Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 10:27:40 AM

Login with username, password and session length

The Beatles are fucking good.

Started by madhair60, December 16, 2012, 10:08:52 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

daf

deleted, and going for a lie down.

wosl

Quote from: biggytitbo on December 18, 2012, 04:32:41 PMGood Morning is a dirge for instance and I'm not convinced Getting Better, Fixing a Hole, She's Leaving Home and Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite are anything but lesser Beatles songs.

If you pull them apart, maybe.  But that's the magic of Pepper: you put it on, and it's bang, bang, bang, bang.  They just sit together, work together so well as a group of songs.  The lyrics of Getting Better are a bit iffy and dated, but it's got a corking groove; I love Paul's vocals on Fixing A Hole, and She's Leaving Home is prime McCartney story-telling with the added poignant magic of Paul and John singing that counterpointed chorus.  Kite is probably the ONE Pepper track that outstays its welcome (Within You Without You completely works as a meditational interlude). Kite is a bit overcooked.

El Unicornio, mang

Quote from: Replies From View on December 18, 2012, 04:48:24 PM
It's important to view it in context as a parody song; a lot of people (not you, I am sure) take it to be quite earnest and plodding because they are wrong idiots.

I mean, it's not that I mind the lyrical content (that would rule out a good chunk of Beatles songs anyway) or the music hall flavour, I just find the tune a bit irritating. Quite like the middle 8 though.

Replies From View

Quote from: daf on December 18, 2012, 04:49:48 PM
strummed on the guitar, it would turn into 'It's Only Love' :


That's funny!  (Edit:  Why did you delete this post?  It's a good observation!)


Quote from: El Unicornio, mang on December 18, 2012, 04:52:07 PM
I mean, it's not that I mind the lyrical content (that would rule out a good chunk of Beatles songs anyway) or the music hall flavour, I just find the tune a bit irritating. Quite like the middle 8 though.

I think its place in the Yellow Submarine cartoon isolates it from Sgt. Pepper in a distracting way.  It struggles to blend into the album for this reason, I think, and it's not a fault of its own.

Although, having said that, the same probably can't be levelled at Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds which also appears in Yellow Submarine, so I might be talking out of my almighty human arse there.

daf

Quote from: Replies From View on December 18, 2012, 04:55:21 PM
That's funny!  (Edit:  Why did you delete this post?  It's a good observation!)

I thought it might spoil it for people (like having the edit in Strawberry Fields pointed out).

I've always rather enjoyed '...Mr Kite' too - the ponderous bassline, the demented circus instrumentation and the re-invention of the strange stilted wording of the Victorian circus poster.  Not to mention Henry the horse dancing his waltz. 

It also works well in the context of the 'Love' album where it is spliced with Helter Skelter and I Want You (She's So Heavy) as the way that it bleeds into the other songs lends it a certain sense of menace.

Replies From View

The 'Love' album can fuck itself up the arse.


Quote from: daf on December 18, 2012, 05:07:34 PM
I thought it might spoil it for people (like having the edit in Strawberry Fields pointed out).

Yeah, maybe, but hopefully not.  In any case I'm going to enjoy potentially ruining it for other people by making the same observation many times myself, so thanks for contributing to that.

grassbath

Some smartypants mimsy woo woo on RateYourMusic put Pepper down by saying "what, do you Pepper lovers sit around listening to how influential it is?"

But I think he's missing the point, because if you think about it you can hear how influential it is- it's complex, beautifully layered and produced, ornate, epic and colourful and wonderful and like nothing else which had ever come out at the time. It's pop music meeting classical music. And although I'd contend that a lot of the songs themselves aren't that strong - apart from the opening and With A Little Help, Paul's contributions are particularly weak compared to his royal flush of material on Revolver - it all SOUNDS wonderful. I was initially a bit skeptical about the Pepper legend but sitting down with some excellent headphones, closing my eyes and really concentrating on it changed my opinion completely.

Subtle Mocking

Quote from: Replies From View on December 18, 2012, 05:12:01 PM
The 'Love' album can fuck itself up the arse.

Yes it can, although the show in Vegas was very lovingly made (I was staying at the hotel in which it was played). It's not really the same without the visual accompaniment. I'd love[nb]hur hur[/nb] for that show to make it to the UK eventually.

She's Leaving Home is a great song, although I'm torn on which speed is better. It was a lower pitch on the recent stereo re-issue.

Subtle Mocking

Quote from: grassbath on December 18, 2012, 05:13:00 PM
it's complex, beautifully layered and produced, ornate, epic and colourful and wonderful and like nothing else which had ever come out at the time. It's pop music meeting classical music.

Well, if I must be a pedant, there was Pet Sounds the year before. I do agree with your point though.

Quote from: Replies From View on December 18, 2012, 05:12:01 PM
The 'Love' album can fuck itself up the arse.

I had a feeling mentioning it might provoke that response but, what the hell, I'm not a purist and I happen to think parts of it work very well.

grassbath

Quote from: Subtle Mocking on December 18, 2012, 05:17:24 PM
Well, if I must be a pedant, there was Pet Sounds the year before. I do agree with your point though.

Ah yes, my bad.

Although I find Pet Sounds, as much as I love it, overeggs the pudding with the horns and bells and whistles and and comes out some of the time sounding like a giant Christmas advert jingle. Pepper has come to be considered the high water mark for "baroque pop" of that kind because it's done far more tastefully.

Subtle Mocking

Quote from: grassbath on December 18, 2012, 05:21:01 PM
Although I find Pet Sounds, as much as I love it, overeggs the pudding with the horns and bells and whistles and and comes out some of the time sounding like a giant Christmas advert jingle. Pepper has come to be considered the high water mark for "baroque pop" of that kind because it's done far more tastefully.

I'm just listening to Peppers now, and it is done in a very elegant way. Also there's a lot more in the way of song concepts, whereas it seems the concept of Pet Sounds is about heartbreak (Sloop John B aside).

daf

Quote from: Subtle Mocking on December 18, 2012, 05:16:32 PM
She's Leaving Home is a great song, although I'm torn on which speed is better. It was a lower pitch on the recent stereo re-issue.

Due to varispeed you have the odd situation of both stereo and Mono versions being partially 'right' and  'wrong' simultaneously.

Mono -
Orchestra : speeded up,
Vocals : correct speed

Stereo -
Orchestra : correct speed,
Vocals : slowed down

Paul must have sung to the speeded up Orchestra recording - hence Mono being the probable 'proper version'.

When I'm 64 is also sped up (a bit too much in my opinion) .

Subtle Mocking

Quote from: daf on December 18, 2012, 05:25:58 PM
Due to varispeed you have the odd situation of both stereo and Mono versions being partially 'right' and  'wrong' simultaneously.

Mono -
Orchestra : speeded up,
Vocals : correct speed

Stereo -
Orchestra : correct speed,
Vocals : slowed down

I knew there was something slightly wrong about them, but the stereo has the much more noticeable problem of Paul having an inexplicably bassy voice.

Replies From View

Quote from: Clatty McCutcheon on December 18, 2012, 05:18:12 PM
I had a feeling mentioning it might provoke that response but, what the hell, I'm not a purist and I happen to think parts of it work very well.

I'm not against the idea of experimenting with the music, but I think it's a bit of a hack job by somebody who's out of his depth and got the gig just because he was George Martin's son.  I can accept the argument that it really needs the live performance in order to be complete.  And I just think that the music was approached much more inventively to create the Anthology album mixes than the 'Love' ones, which come across as comparatively wacky and musically illiterate.

grassbath

Quote from: daf on December 18, 2012, 05:07:34 PM
I thought it might spoil it for people (like having the edit in Strawberry Fields pointed out).

If we're on the topic of spoiling Beatles songs by pointing out their musical similarities, I noticed recently that the horn melody in the title track of Pepper is very similar to the chorus of Maxwell's Silver Hammer.

Quote from: Subtle Mocking on December 18, 2012, 05:23:34 PM
I'm just listening to Peppers now, and it is done in a very elegant way. Also there's a lot more in the way of song concepts, whereas it seems the concept of Pet Sounds is about heartbreak (Sloop John B aside).

Yeah. Pet Sounds is like every single instrument and the kitchen sink was thrown in to make the music as dense and shiny as possible, and in most cases it works, but Pepper uses all the right instruments at the right times and comes across as far more eclectic, stylish and carefully crafted.


Replies From View

Quote from: Subtle Mocking on December 18, 2012, 05:29:08 PM
I knew there was something slightly wrong about them, but the stereo has the much more noticeable problem of Paul having an inexplicably bassy voice.

"Wrong" is subjective, as the strange quality would have been an intentional effect.  One of the great qualities of Strawberry Fields Forever is the "swimming" texture that comes from varispeeding.

grassbath

Also, from Fixing A Hole:

"And it really doesn't matter, if I'm wrong I'm right, where I belong I'm right, where I belong."

Who said Paul was a shit lyricist? Clever string of multiple meanings and wordplay there.

Subtle Mocking

Quote from: Replies From View on December 18, 2012, 05:34:22 PM
"Wrong" is subjective, as the strange quality would have been an intentional effect.  One of the great qualities of Strawberry Fields Forever is the "swimming" texture that comes from varispeeding.

True, but She's Leaving Home is not quite in the same psychedelic realm as Strawberry Fields Forever. It's a baroque pop song, and so it just doesn't quite sound like it should.

Replies From View

Quote from: Subtle Mocking on December 18, 2012, 05:38:06 PM
True, but She's Leaving Home is not quite in the same psychedelic realm as Strawberry Fields Forever. It's a baroque pop song, and so it just doesn't quite sound like it should.

I don't think She's Leaving Home sounds even remotely psychedelic, though.  I think slowing the vocals down creates a kind of yearning quality, or an attempt to hold onto something that's slipping away, and it resonates with the nostalgic drive of the song.

Subtle Mocking

Quote from: Replies From View on December 18, 2012, 05:40:26 PM
I don't think She's Leaving Home sounds even remotely psychedelic, though.  I think slowing the vocals down creates a quality that resonates with the nostalgic drive of the song.

Never really saw it that way, but I'll take your word for it. I guess I just need to detach myself from hearing it at a slower speed than usual.

Replies From View

Isn't the 2009 stereo remaster the same speed as the previous stereo version?  I thought the mono version was the anomaly for most people.

daf

Quote from: Subtle Mocking on December 18, 2012, 05:29:08 PM
I knew there was something slightly wrong about them, but the stereo has the much more noticeable problem of Paul having an inexplicably bassy voice.

Sounds specially 'draggy' after listening to the stereo straight after the mono.

Also, "Fun is the one thing that money can't buy" ?

Eh? what? . .  My huge pile of cocaines, gold penny farthings and padded 'fun-dungeon' begs to differ, sir!

I think he meant to say love, or some such rot!


Subtle Mocking

Quote from: daf on December 18, 2012, 05:49:23 PM
I think he meant to say love, or some such rot!

Or joy. But yeah, loadsa money sound pretty fun to me.

And regarding the mono/stereo thing, didn't they record in mono up until about 1968, and then the stereo was mixed after all the recordings were done? After a brief look, the vocal track was apparently sped up to make Paul sound a bit younger, and to tighten the track.

Replies From View

Quote from: daf on December 18, 2012, 05:49:23 PM
Eh? what? . .  My huge pile of cocaines, gold penny farthings and padded 'fun-dungeon' begs to differ, sir!

Maybe the parents just didn't want their child to witness their padded "fun dungeon".  Selfish.


Quote from: Subtle Mocking on December 18, 2012, 05:52:20 PM
And regarding the mono/stereo thing, didn't they record in mono up until about 1968, and then the stereo was mixed after all the recordings were done? After a brief look, the vocal track was apparently sped up to make Paul sound a bit younger, and to tighten the track.

They prioritised the mono, and the Beatles were themselves present at the mono mixing of Sgt. Pepper.  The stereo version was done by Martin alone a few hours later.

But I think the stereo version is better, maybe because I grew up with it.  The mono one is interesting for being different, but for example I prefer the guitar lick and cockerel of the Good Morning - Sgt. Pepper reprise segue occurring at the same time in different stereo positions rather than one after the other in the same place.

Subtle Mocking

Quote from: Replies From View on December 18, 2012, 05:56:11 PM
They prioritised the mono, and the Beatles were themselves present at the mono mixing of Sgt. Pepper.  The stereo version was done by Martin alone a few hours later.

Cheers for that.

daf

Quote from: Replies From View on December 18, 2012, 05:44:59 PM
Isn't the 2009 stereo remaster the same speed as the previous stereo version?  I thought the mono version was the anomaly for most people.

Yes, and due to the mono not being available since the 60's (cassette and CD all had the stereo version), the stereo is the default . . . now.

However, at the time, mono was considered at least the equal of stereo, and as John Lennon once said "You haven't heard Sgt. Pepper until you've heard it in mono." So I think he may have considered that version 'correct', and the stereo the anomaly.

Replies From View

Does anyone here find the mono version better, out of interest?  I got hold of a bootleg of it in the late 90s and was really keen to prefer it, but in the end the differences seemed to come down to the speed difference of She's Leaving Home, a bit more spluttering applause and laughter in the Sgt. Pepper opener, and the segue with the cockerel and guitar lick that I've just mentioned.  These minor distinctions aside, what else do you spot?

daf

Quote from: Replies From View on December 18, 2012, 06:01:48 PM
Does anyone here find the mono version better, out of interest?

The wonky chicken edit aside (that really is a clunker in the mono). I prefer the mono - it 'rocks' a bit more

'Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds' is particularly good and psychelelic in the mono (as is 'Strawberry Fields' on MMT, though 'Penny Lane' is better in stereo, oddly)