The Beatles History Thread

[Sarahfeena]

Sarahfeena and pepperlandgirl will answer your questions!

[What Exit?]

To start this off, how many albums did they make before the break-up?

[Sarahfeena]

Their studio releases in Britian were:

Please Please Me
With the Beatles
Beatles for Sale
A Hard Day's Night
Help!
Rubber Soul
Revolver
Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
Magical Mystery Tour
Yellow Submarine
The Beatles (the White Album)
Abbey Road
Let it Be

These were all recorded as a band (more or less), although I believe Let it Be was released after the break-up. I think I have them in the correct order, but please don't ask me for the dates.

In the US, the releases were slightly different ("Beatles for Sale" was I think "Beatles 65," for instance) so if this list doesn't seem quite right, that may be the reason.

[pepperlandgirl]

All of the US releases were different from the UK releases until Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band, when the Beatles basically refused to let Capital slice up their albums any longer. The albums prior to that were chopped up and rearranged. For example, the American version of Rubber Soul lost several songs that were replaced by numbers off of the b-side of Help!. Other songs were chopped from the studio releases and bundled into completely new albums. This has, believe it or not, led to quite a bit of debate in the Beatles academic community (yeah such a thing exists) between what's the "proper" release order for the songs. I'm not sure why it's a debatable point, since clearing the UK releases are the proper releases, but there you go. I imagine that it's complicated because the UK releases weren't "standard" until after the albums were released on CDs (at least that's what I gathered from my own experiences). (Also, the Capital records were recently released in a box set for people who grew up on those versions of the albums, I guess).


Let it Be (The "Get Back" sessions) was recorded prior to Abbey Road. They basically left all those tapes in shambles...they had hours and hours and hours and hours of recorded stuff and due to the real discord and rancor that developed in those sessions, no interest in making a final product out of it. That was why Phil Spector was brought in to deal with it, and also why it was released after Abbey Road, but recorded before it.

The original studio releases don't cover all the songs, either. So I would amend Sarah's list to include Past Masters Vol 1 and Past Masters Vol 2, plus Live at the BBC for completion's sake.

[Sarahfeena]

Good point about the order Abbey Road and Let it Be were recorded in...I should have mentioned that, and the existence of the other 3 albums.

[Cluricaun]

No question to contribute, but I came across this picture moments ago and it blew my mind.

[ivan astikov]

Is there any indication of how popular The Beatles music is with teenagers of following generations?

[Sarahfeena]

Cluricaun, what blew your mind? What absolute babies they were when they got together?

ivan, I"m not sure of your question, exactly. I think, though, that one of the amazing things about the Beatles is their continued popularity. Look at how big the new Beatles Rock Band game is, with people in their 60s, with their kids from preschool age up to kindergarteners, and everyone in between. Think about how long it was the Beatles were in their heyday...50 years! 50 years before the Beatles was pre-flapper days. Music just doesn't enjoy popular longevity like that, but the Beatles and some of the other bands from their era have endured.

[Cluricaun]

Cluricaun, what blew your mind? What absolute babies they were when they got together?

Pretty much. I was going through an image thread on another board and it took me a good 10 seconds to realize who that was a picture of. If it weren't for the fact that John Lennon looks much the same I may have never figured out that it was a photo of the Beatles.

How old were they?

[Sarahfeena]

That is a VERY early photo, of course, so I'm gonna take a stab at it and say George was about 14, Paul 15, and John 17. They really were babies. John thought George was, for sure, and didn't want him in the band at first.

[Sarahfeena]

I was off a bit on their ages. I found this website with an awesome collection of early Beatles photos, and it includes that photo Cluricaun posted. According to the website, that pic is from mid 1958, which would mean that George had just turned 15 in February, Paul just about 16 (depending on when it was taken, as his birthday is in June), and John was 17, as he turned 18 that October.

[ChrisStarr]

What is the combined number of weeks that their singles AND albums spent at number 1 in the US charts?

[The Original An Gadaí]

Are there any Beatles recordings that are still extant but have never seen the light of day or a proper commercial release?

[OneCentStamp]

Opinion question, for both of you: Rank the Beatles based on the quality of their post-Beatles recorded output. Explain your rankings.

[Sarahfeena]

Are there any Beatles recordings that are still extant but have never seen the light of day or a proper commercial release?

There are quite a few recordings that have never been officially released. Their Decca Auditions are probabaly the most well-known and coveted by Beatles collectors. There are also some recordings of sessions they did live on the BBC, recordings of concerts, some amateur recordings they did of early rehearsals & that sort of thing. There are a bunch of Lennon-McCartney original songs that were recorded during various sessions and never released. Some of these recordings can be found on the Anthologies, and virutally all of them on bootlegs.

[Sarahfeena]

Opinion question, for both of you: Rank the Beatles based on the quality of their post-Beatles recorded output. Explain your rankings.

An excellent question, and a hard one. Let me think about it.

[Revs]

Did Pete Best play drums on any early Beatles releases? If so which ones. I would like to do a comparison with Ringo.

[Sarahfeena]

Did Pete Best play drums on any early Beatles releases? If so which ones. I would like to do a comparison with Ringo.

On actual releases, the only one I can think of was when the Beatles were the backing band for Tony Sheridan's recording of My Bonnie. This was released as a single, which incidentally was the record that brought the Beatles to the attention of Brian Epstein, when someone came into his record store and asked for it.

When the Beatles auditioned for Parlophone, George Martin requested that they use a session drummer instead of Pete when they did the record (which was Love Me Do/Please Please Me, although I think by the time that was put on an album, they used a different version that Ringo recorded with them). This was probably the death knell for Pete with the band, as I think the other guys kind of wanted to oust him and this was a good excuse, so he never had the chance to work on any of their other recordings.

[pepperlandgirl]

Did Pete Best play drums on any early Beatles releases? If so which ones. I would like to do a comparison with Ringo.

When the Beatles auditioned for Parlophone, George Martin requested that they use a session drummer instead of Pete when they did the record (which was Love Me Do/Please Please Me, although I think by the time that was put on an album, they used a different version that Ringo recorded with them). This was probably the death knell for Pete with the band, as I think the other guys kind of wanted to oust him and this was a good excuse, so he never had the chance to work on any of their other recordings.

Not on any early releases, no. However, he is their drummer for the Decca Audition tapes. A few tracks of those can be found on Anthology Vol 1 Disc 1. There was a recording of My Bonnie and Ain't She Sweet done in Hamberg as a back up band for Tony Sheridan, but as luck would have it, Ringo played on those tracks! It was the first time the four of them played together (I don't remember where Pete Best was that day but he's not on the single).

Now, George Martin did request a session drummer for Love Me Do, but the session drummer didn't ultimately replace Pete. The boys had already asked Ringo to join them, and Ringo showed up ready to play, but George Martin was all "I have this session drummer and I'd like to use him." The single (released on Past Masters Vol 1) features the session drummer, the album features Ringo.

Opinion question, for both of you: Rank the Beatles based on the quality of their post-Beatles recorded output. Explain your rankings.

Hard question but...

1) Paul McCartney
2) George Harrison
3) John Lennon
4) Ringo Starr

I ranked Paul at number 1 because while some of his albums are horrid (Tug of War, Memory Almost Full, Driving Rain, one I can't remember but might have been Mars and Venus), other albums are quite good and even ambitious. I think Band on The Run makes up for a lot of later musical missteps, and I enjoy a number of Wings tunes. Flaming Pie and the two Fireman albums are fantastic and reveal a lot of what Paul is all about. He also consistently makes music and touring. Good or bad, he's doing what he loves and doing it well.

I put George Harrison at number 2 because while he wasn't releasing albums as consistently as Paul, he had a few amazing ones, All Things Must Pass and Cloud 9 being the obvious ones for me. I bought Brainwashed, which was finished up and released after his death, and it's an amazing album. Plus, I just really like George.

I wish I could rank John higher and yet keep Paul and George at one and two. Not all of John's songs were great, but when I listen to something like The John Lennon Collection and compare his work to those of his contemporaries, it's clear that John was doing something special. His music still sounds modern to my ears, and I suspect strongly that if he had lived, he would have remained relevant throughout the 80s, keeping up, staying ahead of, or setting trends. But John had a lot of shit going on in the 70s that had nothing to do with music, and career-wise, I don't think it was a strong time for him.

Now I love Ringo. He works hard, he loves music, he's all about peace, etc. Of course, he deserves points for his stint as Mr. Conductor. And his album Vertical Man. But ultimately, I don't believe he would have had a solo career if it wasn't for a combination of being the Beatles drummer and the fact that Paul, John, and George were all willing to play on his albums and help him write songs.

[Sarahfeena]

Hmmm....seems pep and I are in disagreement. I was sure Pete played on My Bonnie. I'm going to have to do some investigating.

[pepperlandgirl]

Well I thought they said that Ringo played on My Bonnie on The Anthology, but I just dug out the DVDs and...no. They did not mention it. I could have sworn I heard/read somewhere that Ringo sat in on those sessions, but I'll never know where now.

Now I'm sucked in to watching The Anthology.

[Myrnalene]

So, really, why did they break up?

[Sarahfeena]

Well, in my opinion, I would use a metaphor and say that they got married too young and grew apart. They had been making music together through thick and thin for almost 15 years by the time they ended it...since they were teenagers...and there was a lot of bickering and creative disagreements towards the end. I really think that the major factor was that they just really wanted to each spread their wings in a new direction...George was into his spirituality, John wanted to do more experimental types of music, and Paul really really wanted to do more live shows which they hadn't been able to do for a long time. Paul even suggested that they play unannounced dates in clubs, or under a different name so people wouldn't know, just so they could play the way they did in their younger, pre-fame days at the Cavern Club.

About Yoko, I do think that she was a bit of a catalyst for the break up, but only partly because she was sort of pushing John into doing his own thing and not compromising with the rest of the band anymore (which I think she definitely did do). The other thing about her is that the other guys just simply weren't used to giving women a lot of consideration. I mean, really, if you think about it, they are from what we think of now as the older generation, and they had some very old-fashioned ideas about women and relationships. In fact, I would say they were downright chauvinist, and weren't too thrilled about her just hanging around and having a strong influence over John (more so than they did at that point). Of course, later Paul had his wife Linda in his band, but I really think that in both of their minds that was a way to be together, since Paul really did want to tour, vs. thinking that she was being a serious musician. The relationship with John and Yoko was different, as Yoko tended to take charge and John was more of the follower.

[pepperlandgirl]

My pet theory is that the Beatles broke up because the love affair between John and Paul was over. No, I'm not saying they were actually having an affair. But that wasn't a business partnership. That was a relationship, and not all relationships can be sustained indefinitely. People blame Yoko, and John admitted to using Yoko as a weapon because he could (he knew they didn't want her there in the studio), but he was exacerbating an already bad situation. On top of that, George was becoming increasingly dissatisfied with his place in the band. As long as Lennon/McCartney existed, he would be third fiddle in the group. He was getting deeper and deeper into Eastern mysticism and drugs, and going his own direction musically and personally. There was a lot of friction between Paul and George, as well. As much as I love Paul, I think I'd probably punch him in the face if I had to work with him. He's a perfectionist, and worse, he can be extremely condescending--especially since George was younger than him. Not a significant amount, but George was always "the kid" when they were all kids.

In the early years, they were friends, all dedicated to reaching a common goal--"the toppermost of the poppermost." That friendship sustained them through the really hard parts. But, I'd say after Brian Epstein died, those bonds that held them started to deteriorate. I think that they probably could have continued if John and Paul hadn't fallen apart. But I doubt John was even capable of maintaining a long-term relationship with anybody.

[Myrnalene]

Thanks, guys.

Paul really really wanted to do more live shows which they hadn't been able to do for a long time. Paul even suggested that they play unannounced dates in clubs, or under a different name so people wouldn't know, just so they could play the way they did in their younger, pre-fame days at the Cavern Club.

What was it that caused them to give up touring? My impression has always been that they were dissatisfied with the audience reaction, no one was really listening to the music. Can you ladies tell me more about that? Were there safety concerns?

[pepperlandgirl]

Thanks, guys.



What was it that caused them to give up touring? My impression has always been that they were dissatisfied with the audience reaction, no one was really listening to the music. Can you ladies tell me more about that? Were there safety concerns?

It was a combination of factors. One, they were tired. Their American tours would typically be 32 shows in 30 days. Then they would fly home and immediately begin the next leg of their trip. When they weren't touring, they were in the studio, because they were still expected to have two new albums a year, not to mention the singles (that wouldn't be on the albums), and then there was the special engagements, the television shows, the radio shows, the interviews. Second, they were some safety concerns. They had received death threats after the whole "bigger than Jesus" thing, and every town they went to wanted to put them in a parade (George drew the line at that though). Third, not only was the audience not interested in the music, but the Beatles couldn't hear themselves play over the noise of the audience. It was all they could do to keep together, and the quality of their shows and their music was declining as a result. Fourth, after Help!, they began to experiment more and more in the studio. Many of the songs off of Rubber Soul and Revolver couldn't be performed live because they just didn't have the technology at the time. Finally, you tour to promote yourself. In 1966, the band didn't need to be a touring band any longer. They weren't enjoying it and they weren't gaining anything from it.

[Clothahump]

I know that the group's getting strung out on drugs absolutely destroyed their music. Do you think the drug problems also contributed to the breakup?

[pepperlandgirl]

I know that the group's getting strung out on drugs absolutely destroyed their music. Do you think the drug problems also contributed to the breakup?

I'm actually literally confused by your assertion. Which drugs destroyed what music? Which of their albums do you find "destroyed" musically? (I'll at least be able to figure out what drugs they were on at the time if you can narrow the album down for me).

I think that John getting into heroin, Paul getting into coke, Ringo doing every fucking thing he can find, and George tripping his balls off on a regular basis probably contributed to the tension between them.