear it behind his live vocals. On 'Revolution' you can't hear a pre-recorded version behind John's vocals. Well only at the end of the video.

I'm almost positive that the version of 'Revolution' on the David frost show is different than the record. Its either live vocals or maybe they recorded different vocals of the song a couple of days before the performance. All I know is that the link I'm about to provide with 'Revolution' is different than the record. Listen to it closely, it doesn't sound like the record version. Sandra and I could here the difference.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gf-Q2rDd6Tw


This is the version of the performance with the record on it. Its so clearly obvious that it is different than the first link I gave.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7394eK_v1I

I guess too that the effort required to play to play live would have been enormous.
Getting Nicki Hopkins in, rehearsing, setting up, soundchecks, endless takes (remember Let It Be), when the whole point of the exercise was to flog their new single, not impress as a live act.
Plus as Zipp said, their inability to reproduce that guitar sound would have been crucial.

Quoted from Sandra

I don't have the book, so I haven't read about it indepth. Which is why I posted here in the first place. Maybe I should just get the book and not worry about having actual discussions. Also, sorry to sound ignorant, but are Lewisohn's statements absoulutely undebatable? I'm not being sarcastic, I really don't know. I supposed I could just look it up.

Don't get the book and discuss it here!  
I don't think Lewisohn is undebatable, although I feel he's largely considered as a reliable source. At least he's trying to do his work as good as possible.

Quoted from Sandra

I really cannot hear pre-recorded vocals, but maybe it's very subtle.

I don't think it was necessary to put "pre-recorded vocals" in all caps. That was kind of condescending. As if I couldn't comprehend otherwise.

Also, sorry to sound ignorant, but are Lewisohn's statements absoulutely undebatable? I'm not being sarcastic, I really don't know. I supposed I could just look it up.

I know Frost didn't have anything to do with the music, I said maybe they fixed it up before it went out. Again, the version I have is very raw. You hear feedback a few times, talking, and breathing. I don't hear that on the Anthology at all. So I figured they cleaned it up a bit. Not Frost, them.

I just think from a fans point of view a total live version would have been really cool and would have sounded not 'pretty good' but probably awesome.  

Lewisohn can make mistakes but he's pretty reliable.I think you should buy the book AND discuss here.
I put capitals for clarity since it clearly answered a part of the question.Hey Jude and Revolution were filmed the same day in the same place by the same producer and for the same reason so I imagine methods would have been at least similar.
The first clip on youtube doesn't have the recorded vocals on but it definitely has fake applause added at the end which shows there was a certain chicanery going on.My observations are for the Anthology video .And there's still the absence of that piano which gives the game away.
We'll have to agree to disagree about the possible awesomeness of a real live filming.They hadn't played live for two years and were used to studio editing, overdubbing etc.So I think it would have been under par.

Sure, but what fan wouldn't want to see a live performance even if it wasn't perfection. They were a pretty seasoned live band. I don't think we're giving them much credit by saying it would be subpar. I think it just wouldn't have been perfect. And I think if the Beatles are guilty of one thing it is being too perfectionistic at times. That's a heavy burden to carry. But yes, we'll agree to disagree.  

Quoted from Sandra

Sure, but what fan wouldn't want to see a live performance even if it wasn't perfection. They were a pretty seasoned live band.

The live stuff I'd have liked to see was Paul's idea during the Get back sessions.A small filmed concert of them doing their new songs in front of an invited audience.
They could have packaged it first as an album then as a film.
But you're right that for that they were too perfectionist, especially George.

Personally I would've preferred a live version to the backing tracks. I think that (especially on a song like Revolution) this would've given them a harder edge.

Quoted from Mairi

Personally I would've preferred a live version to the backing tracks. I think that (especially on a song like Revolution) this would've given them a harder edge.

Well, I've been looking at that first youtube clip again and I think maybe they sang along to a pre-recorded version that they'd 'taped earlier' (sounds like a cookery programme!)
I say this because the version does sound a bit rawer than the studio version and there's a bit of feedback.
But I still don't think they're playing their instruments when being filmed.At one point in the clip ( from 0.57 to 1.02) Paul plays his bass when there isn't any to be played, he then stops and looks slightly perplexed.
I've also noticed something weird about the Hey Jude film but I won't go into that or you may say I'm off topic.