Session Drummers
Daniel E. Evans
who's credits are pretty well known throughout the music industry,
including Frank Sinatra, Jan and Dean, Phil Spector, etc etc...
ANYWAY, my friend told me that Hal Blaine kept meticulous records of his
recording sessions and among them were sessions with the Beatles.
I also remember reading an article in a musician oriented magazine by
drummer Bernard Purdie, who also claims to have played on several
Beatles tracks. He would not say which ones, however.
Does anyone here have the Hal Blaine book? If so, which songs did he play;
on? Does anyone know which songs featured Bernard Purdie?
I HAVE A THEORY... due to a lot of listening to my DAT player with
headphones all day at work. MY THEORY IS that the session drummers (other
than Andy White) started at about the time of HELP!, including the song
itself. As a sometimes drummer myself, I find the quality of the drumming
takes a giant leap upward for that LP, with occasional relapses which
I explain as Ringo songs. Certainly the drumming on Revolver is much
better than that on 'Get Back'.
Comments? Info???
--
'If there's one thing I wouldn't want to be twice -
ZOMBIES IS BOTH OF 'EM!'
Mantan Moreland in 'Zombie Island'
edward s. chen
>
>I HAVE A THEORY... due to a lot of listening to my DAT player with
>headphones all day at work. MY THEORY IS that the session drummers (other
>than Andy White) started at about the time of HELP!, including the song
>itself. As a sometimes drummer myself, I find the quality of the drumming
>takes a giant leap upward for that LP, with occasional relapses which
>I explain as Ringo songs. Certainly the drumming on Revolver is much
>better than that on 'Get Back'.
No. Please see the FAQ. Ringo was the Beatles drummer, ane he played
on everything both live and in the studio from 1962 on. (The Andy White
tracks excepted) Please read Lewisohn for chapter and verse on anything you
may question.
As to where studio men came off saying that they played on "at least
a dozen" (Purdie) Beatles songs, the most likely explanation lies in
the numerous re-releases of the Tony Sheridan Polydor material. In
addition to the overdubs Sheridan is known to have done sometime in
1963, the various American companies added even *more* overdubs to
make the singles sound more "contemporary" (ie: more like Mersey Beat).
The session men who did those overdubs is not listed, and this seems
the most likely place for substantiation of such "I played on a Beatles
record" type rumors.
<ESC>
--
We're gonna be too big for Hamburg; too big for Liverpool;
too big for our own fuckin' good.
-- Iain Softley, Michael Thomas, and Stephen Ward (Backbeat - 1994)
GWRep Neal
(edward s. chen) writes:
<<As to where studio men came off saying that they played on "at
least
a dozen" (Purdie) Beatles songs, the most likely explanation lies in
the numerous re-releases of the Tony Sheridan Polydor material. In
addition to the overdubs Sheridan is known to have done sometime in
1963, the various American companies added even *more* overdubs to
make the singles sound more "contemporary" (ie: more like Mersey
Beat).
The session men who did those overdubs is not listed, and this seems
the most likely place for substantiation of such "I played on a
Beatles
record" type rumors.>>
Bernard Purdie...
Atlantic Recording (ATCO) overdubs for:
Ain't She Sweet
Sweet Georgia Brown
Take Out Some Insurance On Me, Baby
Nobody's Child
(These overdubs only exist in mono.)
At least, that's the way it's been handed down to me from others.
Can't comment on Hal Blaine.
The relevant Sheridan tracks were first released on CD by German
Polydor as "The Beatles-First" after the original(?) lp of the same
name, albeit with a completely different cover (Polydor 823701-2YH).
"Ain't She Sweet" as presented here is the overdub; the remaining 7
are the originals (the post-Sheridan remixing, that is). This CD was
subsequently released with the same catalog number (dropping the YH)
but with a completely different cover which borrowed the
all-too-famous Hamburg shot.
The original "Ain't She Sweet" can be found on a Polydor CD3 single
b/w "My Bonnie," catalog number P10P 30006, at least as released in
Japan.
To the best of my knowledge, the other three overdubs have not been
committed to CD.
Is it true that the pre-"Sheridan remixing" versions are gone
forever... that he really did record over the original work?
Neal
Andrew R. Neumeyer
>who's credits are pretty well known throughout the music industry,
>including Frank Sinatra, Jan and Dean, Phil Spector, etc etc...
>ANYWAY, my friend told me that Hal Blaine kept meticulous records of his
>recording sessions and among them were sessions with the Beatles.
>I also remember reading an article in a musician oriented magazine by
>drummer Bernard Purdie, who also claims to have played on several
>Beatles tracks. He would not say which ones, however.
Hal Blaine was a guest at Beatlefest in Los Angeles last year. He answered
questions about his involvement with the INDIVIDUAL Beatles on recordings in
the SEVENTIRES, notably John Lennon's _Rock 'n' Roll_ album. He never claimed
to have worked in any capacity with the Beatles as a group.
Someone even asked Blaine about Bernard Purdie's claims (which, by the way,
vary from interview to interview). Blaine dismissed them completely.
Aside from "Love Me Do" (album version only) and "P.S. I Love You," the only
Beatles recordings which feature anyone other than Ringo playing drums are
on the White Album. Paul McCartney plays drums on "Wild Honey Pie" and
possibly also "Why Don't We Do It In The Road." "Back in the U.S.S.R." and
"Dear Prudence" were recorded after Ringo briefly called it quits. Depending
on your source, the drumming on these two songs is either by McCartney alone
or some sort of composite of McCartney, Lennon, and Harrison.
Andrew R. Neumeyer
Ross Clement
>As to where studio men came off saying that they played on "at least
>a dozen" (Purdie) Beatles songs, the most likely explanation lies in
>the numerous re-releases of the Tony Sheridan Polydor material. In
>addition to the overdubs Sheridan is known to have done sometime in
>1963, the various American companies added even *more* overdubs to
>make the singles sound more "contemporary" (ie: more like Mersey Beat).
>The session men who did those overdubs is not listed, and this seems
>the most likely place for substantiation of such "I played on a Beatles
>record" type rumors.
Do these overdubs include the organ that has been mentioned recently
as a bit too advanced for any of the Beatles at that stage in their
career to have played?
Cheers,
Ross-c
Ross Clement
>headphones all day at work. MY THEORY IS that the session drummers (other
>than Andy White) started at about the time of HELP!, including the song
>itself. As a sometimes drummer myself, I find the quality of the drumming
>takes a giant leap upward for that LP, with occasional relapses which
>I explain as Ringo songs. Certainly the drumming on Revolver is much
>better than that on 'Get Back'.
Interesting theory. This theory could also explain George Harrison's
improvement as a guitarist, and songwriter, and John and Paul's improvement
as vocalists, and the better lyrics, and Paul's bass-playing, and George
Martin's improving production. MY GOD!!! IT WAS ALL DONE BY SESSION MEN!!!
;-)
Cheers,
Ross-c
Gary Parker
>I HAVE A THEORY... due to a lot of listening to my DAT player with
>headphones all day at work. MY THEORY IS that the session drummers (other
>than Andy White) started at about the time of HELP!, including the song
>itself. As a sometimes drummer myself, I find the quality of the drumming
>takes a giant leap upward for that LP, with occasional relapses which
>I explain as Ringo songs. Certainly the drumming on Revolver is much
>better than that on 'Get Back'.
While you're at it, what's your theory on the Kennedy assassination?
Your theory ain't got a leg to stand on Dan. I don't care what
Hal Blaine's drum log sez, there's absolutely no evidence that
he, or any other session man, (with the early exception of Andy
White on "Love Me Do") ever did any trapwork with the Fabs.
As a sometimes drummer myself, I find your statement that the
drumming on Beatle records improved after "Help" curious.
I always felt that Ringo's best work was the early stuff.
Have you ever seen the Fabs DC concert film from Feb 1964? YOu say you
haven't? Well, check it out, then tell me Ringo's chops weren't good
enough to play on Beatle records.
Later brethern,
-Gary (Riffking) Parker
Bill Shoemaker
>recording sessions and among them were sessions with the Beatles.
The Beatles never recorded in America, so it's possible he meant "with one
of the Beatles" (I'm willing to bet he played on John's "Rock and Roll" LP,
on the sessions that Phil Spector produced in L.A.). He could have also
overdubbed Beatle recordings after the fact (see next section).
>I also remember reading an article in a musician oriented magazine by
>drummer Bernard Purdie, who also claims to have played on several
>Beatles tracks. He would not say which ones, however.
Wouldn't or couldn't. I recall the time that story first surfaced, which
was 15-20 years ago. Strawberry Fields Forever (hi, Joe, if you're reading
this) did a little piece on it, quoting from the Purdie interview (I seem to
recall it came from a tabloid, not a music magazine, but I could be wrong).
The gist of the story was that Purdie had overdubbed some Beatles songs, and
the record company had paid him extra to keep his mouth shut about it.
However, he was telling all, because he didn't care, and the money was
spent.
When pressed about which songs he worked on, he wasn't sure, but he said
something like, "That song, `Yeah, Yeah Yeah' I remember that one real
good."
I don't think that's particularly credible testimony. There are several
possibilities.
Purdie was lying to get publicity. Since he offered no proof, this is
entirely possible.
Purdie actually did overdub some Capitol Beatle recordings. Possible,
considering how Capitol screwed with a lot of the pre-Pepper releases,
adding echo, fake stereo, repackaging, and crediting them as "Produced for
release in the U.S. by Dave Dexter." However, if there is extra or
different drumming on these recordings, it isn't noticible.
Finally, my favorite theory. Purdie did overdub Beatle recordings, but they
were the "Tony Sheridan with the Beatles" sessions. On the original U.S.
releases, the drums are a lot louder on some songs, and there's even a song
called "Ya Ya," which Purdie could have mis-remembered as "Yeah, Yeah,
Yeah."
Bill Shoemaker
Daniel E. Evans
writes:
is not as good as a lot of what I hear on the recordings. But not
wanting to be lumped with Oliver Stone, I will admit I have no proof
and raise the white flag. Old Ringo seems to have at least had someone
help him tune and mic his drums. they sure sound different on HELP!
David W Doerr
: and raise the white flag. Old Ringo seems to have at least had someone
Hey, I think you're right about about that! I haven't taken a close
listen, but I recall the snare being tuned up quite a bit higher
on HELP!
-Dave
Gary Smith
>takes a giant leap upward for that LP, with occasional relapses which
>I explain as Ringo songs. Certainly the drumming on Revolver is much
>better than that on 'Get Back'.
Ringo wasn't a "bad" drummer, oh he was inexperienced early on, but
then again J/P/G weren't virtuosos on their instruments circa '63/'64
either.
If you want bad drumming, listen to Paul's on the various tracks
attributed to him. Don't forget that by the time the White Album,
Abbey Road and Get Back were recorded, most sessions were largely
individual efforts. Of course the Get Back sessions were recorded live
but a large portion of those sessions were junk (IMHO). The unpolished
out takes do in fact show that the beatles were pretty rough in the
early stages. George's guitar work is particularly appalling in the
formative stages. Once he learned his licks though, they were fine,
as were Ringo's drums. Listen to what several "good" drummers have
to say about him - they consistently point out that his "fills"
are brilliant, quirkey, but brilliant.
This isn't to say that its impossible that there were other drummers
on some tunes, but until someone shows me Abbey Road session sheets
and pay stubs to these "other" drummers, I'll assume that Ritchie
beat the skins...
...it's all too much...
Joseph Brennan
>In addition to the overdubs Sheridan is known to have done sometime in
>1963, the various American companies added even *more* overdubs to
>make the singles sound more "contemporary" (ie: more like Mersey
>Beat).
I know of only one Sheridan overdub, the new lead vocal on "Sweet
Georgia Brown" that was probably done in early 1964. Its first
confirmed appearance on disk is Polydor 52 906 of approximately June
1964, but possibly also on a German single a few months earlier.
Significantly, the original vocal has never appeared again since that
time, and it's been speculated, but never proved, that the original
vocal track was wiped out to make room for the new. It seems to me
they would have kept the original tape intact, or at least made a
safety copy, but they may not have been that careful. (The original
vocal was only on the "Ya Ya" German EP of late 1962.)
Atlantic (for their Atco label) modified the four songs they got from
Polydor, both by editing and by having drums and guitars overdubbed.
No one's talking, but as Neal says this is probably where Bernard
Purdie got a chance to add drums. As far as I know, the modifications
were done in the USA as overdubs to Atlantic's master copies and the
originals in Germany were untouched. Atlantic only had mono masters,
too, their stereo album versions being rechannelled from mono.
>The relevant Sheridan tracks were first released on CD by German
>Polydor as "The Beatles-First" after the original(?) lp of the same
>name, albeit with a completely different cover (Polydor 823701-2YH).
>"Ain't She Sweet" as presented here is the overdub; the remaining 7
>are the originals (the post-Sheridan remixing, that is).
I never did get the CD. The original album with all 8 songs on it was
indeed "The Beatles' First" (Germany, Polydor 46 432 mono and 236 201
stereo), 1964. For some years the UK fans had to do with imports of
that, and US fans were stuck with separate releases of 4 songs on MGM
and 4 on Atco. The other songs on "The Beatles' First" are Tony
Sheridan songs from the same period but not with the Beatles.
I don't know why "Ain't she sweet" is mono on the CD. But that can't
be the one with Atlantic's overdubs-- it should be the original mono
mix, unless I'm in for a big surprise.
>The original "Ain't She Sweet" can be found on a Polydor CD3 single
>b/w "My Bonnie," catalog number P10P 30006, at least as released in
>Japan.
Is this possibly the stereo mix?
Joe Brennan Columbia University in the City of New York
bre...@columbia.edu ("affiliation shown for identification only")
Joseph Brennan
>Aside from "Love Me Do" (album version only) and "P.S. I Love You," the only
>Beatles recordings which feature anyone other than Ringo playing drums are
Someone overdubbed drums to the mono mix of "Can't buy me love". See
Lewisohn's "Chronicles". Ringo was filming on location the day of the
overdub, which is logged in documentation Mark found after the
"Sessions" book was published, but no name is given (unusual for EMI)
as to who did the drums. If you compare the mono and stereo mixes the
difference is obvious. The dub seems to be onto the mono mix rather
than to the master, since later mixes from the 4-track do not have it.
Larry Micohn
In article <2si8gq$r...@hpscit.sc.hp.com>, Phil Miller (mil...@sc.hp.com) writes:
>You Beatles timekeeper scholars, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't
>HELP! (God I love to type that -- HELP! HELP! HELP!) the first lp the
>Beatles recorded after being turned on to Mary Jane by Dr. Zimmerman?
>That would explain the improvement in Richie's skin work, no?
Well, John was doing heroin through this period and he went from
rhythm guitar to accoustic, so go figure!
>>08vio...@cua.edu wrote:
>>: Deep Purple / *8-{)> / "I am not what I seem." -- Ahme
>Could you please explain what this signiture file means?
>Is it a Deep Purple lyric quote, or what?
The quote is from a movie called "HELP!"
LarryM
(I also never lose Trivial Pursuit)
GWRep Neal
bre...@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan) writes:
<<I don't know why "Ain't she sweet" is mono on the CD. But that
can't
be the one with Atlantic's overdubs-- it should be the original mono
mix, unless I'm in for a big surprise.>>
Polydor had said it was a mistake, but when they re-released the CD
with the alternate Hamburg photo cover, didn't correct it. Yep, it is
the Atlantic overdub. Remainder of the CD is in stereo.
>The original "Ain't She Sweet" can be found on a Polydor CD3 single
>b/w "My Bonnie," catalog number P10P 30006, at least as released in
>Japan.
<<Is this possibly the stereo mix?>>
Yep.... this is where we find the original (non-overdub) CD stereo
release.
Neal
Ross Clement
>John Lennon met Hal Blaine during the recording of the "Rock'n'
>Roll" album produced by Phil Spector & John Lennon. John was
>impressed with his drumming and the people he had drummed for in his
>early days (Elvis, I believe was one). He was one of two drummers on
>those Spector sessions, the other being Jim Keltner. He was part of
And Paul McCartney according to some recordings of illegitimate origin.
Cheers,
Ross-c
Phil Miller
: wanting to be lumped with Oliver Stone, I will admit I have no proof
: and raise the white flag. Old Ringo seems to have at least had someone
: help him tune and mic his drums. they sure sound different on HELP!
You Beatles timekeeper scholars, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't
HELP! (God I love to type that -- HELP! HELP! HELP!) the first lp the
Beatles recorded after being turned on to Mary Jane by Dr. Zimmerman?
That would explain the improvement in Richie's skin work, no?
philll
Bryan D. Woolley
wondering, why is Ringo regarded as a shlock drummer? (I realise
most of this thread has been about possible mystery drummers)
It seems people don't want to give Ringo any credit.
This goes from the "Paul overdubbed Ringo's The End drum parts"
to the "Pete Best was a better drummer" threads.
Personally, I think Ringo has a great "feel" (for lack of a better
word). His live meter may be a bit shaky sometimes, but then a
lot of drummers have the same problem live. (keith moon, yeh, I
know he's dead and not "live"! But when he was alive... you get it
don't you?) and who could concentrate with Beatlemania going on
around you?
Listen to his latest album. While there's nothing spectacular
drum wise, the "feel" is total Ringo. Don't go Where the Road
don't go has a great groove and the drums feel (love that word!)
very Beatley.
I just wish people would give him more credit as a drummer.
Bryan
no e-mail please
Bryan D. Woolley
>
Certainly the drumming on Revolver is much
>>better than that on 'Get Back'.
ALL of the Beatles skill's are better on Revolver!
At that period, they were creating NEW and FRESH ideas and sounds.
On Get Back (Let it Be) you can tell they were getting to the
burn out point. I still like it, but the end was near. However,
they seemed to create the flames of
inspiration again on Abbey Road.
I think the only thing on Get Back (Let it Be) that's better
than on the Revolver album is Paul's Screamer Voice.
The way he tears up I've gotta Feeling is magic. After a few
takes, he probably wanted to call it "I've got a Soar Throat".
Same goes for Hey Jude! Love the screamer voice!
Bryan
no e-mail please
Phil Miller
: ALL of the Beatles skill's are better on Revolver!
: At that period, they were creating NEW and FRESH ideas and sounds.
Perhaps instead of skills, the words creativeness and drive should
be used. I think as far as musical skills, the Beatles were more
capable in 1969 than in 1966.
: I think the only thing on Get Back (Let it Be) that's better
: than on the Revolver album is Paul's Screamer Voice.
And his ballad voice on "Let It Be" is an improvement over his
ballad voices on "Revolver", no?
: Same goes for Hey Jude! Love the screamer voice!
When I was a kid, and this song first came out, I assumed it was John
doing the screaming at the end of "Hey Jude" because he was the wild
looking one. In fact, I thought he was trying to destroy one of Paul's
songs, and that the recording of "Hey Jude" captured on the 45 rpm
was a "live, one shot" event.
philll
D.Gage
that this guy claiming to have played on Beatles tracks,had actually played
on the Hamburg stuff,when it was re-released.It was a long and involved story
but he never actually replaced Ringo on E.M.I stuff.
Dom
Gary Parker
>If you want bad drumming, listen to Paul's on the various tracks
>attributed to him. Don't forget that by the time the White Album,
>Abbey Road and Get Back were recorded, most sessions were largely
>individual efforts. Of course the Get Back sessions were recorded live
>but a large portion of those sessions were junk (IMHO). The unpolished
>out takes do in fact show that the beatles were pretty rough in the
>early stages. George's guitar work is particularly appalling in the
>formative stages. Once he learned his licks though, they were fine,
>as were Ringo's drums.
Bravo! It`s not often that someone seems to speak for me. I agree
about Paul's drumming. He's a lot of things, but a drummer he's
not. I think the drumming on "Band on the Run", which gets touted
alot, is flat, boring and dreadful. I don't even give him credit for
being a good timekeeper...it's always sounds like he's, at best,
right on the beat or just behind it. Listen to Ringo on the traps...
he always right ahead of the beat, driving the band.
And yeah, you're right about George's early fretwork...very poor
in many cases. The early stuff he played sounds as if he did no
advance planning at all, just winged it when the solo was due.
There's obviously some exceptions to this (Can't Buy Me Love, All
MY Loving, etc, where his work is exemplary), but other stuff
is pretty grim.
In his defense, (a) he had the toughest instrument in the band to play
in those early days, and (b) I think of alot of criticism George gets
for the early guitar work is based on the pre-release versions of
songs that people have heard in the past few years, that were works-
in-progress where he's learning the song and working out his solo.
I sure wouldn't want to be judged under those circumstances. I `spose
if he knew that 30 years later people would be listening to outtakes and
judging what was on them, he might've done better.
Later brethren,
-Gary (riffking) Parker
GWRep Neal
(Gary Parker) writes:
<<And yeah, you're right about George's early fretwork...very poor
in many cases. The early stuff he played sounds as if he did no
advance planning at all, just winged it when the solo was due.
There's obviously some exceptions to this (Can't Buy Me Love, All
MY Loving, etc, where his work is exemplary), but other stuff
is pretty grim.>>
I don't agree at all. I always thought George's work was fresh and
new on every track... and not the product of a hack guitar player.
<<In his defense, (a) he had the toughest instrument in the band to
play
in those early days, and (b) I think of alot of criticism George gets
for the early guitar work is based on the pre-release versions of
songs that people have heard in the past few years, that were works-
in-progress where he's learning the song and working out his solo.>>
If folks can't tell the difference between a work-in-progress and a
finished piece, perhaps they should stay away from the unreleases.
Perhaps they're disappointed that creativity doesn't pour out of a
carton like milk. BTW... milk doesn't grow in cartons, either. ;-)
<<I sure wouldn't want to be judged under those circumstances. I
`spose
if he knew that 30 years later people would be listening to outtakes
and
judging what was on them, he might've done better.>>
Nonsense. People judging artists by their works-in-progress are
boneheads. BTW... there's lots of boneheads out there. They're
boneheads simply because they don't understand the creative process.
Sorry for using "bonehead" to describe these folks, but my patience
does have its limits and besides, this kind of stuff is extremely
unfair and not at all a proper characterization of George Harrison.
Neal
Scott Galuska
GWRep Neal <gwre...@aol.com> wrote:
...about George Harison's early guitar solos...
>Perhaps they're disappointed that creativity doesn't pour out of a
>carton like milk. BTW... milk doesn't grow in cartons, either. ;-)
Wanna bet? You shoulda seen what I pulled out of the fridge at work
today...
:-)
--
Scott Galuska
Gesture Recognition Laboratory "'Scuse me while I boogaloo!"
ASEL/Univ of Delaware
gal...@asel.udel.edu
Gary Parker
(GWRep Neal) sez responds to my remarks on the sometimes tepid
fretwork of George on the early Beatle trax:
>I don't agree at all. I always thought George's work was fresh and
>new on every track... and not the product of a hack guitar player.
I never said he was a hack. I think George has played some beautiful
guitar. What I said was, some of the early solos were unstructured
and uninspired. You may think that the Quiet Ones work was
(in your words) "fresh and new on every track", and I certainly
don't want to put myself in the position of denigrating the
esteemed Mr. Harrison in anyway whatsoever, but, may I suggest
that you go back and listen to the solos on "Slow Down", "Kansas
City" "Boys" , "I Saw Her Standing There" and a number of other
early trax? They don't hold up. They meander, they go nowhere,
they add little or nothing to the track....there's no evidence
of a defined guitar style.
Of course, I could point to many examples of what I consider to
be great Harrison fretwork, but of course, that's not the issue
being discussed.
Later brethren,
-Gary Parker
Howie Schwesky
> in those early days, and (b) I think of alot of criticism George gets
> for the early guitar work is based on the pre-release versions of
> songs that people have heard in the past few years, that were works-
> in-progress where he's learning the song and working out his solo.
> I sure wouldn't want to be judged under those circumstances. I `spose
> if he knew that 30 years later people would be listening to outtakes and
> judging what was on them, he might've done better.
Or he might have created an 18 minute gap!
(Some humor circa 1974 Watergate)
>
>
> Later brethren,
>
> -Gary (riffking) Parker
>
Howie
GWRep Neal
(Gary Parker) writes:
<<I never said he was a hack.>> I know and I didn't intend to say
that you did. ;-)
<<...you may think (in your words) "fresh and new on every track"...
but, may I suggest that you go back and listen to the solos on "Slow
Down", "Kansas
City" "Boys" , "I Saw Her Standing There" and a number of other early
trax? They don't hold up. They meander, they go nowhere, they add
little or nothing to the track....there's no evidence of a defined
guitar style.>>
We all aren't going to agree on the merits of every solo, but I
happen to think the solos on the abovementioned tracks are absolutely
fantastic.
What does "defined guitar style" mean? Each of the solos above were
distinctively different and at least to my mind fit each song
perfectly; I never tire of listening to them, even after 30 years.
To me, "defined guitar style" = boring and predictable, like the
slide stupor Harrison fell into during the 70s.
For me, the best early Harrison solo great is on "I Don't Want To
Spoil The Party."
Neal
David Hines
>Hey! I guess I stand corrected. But what I saw of Ringo's drumming live
>is not as good as a lot of what I hear on the recordings. But not
>wanting to be lumped with Oliver Stone, I will admit I have no proof
>and raise the white flag. Old Ringo seems to have at least had someone
>help him tune and mic his drums. they sure sound different on HELP!
Ringo live was, I believe, brilliant when you consider the conditions.
No monitors, no drum fill, 50,000 kids going AAAAHHHHHH, and the only
amplification on stage was 60-100 watt valve amps.
Ringo has said in an interview that he couldn't hear a thing, and that
he used to watch the guy's bums wiggling to get some idea of the ryhthm.
--
___________________________________________________________________________
DAVE "She's a drag, a well known
(From NZ) drag. We turn the sound down
David Hines..(rum...@pinn.nacjack.gen.nz) on her and say rude things."
- George Harrison
"A Hard Day's Night"
___________________________________________________________________________
David Hines
>I just wish people would give him more credit as a drummer.
I agree 100% Bryan. As I have posted countless times before, listen to
1: Long Tall Sally (Last "Have some fun tonight" verse)
2: Day in the life
3: Thank you girl
4: Rain
Then tell me the guy was no good. Just because he didn't paradiddle around the
kit all the time doesn't mean he wasn't a good skinsman.
--
___________________________________________________________________________
DAVE "Onward my friends to victory
(From NZ) and glory for the thrirtyninth"
David Hines..(rum...@pinn.nacjack.gen.nz) John Lennon - In His Own Write
___________________________________________________________________________
David Hines
>Nonsense. People judging artists by their works-in-progress are
>boneheads. BTW... there's lots of boneheads out there. They're
>boneheads simply because they don't understand the creative process.
>Sorry for using "bonehead" to describe these folks, but my patience
>does have its limits and besides, this kind of stuff is extremely
>unfair and not at all a proper characterization of George Harrison.
Neal, I'll have to side with Gary here.
Some of the out-takes of George's guitar work do demonstrate a lack
of technique. It's not a case of "work in progress", the bits I'm
thinking of are just plain fluffed notes and lead runs which end up in the
wrong key. There is a version of AHDN in which the lead part is really
terrible, and it's not just that George hadn't got his chops down yet,
he hits bum notes and mis-picks on numerous occassions.
he got a *lot* better later on, but for '63 and '64 I think there were
plenty of better guitarists around.
David Hines
>In article <2si8gq$r...@hpscit.sc.hp.com>, Phil Miller (mil...@sc.hp.com) writes:
>>You Beatles timekeeper scholars, correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't
>>HELP! (God I love to type that -- HELP! HELP! HELP!) the first lp the
>>Beatles recorded after being turned on to Mary Jane by Dr. Zimmerman?
>>That would explain the improvement in Richie's skin work, no?
>Well, John was doing heroin through this period and he went from
>rhythm guitar to accoustic, so go figure!
Have you ever tried to play drums stoned? Not such a great success...
GWRep Neal
rum...@pinn.nacjack.gen.nz (David Hines) writes:
<<Some of the out-takes of George's guitar work do demonstrate a lack
of technique. It's not a case of "work in progress", the bits I'm
thinking of are just plain fluffed notes and lead runs which end up
in the
wrong key.>>
It is clear to me that Harrison used session takes to get a feel for
the song and would experiment with bits and pieces during the take.
When that's happening, bum notes are bound to occur. It's all clear
to me that on many takes, Harrison's role was just to get to the next
vocal part.
It is not possible to play smoothly if you're not sure what you want
to play or what you're going to play next... unless you just fill
with a canned riff you happen to have memorized. Many times, it seems
as if there is a big leap between session and final version, but the
grand majority of us have never heard but a smattering of session
takes. If one listens carefully though, one can hear the famous...
and original... fills taking shape.
Neal
Gary Smith
Lest I be labeled a George basher (saki would never forgive!) what I
mean is that his guitar parts were very studied. His early work certainly
suggests that he got an idea which was refined over time - listen to the
PAINFUL rehearsals for the opening riff in HELP!
Contrast this with the fluid solos of more freeform players like
Hendrix or Clapton. I would guess that while these guys also had their
share of poor solos that the nature of their work differed significantly.
Listen to the Clapton solos on the Harrison LIVE IN JAPAN set. When Eric
is doing the solos he did on later Harrison stuff, they sound perfectly
fine, when Eric is playing solos for "Beatle" songs, they sound out of place
(to me anyway). George's guitar work was appropriate for the material. I
think George would have a hard time sitting in with "Derick and the Dominoes"
and cutting loose on Layla, for example...
Its all too much...
Gary
grsm...@ingr.com
David Hines
>In article <221412.155...@pinn.nacjack.gen.nz>,
>rum...@pinn.nacjack.gen.nz (David Hines) writes:
><<Some of the out-takes of George's guitar work do demonstrate a lack
>of technique. It's not a case of "work in progress", the bits I'm
>thinking of are just plain fluffed notes and lead runs which end up
>in the
>wrong key.>>
>It is clear to me that Harrison used session takes to get a feel for
>the song and would experiment with bits and pieces during the take.
>When that's happening, bum notes are bound to occur.
May I cite as an example in my argument the sax solo from "Listen to what
the man said" from "Venus and Mars".
The player (his name escapes me), was limbering up and basically just jamming
around the backing. Unknown to him it went down on tape. When he said "OK, I'm
ready", Macca said, "well, actually, we like what you were doing, so we'll
use that". Listening to the solo it is excellent.
I have played in many bands, and in my experience a good guitarist will
fit in a lead break even if he's unsure of the chord progressions.
