"... we were at our best as a band in Hamburg", paraphrasing John and George at various times, and maybe Paul for all I know as well.

At the time they put together the Decca tape, they were known as one of the hardest rocking bands around, if not the hardest. Yet the tape doesn't convey much energy, at least to me, and presumably not to the many A&R men who turned it down as well.

So why didn't the tape do a good job of showing how good the Beatles were then?

Was it choice of material (too much "3 Cool Cats", not enough "Money" or "Long Tall Sally")? Who was the main decider about the playlist ...  Brian Epstein or the Beatles?

Or was it because they were tired or hung over (did they record it on New Years Day after driving down from Liverpool the night before)?

Or maybe was it even because at that "late" stage were they simply just not that good yet?

Be interested in the opinions of other Beatle people here!

Choice of material. Brian Epstein figured that if the Beatles could show off their versatility (which meant their novelty songs, revamped movie tunes, etc.), they'd be more likely to attract the interest of a record company. If they'd auditioned with their rock'n'roll stuff, Decca might have signed them, and we wouldn't be talking about them right now.

I hasten to add that two of my favorite Beatle tunes are on the tape:

1) To Know Her is to Love Her (John's voice is so perfect here, IMO!)
2) Sheik of Araby (Yeah, I know, sorry but, that's just me!)

BTW, was it the same Decca tape that was hawked to George Martin? If so, thank goodness he was a bit "hungrier" than the Decca dudes!

Quoted from alexis

BTW, was it the same Decca tape that was hawked to George Martin? If so, thank goodness he was a bit "hungrier" than the Decca dudes!

As far as I know, yes. Epstein had an acetate made of it at HMV in Oxford Street, London, which is where, I believe, he was recommended to George Martin.

There are a few contributory factors in the poor performance at Decca. Whilst Brian had traveled the day before, by train, our heroes were tightly packed into a van with all their equipment, in snowstorms, for 10 hours. I doubt there was much sleep to be had. Epsteins first big mistake, with regard to The Beatles, in my opinion. And probably the cause of John's cold, which is why George sings a lot.

Upon arrival at Decca they were made to wait for an hour by Mike Smith, who was supervising, making them even more nervous. Smith also made them use unfamiliar studio amplification, against their will.

All the songs are done in one take. It is, essentially a live show in the studio. And I believe Smith rushed them, as he had to supervise another audition (Brian Poole And The Tremelos).

The songs were selected by Brian Epstein for as much variety as possible, so instead of doing what they did best, they performed a hotch potch of cabaret material in amongst some old favourites, and a few original numbers. Yes, I like The Sheik Of Araby as well, but it shouldn't have been in there. Quite why Epstein thought he knew better than them, I've never known. Still, at least he had a tape to hawk around the record labels.

Speaking of Decca...do you think the lads would have made it as big if they had signed with Decca? Different songs? Concepts?

Quoted from JimmyMcCullochFan

Speaking of Decca...do you think the lads would have made it as big if they had signed with Decca? Different songs? Concepts?

Who knows what would have happened without the early guidance of George Martin. People say that they would have been successful anyway, but great talent isn't the only ingredient for success.

Quoted from BlueMeanie

Who knows what would have happened without the early guidance of George Martin. People say that they would have been successful anyway, but great talent isn't the only ingredient for success.

One could take that further and say they may not even have developed their great talent without George Martin's presence!

It is essential for a band to be in the hands of a good engineer/producer at the beginning of their careers, if they cannot record themselves. The timing & age difference were perfect in my opinion, especially at GM's stage of his career by that point. Experienced but young enough to effectively communicate.
Just imagine most mersey beat bands for a clue of what they may have been like. Maybe another 'Gerry & The Pacemakers' or even a straight up rock band with no strings... A few albums with no growth, just the same, re-worked material. A more scrupolous producer may have had them separated earlier in their careers...we will never know.

George Martin was essential for their evolving talents, the proof is in the pudding. He facilitated their growth with great success. Not many bands are afforded that luxury. By growing, they could re-invent themselves constantly and gave us listeners fresh pallettes of sound, word & wonder for a good run....8 years is a long time for a band to stay top of the game.

Very wise words, my friend.

Quoted from An Apple Beatle

It is essential for a band to be in the hands of a good engineer/producer at the beginning of their careers, if they cannot record themselves. The timing & age difference were perfect in my opinion, especially at GM's stage of his career by that point. Experienced but young enough to effectively communicate.
Just imagine most mersey beat bands for a clue of what they may have been like. Maybe another 'Gerry & The Pacemakers' or even a straight up rock band with no strings... A few albums with no growth, just the same, re-worked material. A more scrupolous producer may have had them separated earlier in their careers...we will never know.

George Martin was essential for their evolving talents, the proof is in the pudding. He facilitated their growth with great success. Not many bands are afforded that luxury. By growing, they could re-invent themselves constantly and gave us listeners fresh pallettes of sound, word & wonder for a good run....8 years is a long time for a band to stay top of the game.

i agree with that 100% they needed some one experienced enough but also young and able to be open to new ideas and not be set in there ways.

they could have been paired with any other producer as you say who were old and set in there ways who would have made them like any other merseybeat band and limited there sound when it was beggining to progress

I think that the Decca audition failed because they were destined for something bigger...

Face it, Decca simply passed on a not-too-fabulous initial audition tape. Perhaps it was just fate that Martin over at EMI had a more intuitive ear and heard unforeseen possibilities. But alas Decca didnt do too badly w/ The Who later on... they didnt exactly "hamper" the aristic growth of one Peter Townsend when in 1968/69 he and the boys were working Tommy (and even earlier when Pete brought in the conceptually strange "A Quick One While He's Away" which predated the aforemention self-penned opus which is universally recognized as the first full-fledged rock "opera" (Granted, the Moody Blues '67 work "Days Of Future Passed" --also on Decca, I might add--was thematic and innovative (w/ a holistic use of symphonics in an entire LP)
Maybe Decca tried to be more open-minded w/ their own stable of artists (and gave them more artistic freedom) after the enormous blunder of losing The Beatles. Just a thought.

ST

I think Decca was typical of alot of labels, then and now.  They wanted something they could pigeonhole--we can sell this like we sold that.

And they were probably thinking singles and didn't hear anything jump out.  "Til There was You" is a great version and they might have heard something in "Money."

The variety might have been too much.  The songs are all over the map--old show tunes, r&b covers, girl group covers, musical numbers, 50s rock.  With three different guys singing.

And the originals aren't much.  I think that's what sank them.  "Hello Little Girl" just ain't much of a song.  I think the rejection really lit a fire under Paul and John to write some of their own material and create their own sound from the various sources evident on the Decca audition.  

And while I admit that George Martin was essential to their growth, I don't think he was the only guy in the world that could have done it.  He basically cut the first album live and how many great songs does it have--with minimal production?

Can you imagine GM saying, "John, I'd like to hear just a tad more scream on 'Twist and Shout'?"  

I was listening to "Beatle Brunch" yesterday and interestingly enough Joe Johnson asked the question about what would of happened if the lads had been signed to Decca.

Decca also had the Rolling Stones on their label on their Lodon Records subsidiary. George Harrison recommended them to the label as a way of saying no hard feelings.