how does the intro of Drive My Car work?
Eric Ramon
beat if you hear it as coming in on 1 but once you realize it's coming
in on the pickup beat and is the same rhythm as "I can't hide" it's
easy to hear all the way into the singing as being "right".
But how does Drive My Car work? Does that intro have anything to do
with any other part of the song? What beat does it start on? 'cause I
don't know!
marcuscp
Start the riff on the "and". 1and2and3and4NOW! I still stuff it up
when we haven't played the song for a while. Gotta get in touch with
your inner "AND".
JohnBL
"She's a Woman" still messes me up -- but only when hearing it, not playing it. (I play keyboards and the song sounds great with some fattened-up 10-finger chords.) I can come in on the "and" beat and play it fine, but I still can't catch the beat when listening to it, until Paul comes in with the first line.
JL
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
> But how does Drive My Car work? Does that intro have anything to
> do with any other part of the song? What beat does it start on?
> 'cause I don't know!
There is something odd about it, but I get confused when I try to count
it. I always play it correctly on guitar, but I'm glad I'm not the
bassist or drummer!
RichL
news:c02c35dd-daa6-43f3...@h11g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
If you score it as strictly 4/4 time, it starts on the "four AND".
But to me it makes more sense to represent the first measure as 4 beats,
with the guitar coming in at beat 1, and then the second measure as 4 1/2
beats. Doing it that way keeps the guitar in sync with the beat in the
intro. The second measure has that brief (1/2 beat) delay at the end, and
the first verse starts.
As far as I can tell, there's no correlation with any other part of the song
as there is with IWTHYH.
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
> Start the riff on the "and". 1and2and3and4NOW! I still stuff it
> up when we haven't played the song for a while. Gotta get in touch
> with your inner "AND".
You're right! I swear, I've been playing it right for decades, but I
have not been hearing it that way! However, I just pounded out the beat
on a cowbell along with the intro, and now, I think I finally hear the
rhythm as was originally intended:
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
> If you score it as strictly 4/4 time, it starts on the "four AND".
>
> But to me it makes more sense to represent the first measure as 4
> beats, with the guitar coming in at beat 1, and then the second
> measure as 4 1/2 beats. Doing it that way keeps the guitar in
> sync with the beat in the intro. The second measure has that
> brief (1/2 beat) delay at the end, and the first verse starts.
I don't like that, but if it works for you...
My "Beatles Complete Scores" book has the intro as one measure of 4/4
and one measure of 9/8, but I think they have the rhythms notated
wrong.
After a lifetime of intentionally avoiding counting it out, I now as of
tonight like the 4/4 method.
marcuscp
> On 08 Jul 2011, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote in
It only really matters if, like me, you have to play to a backing
track with the piano and cowbell on it. If you stuff up the intro and
the drummer stuffs up the intro roll, things can end up quite
embarrassing. The curse of the clik track.
ermitano
>
> - Mostrar texto de la cita -
i agree with RichL, that's the sense of accent of the rhythm. The
other way it fits "artificially" with the tempo of the song,
9/8 is a simple way to note a 4/4+1/8 , which i guess would be the
right way for it.
who?
> On 07 Jul 2011, Eric Ramon <ramon.e...@gmail.com> wrote in
I've never tried to play it on any instrument, but in my head
the bass comes in on the last chord of the guitar riff. I don't hear
anything
difficult about coming in at the right time. Maybe I should
listen to the record, and find out what happens.
:-)
RichL
"Nil" <redn...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9F1CDFA...@130.133.4.11...
> On 08 Jul 2011, "RichL" <rple...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> rec.music.beatles:
>
>> If you score it as strictly 4/4 time, it starts on the "four AND".
>>
>> But to me it makes more sense to represent the first measure as 4
>> beats, with the guitar coming in at beat 1, and then the second
>> measure as 4 1/2 beats. Doing it that way keeps the guitar in
>> sync with the beat in the intro. The second measure has that
>> brief (1/2 beat) delay at the end, and the first verse starts.
>
> I don't like that, but if it works for you...
>
> My "Beatles Complete Scores" book has the intro as one measure of 4/4
> and one measure of 9/8, but I think they have the rhythms notated
> wrong.
That's just another way to put what I was saying. I'd have to check out the
score to see what you mean by "rhythms notated wrong".
>
> After a lifetime of intentionally avoiding counting it out, I now as of
> tonight like the 4/4 method.
Well, I for one thing that, in the interest of keeping sane, we should all
agree that Ringo made a mistake coming in with the drums, and we should
shorten that second measure so it's 4/4 all around :-)
Some Other Guy
Holy crap! My problem is that as much as it is spot on, my brain still hears it the way it has the
past 40 years and it is fighting the click track you added. I had the same problem with Two of Us,
thinking that the intro came in on the 1 AND when it really comes in on the 1.
Now if I can ever get Everybodys Got Something to Hide down. That one is really screwed up. even
when I hear the count in on one of the bootlegs.
Tony
Some Other Guy
Bass comes in way before that and it is on a weird beat. It is on the 3rd beat of the 2nd measure
Some Other Guy
Ringo doesnt make mistakes.
who?
I'm sure I could figure it out after 41 years. It took me a while to
figure
out "Money" by Pink Floyd.
who?
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 18:37:50 -0400, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >"Nil" <redno...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote in message
> >news:Xns9F1CDFA...@130.133.4.11...
> >> On 08 Jul 2011, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> >> rec.music.beatles:
>
> >>> If you score it as strictly 4/4 time, it starts on the "four AND".
>
> >>> But to me it makes more sense to represent the first measure as 4
> >>> beats, with the guitar coming in at beat 1, and then the second
> >>> measure as 4 1/2 beats. Doing it that way keeps the guitar in
> >>> sync with the beat in the intro. The second measure has that
> >>> brief (1/2 beat) delay at the end, and the first verse starts.
>
> >> I don't like that, but if it works for you...
>
> >> My "Beatles Complete Scores" book has the intro as one measure of 4/4
> >> and one measure of 9/8, but I think they have the rhythms notated
> >> wrong.
>
> >That's just another way to put what I was saying. I'd have to check out the
> >score to see what you mean by "rhythms notated wrong".
>
> >> After a lifetime of intentionally avoiding counting it out, I now as of
> >> tonight like the 4/4 method.
>
> >Well, I for one thing that, in the interest of keeping sane, we should all
> >agree that Ringo made a mistake coming in with the drums, and we should
> >shorten that second measure so it's 4/4 all around :-)
>>Ringo doesnt make mistakes.
Yeah, it's why why they spliced together the best takes of their
songs, and stuck them all together to make one song.
marcuscp
> On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 01:15:08 -0400, Nil <redno...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net> wrote:
> >On 07 Jul 2011, marcuscp <phelanmar...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >rec.music.beatles:
>
> >> Start the riff on the "and". 1and2and3and4NOW! I still stuff it
> >> up when we haven't played the song for a while. Gotta get in touch
> >> with your inner "AND".
>
> >You're right! I swear, I've been playing it right for decades, but I
> >have not been hearing it that way! However, I just pounded out the beat
> >on a cowbell along with the intro, and now, I think I finally hear the
> >rhythm as was originally intended:
>
> >http://home.comcast.net/~esionder/temp/DMC.mp3
>
> Holy crap! My problem is that as much as it is spot on, my brain still hears it the way it has the
> past 40 years and it is fighting the click track you added. I had the same problem with Two of Us,
> thinking that the intro came in on the 1 AND when it really comes in on the 1.
>
> Now if I can ever get Everybodys Got Something to Hide down. That one is really screwed up. even
> when I hear the count in on one of the bootlegs.
>
> Tony
Learning EGSTHEFMAMM really messed my head around, When we played it
live (40th anniversary of the White Album), with a click track - LOUD
cowbell - I never really knew where I was until the A chord change,
but as I was playing the frenetic lead bit and the song was pretty
chaotic anyway, I think I got away with it. One of Macca's most
incredible basslines.
RichL
From my post of a couple of days ago:
"If you score it as strictly 4/4 time, it starts on the "four AND".
"But to me it makes more sense to represent the first measure as 4 beats,
with the guitar coming in at beat 1, and then the second measure as 4 1/2
beats."
If anything, your clip illustrates my point. You can sync up a cowbell or
metronome so that it has the right tempo and winds up on the ONE at the
right time when the verse starts, but listening to your cowbell played along
with the song's intro illustrates clearly (to me at least!) that this
approach is completely counterintuitive. Simply put, the cowbell rhythm is
completely out of sync with the part being played.
I found an interesting comment by a "James, Liverpool, United Kingdom" on
the songfacts.com forum:
http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=86
______
"Actually, Paul played Bass, piano, and dual tracked the lead guitar with
George, while John played the cowbell, and sang harmony. John also was
tracked in playing the tambourine, while of course, Ringo was on drums. The
reason Ringo's timing comes in the way it does, is because he is left
handed, but was forced as a child to learn to play on a right handed drum
kit. You will notice this in a lot of Beatle songs, like Ticket To ride,
and Come Together, and may others! How do I know all this?
Because I was there! Hello to all...! James
______
SIR James, perhaps? ;-)
RichL
news:cpng17h9c3g1lfkgj...@4ax.com...
Humor, laddie!
Eric Ramon
> On 07 Jul 2011, marcuscp <phelanmar...@gmail.com> wrote in
wow! Terrific! Thanks so much! The second half, leading into the verse
is especially clear. This is now learnable for me.
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
>> http://home.comcast.net/~esionder/temp/DMC.mp3
> If anything, your clip illustrates my point. You can sync up a
> cowbell or metronome so that it has the right tempo and winds up
> on the ONE at the right time when the verse starts, but listening
> to your cowbell played along with the song's intro illustrates
> clearly (to me at least!) that this approach is completely
> counterintuitive. Simply put, the cowbell rhythm is completely
> out of sync with the part being played.
Not to me. Now that I have it plotted out, it makes good sense as 4/4.
It's not out-of-sync, it's just highly syncopated.
I think the reason it tends to sound awkward is that the downbeat (just
after the initial 8th note pickup) is the 7th of the chord, which isn't
usually stressed in that position, plus George doesn't physically
emphasize it. Plus, the *next* downbeat is anticipated by an 8th not,
so *it* doesn't get emphasized. So, the start of those two measures is
never explicit. Very clever!
And if you count it off this way, Ringo enters at a more logical point,
right on three, with a 2-beat fill.
The oddest thing to me about it is Paul's little bass flourish on beat
3 of the first measure. Kinda comes out of nowhere, but it's perfectly
times with George's guitar, so it's clearly no accident.
As further evidence, I present a clip of Paul playing the song at Live
8 concert in 2005. You can clearly hear him counting the song off so
that the intro starts on 4-and.
http://home.comcast.net/~esionder/temp/Drive_My_Car-McCartney_Live8.mp3
Your honour, I rest my case.
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
>>http://home.comcast.net/~esionder/temp/DMC.mp3
>
> Holy crap! My problem is that as much as it is spot on, my brain
> still hears it the way it has the past 40 years and it is fighting
> the click track you added.
There are some other songs I've had that trouble with (several Led
Zeppelin songs come to mine - I've figured out some really twisted
ways of counting them, and when it was later pointed out that they
fall into a simpler 4/4 pattern if you just start in a different
place... well, I still can't accept it.) But I'm having an easy time
with Drive My Car.
> I had the same problem with Two of Us, thinking that the intro
> came in on the 1 AND when it really comes in on the 1.
I've always heard it on 1, and I can't seem to force myself to hear it
on 1-and. Too ingrained, I guess.
> Now if I can ever get Everybodys Got Something to Hide down. That
> one is really screwed up. even when I hear the count in on one of
> the bootlegs.
That's another one that I should pin down. I've always heard it as the
first guitar chip being on 1 and the word ON ("come ON") being on one.
It works that way until you get to the chorus, and it suddenly turns
out that the beat is not where I thought it was. I've been listening to
it for more than 40 years, and I still get that disorienting rush every
time that comes around. Will I never learn?
I've never heard a take where they count it off. That would be cool.
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
>> http://home.comcast.net/~esionder/temp/DMC.mp3
>
> wow! Terrific! Thanks so much! The second half, leading into the
> verse is especially clear. This is now learnable for me.
Yeah, I like that I can now count it off with confidence. I could
always play it correctly... until I started thinking about it too much
and start to question my sanity.
I did that with my shoelaces once. I made the mistake of watching my
fingers going in and out of the laces, and the self-awareness made my
mind go blank. I had to walk around with untied shoes for half a day
before I could forget what I had seen and tie them automatically.
RichL
> On 09 Jul 2011, "RichL" <rple...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> rec.music.beatles:
>
>>> http://home.comcast.net/~esionder/temp/DMC.mp3
>
>> If anything, your clip illustrates my point. You can sync up a
>> cowbell or metronome so that it has the right tempo and winds up
>> on the ONE at the right time when the verse starts, but listening
>> to your cowbell played along with the song's intro illustrates
>> clearly (to me at least!) that this approach is completely
>> counterintuitive. Simply put, the cowbell rhythm is completely
>> out of sync with the part being played.
>
> Not to me. Now that I have it plotted out, it makes good sense as 4/4.
> It's not out-of-sync, it's just highly syncopated.
>
> I think the reason it tends to sound awkward is that the downbeat (just
> after the initial 8th note pickup) is the 7th of the chord, which isn't
> usually stressed in that position, plus George doesn't physically
> emphasize it. Plus, the *next* downbeat is anticipated by an 8th not,
> so *it* doesn't get emphasized. So, the start of those two measures is
> never explicit. Very clever!
Clever? Or confusing?
>
> And if you count it off this way, Ringo enters at a more logical point,
> right on three, with a 2-beat fill.
>
> The oddest thing to me about it is Paul's little bass flourish on beat
> 3 of the first measure. Kinda comes out of nowhere, but it's perfectly
> times with George's guitar, so it's clearly no accident.
>
> As further evidence, I present a clip of Paul playing the song at Live
> 8 concert in 2005. You can clearly hear him counting the song off so
> that the intro starts on 4-and.
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~esionder/temp/Drive_My_Car-McCartney_Live8.mp3
>
> Your honour, I rest my case.
Well there are clearly two ways to interpret what's going on. I take at
least some comfort in the fact that, according to one of your earlier posts,
Hal Leonard and his crew interpret things the same way I do :-)
But now you've got me thinking, which in this case is both a good thing and
a bad thing. I never really thought consciously about this before this
thread started, but intuitively I approached it according to the
interpretation I mentioned. Always played it without a hitch.
Now I've got your clip as well as Paul's count-in in my head, and next time
I'm likely to screw it up because I'll over-think it!
By the way, you mentioned "George's guitar" above. Did George play that
part or did Paul overdub it? Isn't the solo Paul's?
My impression was that George's contribution to the song was the riff that's
doubled on Paul's bass, played with a Strat, and not much else. Neither the
intro guitar part nor the lead part sounds like a Strat to me, more like a
Casino which was Paul's favorite in those days.
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
> Clever? Or confusing?
Clever, definitely!
It's like reggae or some latin rhythms - you leave out the one and
things can get very propulsive!
(I'm terrible at reggae, btw.)
> Well there are clearly two ways to interpret what's going on. I
> take at least some comfort in the fact that, according to one of
> your earlier posts, Hal Leonard and his crew interpret things the
> same way I do :-)
There's always more than one way to interpret music: the wrong way and
my way.
But seriously, folks, whatever works for you. And a sometimes it sounds
more interesting when two players approach it from a slightly different
angle and things bump up against each other in interesting ways. Think
of Chuck Berry playing straight 8ths against a shuffle (or was it vice
versa?)
> Now I've got your clip as well as Paul's count-in in my head, and
> next time I'm likely to screw it up because I'll over-think it!
You'll get it. Free your mind and your ass will follow.
> By the way, you mentioned "George's guitar" above. Did George
> play that part or did Paul overdub it? Isn't the solo Paul's?
I assumed it was George, but you may be right. The intro guitar is in
one channel, as is the solo(s). The guitar that follows the bass part
is in the other channel. I guess it's a reasonable assumption that if
Paul played the solo, he played the intro, too. On the other hand,
maybe John played one of those two guitars. It was most common for the
basic track to be recorded live in those days, but any one of those
parts, including the bass, could have been recorded later. Seems to me,
though, that the intro had to have been recorded with the basic track,
since everybody else has to fall in line with it.
None of my reference books say exactly how it was recorded. The closest
is the Lewisohn book, which says the basic track was recorded Wen,
Oct. 13, 1965:
"The 'best' take of 'Drive My Car', chosen to open the LP, was take
four, the only complete run through. But there were numerous overdubs,
and by the end of the day the song featured lead vocal by Paul and John
plus backing vocal by George, tambourine, lead guitar, rhythm guitar,
drums, piano, and cowbell."
I notice that he doesn't mention the bass.
RichL
For what it's worth, while I was digging around for info on how various
people see the timing of the intro, I hit a pile of web sites that discuss
these various issues. Since that's not what I was interested in at the
time, I didn't save them, and I'm too lazy to go back and look now. But a
few things I recall...
George apparently worked through that riff in the verses; he showed it to
Paul, and they decided to double it in the song. They recorded it together,
most likely in the main take. But apparently this little tidbit got
misinterpreted, and there's actually a lot of stuff out there that says that
George played the bassline. Nope.
Supposedly the intro guitar riff was patched in later as an overdub. How, I
dunno, I suppose they could have kept a click track of some sort synced to
the main take that gave Paul (???) guidance as to when to come in with the
guitar.
hrgla...@gmail.com
First time I heard Drive My Car as the opening track on Rubber Soul it signalled a distinct departure from their earlier music and completely blew me away.
Nil
> On Friday, July 8, 2011 at 7:06:29 AM UTC+3, RichL wrote:
>> If you score it as strictly 4/4 time, it starts on the "four
>> AND".
> whole lick will be 3 measures long (including the count-in
> measure) and it will start on the AND after 3. The bass comes in
> on 2 of measure 2 and throws it out of sync until beat 3 of
> measure 3 when ringo comes in.
long and the guitar starts on 4-and. The bass comes in on 2 in the
following measure and the drums come in on 2 in the 3rd measure with a
2-bar fill. Then "Asked a girl..."
The timing puzzled me for years. I finally managed to count it out
correctly and have since played it enough times that it finally became
comfortable. I've been playing it recently with my band and the drum
and bass are struggling with it. The each have their own twisted way
counting it out, but as long as we all get to the verse downbeat
together, I don't care how they do it. I like the straightest path.
thewalruswasdanny
James
Danny
Wir Munchen Liebschoen
> The comment above suggests it a Macca response as well: No fuzz bass was used on Drive My Car .The only song I used a fuzz attachment on my bass was on Think For Yourself .
> James
a worthless comment about a fuzz box which has nothing to do with the
discussion and it is totally obvious no fuzz was used.
Total waste of bandwidth.
Nil
wrote in rec.music.beatles:
> The comment above suggests it a Macca response as well: No fuzz
> bass was used on Drive My Car .The only song I used a fuzz
> attachment on my bass was on Think For Yourself . James
wonder which are just the amp cranked way up into distortion territory
or if there was ever a fuzz box involved.
rplea...@gmail.com
Paul: "Hey, if John can get away with it, why can't I?"
cuppajoe2go
zippl...@gmail.com
whatever on this song, like the fuzz, (whiskers) on my face. All
songs since the 1950's have used fuzz on the bass. You didn't know
that?
thewalruswasdanny
Danny
danielc...@gmail.com
1/8
4/4
4/4
With pauls bass being on 3+4+ of the 1st 4/4 bar. Obviously the confusion comes because we think of the riff as being the other way round - with the off beats being the on beat. If george put some dynamics in or specifically played the pickup quieter or with a clear upstroke itd all be a lot simpler. I suspect the beatles practiced it without the pickup note then george decided to add it once everyone knew how the riff really sounded.
Or like someone else has suggested, it was added/overdubbed later.
IMO it just seems too retarded for them all to be on board with the timing how it is on record, particularly with the way they recorded songs basically at creation in the studio - its something you have to feel rather than think about which cant really be done on cue in my opinion...then again the Beatles were geniuses...!
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
> Like someone above has said there is a pickup note at the start of
> the riff so the timing should be 3 bars like: 1/8
> 4/4
> 4/4
>
> With pauls bass being on 3+4+ of the 1st 4/4 bar. Obviously the
> confusion comes because we think of the riff as being the other
> way round - with the off beats being the on beat. If george put
> some dynamics in or specifically played the pickup quieter or with
> a clear upstroke itd all be a lot simpler.
out, but some little clue like you mention would make it more explicit
and less confusing. OTOH, I think it's better for being mysterious! In
that regard it's not unlike the intro to "I Want to Hold Your Hand",
where the downbeat is ambiguous until the verse makes it not so. In the
rehearsal takes you can even hear Paul encouraging them to muddy the
waters.
> I suspect the beatles
> practiced it without the pickup note then george decided to add it
> once everyone knew how the riff really sounded. Or like someone
> else has suggested, it was added/overdubbed later.
and kept, as they sometimes did. Perhaps there was a count-off that was
edited off the release take. This is one of the questions I have in
mind for that day when I finally have afternoon tea with Sir Paul. I
will take clotted cream with my scone.
I think I mentioned earlier that I was trying to get my Beatles cover
band to play this right. Alas, I never succeeded. We got it right
sometimes, but only by accident. Only me and the drummer were
consistently on the same page. He had some weird-ass way of counting it
out for himself, which didn't matter to me since we hit things at the
right times, but the other guys never could get it in the same place.
They kept trying to tell me it didn't matter, but I know better.
Sloppy.
Apropos of nothing except that it's the subject of the thread, here's
my DIY recording of the song. I *DID* get the timing right!
https://soundcloud.com/rednoise-121658843/drive-my-car4c
Dresden Houndiearfums
> On 19 Sep 2017, danielc...@gmail.com wrote in
> rec.music.beatles:
>
>> Like someone above has said there is a pickup note at the start of
>> the riff so the timing should be 3 bars like: 1/8
>> 4/4
>> 4/4
>>
>> With pauls bass being on 3+4+ of the 1st 4/4 bar. Obviously the
>> confusion comes because we think of the riff as being the other
>> way round - with the off beats being the on beat. If george put
>> some dynamics in or specifically played the pickup quieter or with
>> a clear upstroke itd all be a lot simpler.
>
> Bingo! There's no doubt in my mind that this is the way to count it
> out, but some little clue like you mention would make it more explicit
> and less confusing. OTOH, I think it's better for being mysterious! In
> that regard it's not unlike the intro to "I Want to Hold Your Hand",
> where the downbeat is ambiguous until the verse makes it not so. In the
> rehearsal takes you can even hear Paul encouraging them to muddy the
> waters.
your approval. Of course only you knew all this information and must be
so happy now that someone else knows it and can now feel worthy of
picking your holy nose.
>> I suspect the beatles
>> practiced it without the pickup note then george decided to add it
>> once everyone knew how the riff really sounded. Or like someone
>> else has suggested, it was added/overdubbed later.
>
> I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it was a mistake that they liked
> and kept, as they sometimes did. Perhaps there was a count-off that was
> edited off the release take. This is one of the questions I have in
> mind for that day when I finally have afternoon tea with Sir Paul. I
> will take clotted cream with my scone.
>
> I think I mentioned earlier that I was trying to get my Beatles cover
> band to play this right. Alas, I never succeeded. We got it right
> sometimes, but only by accident. Only me and the drummer were
> consistently on the same page. He had some weird-ass way of counting it
> out for himself, which didn't matter to me since we hit things at the
> right times, but the other guys never could get it in the same place.
> They kept trying to tell me it didn't matter, but I know better.
> Sloppy.
bandmates must be in awe of you everytime you give a holy command. For
only you Nil and the surviving Beatles can play a Beatles tune with true
authenticity. Even the McCartney comes to you for advice before he goes
on tour and auditions for you to ensure he is playing his own music up
to your high standards.
> Apropos of nothing except that it's the subject of the thread, here's
> my DIY recording of the song. I *DID* get the timing right!
themselves. Then again I was on LSD and Percodan so even Tiny Tim sounds
like Harrison. But your version is so good they ought to put it out to
show how musically challenged frogs think they can do a Beatles cover.
P-Dub
If I was covering this one, I'd just keep it to 4/4 like the rest of the song. I have never believed that you have to play anything exactly like the record. I play with guys that insist everything should be exactly like the record - and it annoys me.
My response - if you want to hear the record, put in the fn record. If I'm playing it, I will stick with the basic structure, and I will keep key riffs. But I will always put in my own style.
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
> I believe this was a mistake. Or it was a result of a cut made off
> the intro that gave us a shortened measure to start the song.
> Sounds pretty cool, but I don't think we have to do too much
> thinking on this.
measure is 3 1/2 beats of rest followed by a pickup note on the 4-and.
> If I was covering this one, I'd just keep it to 4/4 like the rest
> of the song. I have never believed that you have to play anything
> exactly like the record. I play with guys that insist everything
> should be exactly like the record - and it annoys me.
make it simpler by leaving something out, but then you'd have to decide
what, exactly, to leave out, so why not learn it how it really goes?
> My response - if you want to hear the record, put in the fn
> record. If I'm playing it, I will stick with the basic structure,
> and I will keep key riffs. But I will always put in my own style.
to be a "key riff". Plus, it's fun!
Dresden Houndiearfums
> On 20 Sep 2017, P-Dub <pwol...@gmail.com> wrote in
> rec.music.beatles:
>
>> I believe this was a mistake. Or it was a result of a cut made off
>> the intro that gave us a shortened measure to start the song.
>> Sounds pretty cool, but I don't think we have to do too much
>> thinking on this.
>
> But there is no shortened measure! It's 4/4 all the way. The first
> measure is 3 1/2 beats of rest followed by a pickup note on the 4-and.
>
>> If I was covering this one, I'd just keep it to 4/4 like the rest
>> of the song. I have never believed that you have to play anything
>> exactly like the record. I play with guys that insist everything
>> should be exactly like the record - and it annoys me.
>
> If you play it like the record, you *are* playing it in 4/4. You could
> make it simpler by leaving something out, but then you'd have to decide
> what, exactly, to leave out, so why not learn it how it really goes?
why your band is world famous and you are regarded as a musical genius
who can not only play with the best of them, but you are much sought
after as a producer.
>> My response - if you want to hear the record, put in the fn
>> record. If I'm playing it, I will stick with the basic structure,
>> and I will keep key riffs. But I will always put in my own style.
>
> I have no problem with that. In this case, though, I consider the intro
> to be a "key riff". Plus, it's fun!
knowledge and humour mixing to form greatness with a Kermit the Frog vox.
RichL
Rich Penis Leavitt
Nil
rec.music.beatles:
> "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out
> and remove all doubt."
every word. Congratulations! You bring purpose to some crazy idiot's
otherwise barren life.
ron9...@gmail.com
Dresden Houndiearfums
must be dead chuffed that he has you on his side to defend him against
people who say nasty things. In fact you can see how grateful Richie is
by his quick reply to you.
Every day the Beatles thank Jesus H. Christ that they have you here to
enrich topics with your bottomless well of Beatle knowledge. You truly
are the Fifth Beatle, Nil.
pkna...@gmail.com
As far as DMC, I favor the theory that lead gtr screwed up, possibly following a click track, because bass and drums sound perfectly in sync when they enter, and that they liked the mistake and kept it.
Nil
> Does anybody besides me hear the beat wrong on the intro to "Day
> beat in m. 4.
is... that there *is* a missing beat! I just checked out the rehearsal
take on the 20th anniversary set, and if you assume that after John's
"Sugar plum fairy" "countoff", the guitar enters on the 1, then the
piano enters 2 bars later, then the vocal enters two bars after that,
just like you'd expect.
On the released take, it's hard to hear where the acoustic guitar
starts, but if you assume that the piano starts on the 1 like in the
rehearsal take, then there's a missing 8th note just before the vocal
enters! I don't know if it's an edit, an intentional rhythmic twist, or
if they just screwed up but it magically worked out anyway.
> As far as DMC, I favor the theory that lead gtr
> screwed up, possibly following a click track, because bass and
> drums sound perfectly in sync when they enter, and that they liked
> the mistake and kept it.
that the bass and drums screwed up?? I've never heard any rehearsal or
alternate takes of DMC to compare it to. That would be interesting. I
used to be thrown by the intro, but I puzzled it out several years ago
and now that I hear the guitar starting on the 4-and, everything works
out in nice, even bars of 4 after that. I like to think they were
purposely playing a little mind game with us, but who knows for sure?