George Martin wasn't so important... say the two Beatles

Started by real01, Oct 26, 2015, 05:36 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

tkitna

Quote from: Harlena McStarkney on Jan 16, 2017, 07:14 AM
Is that why he didn't produce Let It Be?  Or did they have some kind of falling out?

The whole thing was kind of a mess.  McCartney brought in Glynn Johns as a producer/engineer and also wanted Martins input.  Too many cooks in the kitchen already.  The band wasn't getting along and they really didn't know what they wanted to do or what direction they wanted to go with the album (live, studio, soundtrack, etc,,).  It was shelved more than once.  Spector was brought in to remix the material for an album release and that was after Johns and Martin had already produced and recorded the material (hell I think Alan Parsons was even involved somewhat from what I've read).  Klein brought in Spector and the band had already broken up before the record was released.  Of course McCartney hated what Spector did, but I actually prefer it to the Naked release.

nimrod

 I always thought that George Martin preferred Paul to John or George, Paul being the more musical one, I get the feeling the others got a bit miffed with him.
Kevin

All You Need Is Love

Harlena McStarkney

Quote from: tkitna on Jan 16, 2017, 08:10 PM
The whole thing was kind of a mess.  McCartney brought in Glynn Johns as a producer/engineer and also wanted Martins input.  Too many cooks in the kitchen already.  The band wasn't getting along and they really didn't know what they wanted to do or what direction they wanted to go with the album (live, studio, soundtrack, etc,,).  It was shelved more than once.  Spector was brought in to remix the material for an album release and that was after Johns and Martin had already produced and recorded the material (hell I think Alan Parsons was even involved somewhat from what I've read).  Klein brought in Spector and the band had already broken up before the record was released.  Of course McCartney hated what Spector did, but I actually prefer it to the Naked release.
I didn't know there were so many hands in it.  So Martin did actually produce it...sort of.  Interesting!  I think some tracks from the naked version sound better, like Across the Universe and I Me Mine, but the whole thing kind of just sounds "weird".  I don't really like the original that much either, though.

This discussion reminds me of a Tim Minchin song "If I Didn't Have You". The Beatles probably would have found somebody else if not George Martin, but everything would have been different. "What I'm really saying is, I don't think you're special.  I mean, you're special, but you fall within a bell curve."
I guess what I mean to say is that George Martin really was special in that without him being where he was when he was, etc, the Beatles' music as we know and love it wouldn't be.  But the same could be said for each and every person involved, right? Lol everyone is special, ergo no one is special.
Love, love is a verb. Love is a doing word.

nimrod

Quote from: tkitna on Jan 13, 2017, 03:55 PM
Paul and John were going to make it regardless of who the producer was. 
Yeah but maybe if GM hadn't given them a chance to record  they could've decided to split up, ie no Beatles
Kevin

All You Need Is Love

tkitna

Quote from: nimrod on Jan 17, 2017, 05:20 PM
Yeah but maybe if GM hadn't given them a chance to record  they could've decided to split up, ie no Beatles

Very true

Moogmodule

Quote from: nimrod on Jan 17, 2017, 05:20 PM
Yeah but maybe if GM hadn't given them a chance to record  they could've decided to split up, ie no Beatles

Although, according to Lewisohn, GM was forced into doing it by the EMI higher ups.

Still, I think GM was the right personality to nurture them just as they needed at that time.

NotTheWalrus

Quote from: blmeanie on Oct 27, 2015, 05:55 PM
You would never have heard of Richard Starkey had he not joined the team, just saying.

The best way to look at it IMO is that a tremendous lot of things had to, and did, go right for it to all fall into place.  Timings, introductions, family connections, obviously personalities.  What if Stu hadn't passed when he did?  Would John have taken him out of the group for the betterment?

If Ringo hadn't joined The Beatles, and The Beatles made it without him (likely IMHO), then I think that it's quite likely Ringo would have been in one of the other British Invasion bands. Perhaps he would be like John Steel, who now owns the name of 'The Animals' and tours with a new lineup.

Hello Goodbye

Quote from: Moogmodule on Jan 13, 2017, 04:45 PM
I think GM was pretty essential to end up with the Beatles as we now love them . Not just because of his skills in polishing their product but also his open mindedness to let them develop as songwriters rather than force feeding them other songs hoping to rack up hits. .

But yes, John and Paul would still have been great regardless. And I think as a unit they were pretty strong willed. I doubt they would have lasted with a too dictatorial producer. So eventually they'd have found one like GM. Just like they went through managers til they found Brian. And drummers til they found Ringo.

I think you summed it up pretty well, Moog.  With all the "what and maybe ifs" in this thread, everything happened the way it did and history cannot be changed.

Anyway, here a good documentary which was just put up earlier this week...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TtXlv-69E0#
I can stay till it's time to go