Guilt , Confliction with Beatles songs

[blmeanie]

As a huge Beatles believer, fan and promoter I often defend them and use the four guys playing instruments/band argument vs artists that are singers only and or more produced music behind them.

The conflict I have is that some of my favorite parts of Beatle songs aren't them playing instruments.  For example, this morning on my commute, I enjoyed and was reminded of how much I enjoy the trumpet solo in Penny Lane.  The notes, the tempo, the crescendo all are magnificent to me.  Another example is the haunting strings in Eleanor Rigby.  I remember listening to them 30 or more years ago and flipping the speakers to whichever side has the strings isolated during the chorus to hear them without the chorus singing.  Wow.

Anyone else defend them with the four guys playing as a band argument?

Anyone else feel guilt about liking the heavily "produced" components?

[Normandie]

I, too, have spent quite a bit of time defending the Beatles as artists who are superior to some others because they wrote their own songs and played their own instruments. I view the examples you mentioned, blmeanie (e.g., the trumpet solo in Penny Lane), as instances in which they needed a special, unique sound that simply did not have the training/skills needed to produce (the symphony crescendo at the end of A Day in the Life comes to mind in addition to the other examples you mentioned).

That is an interesting question and certainly provides food for thought.

[tkitna]

I'm at the stage where I dont do a whole lot of defending or tearing down anymore.  If I like it, thats good enough for me and I dont care what other people think.  If I dislike something that somebody else likes, who cares?  Everybody has different tastes.

I used to discredit people that did nothing but sing because they didnt play any instrument and only had their voice to offer.  That wasnt a musician to me.  It took me years to figure out that their voice was their instrument and was just as important as anything else.  I was wrong on that account, but saw the error of my ways later on. 

[Hello Goodbye]

The conflict I have is that some of my favorite parts of Beatle songs aren't them playing instruments.  For example, this morning on my commute, I enjoyed and was reminded of how much I enjoy the trumpet solo in Penny Lane.  The notes, the tempo, the crescendo all are magnificent to me.  Another example is the haunting strings in Eleanor Rigby.  I remember listening to them 30 or more years ago and flipping the speakers to whichever side has the strings isolated during the chorus to hear them without the chorus singing.  Wow.

You shouldn't feel any conflict, blmeanie.  The Beatles wanted to express themselves musically and were finally able to do so completely once they stopped touring.  Amongst the four, there was proficiency in many instruments but they needed more to fully express themselves.  The Beatles, with George Martin's help, merely found the musicians to do so.

In addition to Eleanor Rigby's string quartet and David Mason's piccolo trumpet solo in Penny Lane, I also like Alan Civil's French horn solo in For No One.

Can you picture Paul telling Mr. Civil how he wanted the French horn solo to sound?  It might have gone something like this...


https://youtu.be/cbJrXqrLtMw

[Moogmodule]

Yeah I don't really mind that they brought in specialist instrumentalists when needed. It's not a huge part of their canon and I think they did pretty well overall gaining enough expertise in instruments to be pretty much do it yourself. They had input to the solos and things that contributed to the end product. One of the good things about the latest deluxe releases is hearing the alternate takes etc and finding they did play as a band more than we sometimes suspect in later years and they were doing it really well.

[blmeanie]

Hello - thanks for posting that video, very cool, love the comments on youtube too after it.

I agree with everyone's comments, TK - I'm with you, I remember "defending" them and their music so much more long ago and I too believe a voice from a singer is an instrument and have argued that the four of them used their voice instruments better than most bands every did , there still is something there that a group or band , all playing , is more fulfilling for me to listen too.  Obviously there are exceptions, many great songs where no band is playing, maybe some engineered backing or whatever but the energy from a band playing is different.  At least to me.

All great thoughts and comments

[Normandie]

. . . I also like Alan Civil's French horn solo in For No One.

That is one of my favorite instrumental solos of all time, Beatle song or otherwise.

[Beatlemaniac64]

I see where you're coming from, but don't feel guilty. After all, I'm sure the Beatles had a hand in writing those musical parts that they don't necessarily play in! There's been plenty of times where I heard studio banter where Paul in particular was directing people how to play something. I also read in the book "Lennon" that Paul was very involved in working on the produced-sounding things you mentioned.

So yeah, they may not play those parts, but a lot of those parts did come from a Beatle brain!

[stevie]

You also have to remember that in the Sixties, the really good special musicians were just doing their job by playing on different records. So Alan Civil could've played on FNO in 1966 in that week and two days later have been playing on a Tom Jones record or with a full orchestra with Acker Bilk or someone   It was just music for hire prolly until about 1970

[Hello Goodbye]

So yeah, they may not play those parts, but a lot of those parts did come from a Beatle brain!

And George Martin.

For example, the piano solo for In My Life...


https://youtu.be/cMbqh_yNyOs

...which was sped up during mixing.



https://youtu.be/YBcdt6DsLQA

[Loco Mo]

1st thing that comes to mind:  the movie, Yellow Submarine.  It's wonderful and magnificent.  The Beatles didn't create it but nonetheless it's all Beatles.  So I think the question posed is unanswerable.  The Beatles just generated things that they themselves didn't step-by-step create.

The orchestral ending to Glass Onion, the whirling calliope at the end of Mr. Kite, the sound effects in Walrus, etc.  It goes on and on.  Other people had to help create those things.  Yet, without the Beatles, these things would never have come to pass.  Well, at least, that's how I see it.

God - I love those Beatles - now and forever - even to my dying breath!

[Moogmodule]

God - I love those Beatles - now and forever - even to my dying breath!

Amen to that Loco!

[Loco Mo]

Something else I wanna add:  Strawberry Fields.  They really worked and reworked that song.  The version we hear is with John's voice slowed down.  Did John actually tell George Martin to do that?  I heard the faster version and it doesn't sound as good to me.  So there you go - input from non-Beatles contributes significantly to the quality of Beatles songs.

Do we think less of the Beatles because of it?

[Moogmodule]

Something else I wanna add:  Strawberry Fields.  They really worked and reworked that song.  The version we hear is with John's voice slowed down.  Did John actually tell George Martin to do that?  I heard the faster version and it doesn't sound as good to me.  So there you go - input from non-Beatles contributes significantly to the quality of Beatles songs.

Do we think less of the Beatles because of it?

The recording of Strawberry Fields and how it ended up as it did is a book in itself.

[Hello Goodbye]

The recording of Strawberry Fields and how it ended up as it did is a book in itself.

Ending with...


https://youtu.be/bMPrUz6FfwM