Beatles question

Bobby Lee · From: Cloverdale, California, USA

I'm listening to "1", the compilation of Beatles singles. One ingredient of their sound on the early stuff is the unison lead vocal. It sounds like it might be John singing with himself on tape, but I wonder if it's actually Paul imitating John and singing along in real time. Anybody know?

------------------

Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (C6add9), Sierra Laptop 8 (D13), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6),
Roland Handsonic, Line 6 Variax

Mike Perlowin · From: Los Angeles CA

I don't know the answer, but I always wondered how the steel would have evolved if they had used one on "Yesterday" instead of the string section.

Joe Goldmark's Steelin The Beatles is a cool CD BTW.

Ken Lang · From: Simi Valley, Ca

The early Beatle unison stuff was done by flanging. It was the same track, but the second feed was done literally with a thumb on the flange of the reel to slow it down a little to make it a bit behind. Pretty simple.

Fortunately we don't have to do that old stuff anymore. We can spend lotsa money on gadgets (flangers, delay,echo) that do the same thing, only better?

[This message was edited by Ken Lang on 06 April 2003 at 08:26 PM.]

Rick Schmidt · From: Prescott AZ, USA

Bobby...name a couple of the songs youre talking about. I have the book, "The Beatles Recording Sessions...The Official Abbey Road Studio Session Notes 1962-1970". It's a great book for Beatle fans! I'll look up the songs you want & find out just what they did. What day, how many takes, who sang what & why? Over the course of those 8 years, they utilized most all of the possible vocal combinations they could think of.

[This message was edited by Rick Schmidt on 07 April 2003 at 02:09 AM.]

Randy Pettit · From: North Texas USA

b0b:
John double-tracked a lot of his vocal tracks in the early days, often forgetting or mispronouncing the words (to his own songs!) on the second take. A good place to check out recording anomalies and other interesting tidbits is: www.stevesbeatles.com/
Go to the "songs" link.

Alvin Blaine · From: Picture Rocks, Arizona, USA

I have an interview on tape of Paul saying that on the early songs he would sing the same lines as John. He would sing it just a little late because they were trying to get that slap-back sound like on Buddy Holly's records. He said that they didn't know about tape delays and the only way they could get that sound was to sing in unison a little off time.

Kevin Hatton · From: Buffalo, N.Y.

On many but not all of the early Beatles hits both John and Paul sang in unison for the recordings. Paul would break off into a high harmony. Its how they got that fat vocal sound. "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and "She Loves You" are two perfect examples. Another would be"I'll Get You" , "Misery". Some of the time either John or Paul would just double track their own lead vocals. Harmonies were also sometimes double tracked. I saw Beatlemania up here in Buffalo last month and saw this in their stage performance. I talked to the bass player about this. All of the characters in Beatlemania were extremely well versed on there own Beatle character. They looked and sounded exactly like the originals. Each one
knew extreme detail about there own character
including equipment and recording techniques. If you get a chance, see the show. They use all original equipment. You will think that you are watching the originals.

Gene Jones · From: Oklahoma City, OK USA, (deceased)

.....I have to admit, I liked much of the Beatles music even though it put me out of the music business (at least steel-guitar), but I survived by playing bass!

P.S. I liked Elvis too....especially the later years when after he mellowed! www.genejones.com

Michael Holland · From: Nashville, Tennessee, USA

John and Paul did do a lot of unison parts, but this is very interesting.

From the original liner notes of the Parlophone release of 'A Hard Day's Night' (notes by Tony Barrow).

Mike Perlowin · From: Los Angeles CA

Kevin Hatton · From: Buffalo, N.Y.

Mike, that would be a great memory.

Ken Lang · From: Simi Valley, Ca

THE ROOTS OF FLANGING (ADT) and "flanging" can be credited in part to John Lennon, According to Mark Lewisohn's fine book "THE BEATLES RECORDING SESSIONS", Lennon just hated singing the tedious "mult-tracks" so prevalent in Beatles recordings prior to 1966. In response to this, on April 6, 1966, Ken Townsend, Abbey Road Studios' Tech Engineer had a brilliant idea. During the mixing process, the output of the vocal track was recorded on another open reel machine and then combined with the original track to produce a "multed" sound.

Although not detailed in Mr. Lewisohn's book, the specifics of Ken's invention must have been something like this...in order for a track to be synched with one being recorded on another tape machine and played back off that machine's playback head, Ken needed to feed the second tape deck "preview " information by using the first deck's record head as a preview playback head (because it is first in the tape path). Then Ken had to make sure that the distance between record (or preview) and playback heads was the same for both tape machines. Following these steps would only produce a unison sound due to perfect sync however.

In order to get the multed sound, Ken used a VSO vari-speed oscillator to control subtle speed variation on the second deck's capstan motor. These variations could also be accomplished by rubbing a thumb on the reel flange to produce the necessary speed fluctuations.

John Lennon and the Beatles were delighted with Ken's invention. George Harrison said that Ken should have received a medal for his ADT concept. ADT would affect all Beatles recordings after 1966. When Beatles' producer George Martin attempted to explain the workings of ADT to the non-technical Lennon, he called it a "double vibrocated splooshing flanger". From then on the Beatles would frequently call for the use of "the flanger" which can first be heard on the "REVOLVER" LP.

Bobby Lee · From: Cloverdale, California, USA

Right. Actually, I'm talking about much earlier tracks, like "She Loves You", "I Wanna Hold Your Hand", etc.

The consensus is that John and Paul were singing unison in real time. They did it so well, though! Listening closely, I can hear the parts where Paul diverges into high harmony. What fantastic musicians!

It's really refreshing to listen to these songs today, on a modern sound system. I have a newfound appreciation for them.

------------------

Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (C6add9), Sierra Laptop 8 (D13), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6),
Roland Handsonic, Line 6 Variax

Chris Forbes · From: Beltsville, MD, USA

Ah, the Beatles. I remember when I first heard them I thought, "nice songs, neat little pop group, not much substance though." Then I became a musician and started to try to figure out exactly what it was they were playing. Dang! Then I realized my first impression was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off!!!!! And the vocal arrangements were absolutely brilliant!!

[This message was edited by Chris Forbes on 08 April 2003 at 11:19 AM.]

JB Arnold · From: Longmont,Co,USA (deceased)

Yeah, that was all done live on the first couple of albums. You have to remember, there wasn't much of a budget, and they recorded those first 3 albums in an afternoon each. They were, I recall, direct to 2 track as well, so almost everything was live. It was almost all nailed in one take as well-I recall at a speaking engagement by George Martin he was saying that in his mind the Beatles were the greatest one-take artists ever. Almost all their basic tracks were first takes, even on Sgt Pepper, although there were many alternate versions recorded of everything.

The more you study these guys, the more you realize that there as something incredibly special and star crossed about that band. It wasn't just an accident of timing-what they were able to do with just a 4 piece band was astounding.

And if you can hold of some of the real live tapes form that era, you'll also notice that the talk of them not being very good live is completely untrue. Even with no monitors, in baseball stadiums, with so much screaming going on no one could hear anything, even on stage, they absolutely smoked. Didn't even need to hear what they were doing. Today's artists can't carry a tune in a bucket with autotune and in-ear monitors!

JB

------------------
Fulawka D-10 9&5
Fessenden D-10 8&8
Mullen Royal Precision D-10 8 & 5
"All in all, looking back, I'd have to say the best advice anyone ever gave me was 'Hands Up, Don't Move!"
www.johnbarnold.com/pedalsteel
www.buddycage.net

http://www.nrpsmusic.com/index.html

Gerald Menke · From: Stormville NY, USA

I must say, the Beatles were anything but "starcrossed"...I think that term was used to describe Romeo and Juliet, among others. If anything, not that I put any stock in this sort of thing, their stars were rather well-aligned. Individuals who were "starcrossed" had fate against them, and generally did not end up being among the most successful musical endeavors of all time. They ended up dead...as those sad young Italian lovers did, but your point and enthusiasm is well taken.

Bobby Lee · From: Cloverdale, California, USA

I don't know how many of you have seen Paul McCartney's recent "Back In The US" video. I bought it (on DVD). It's the best concert I've ever seen. He does a lot of Beatles songs these days.

JB Arnold · From: Longmont,Co,USA (deceased)

Sorry-Starcrossed WAS the wrong choice of words, eh?

I saw both of the most recent McCartney tours, and the man knows how to put on a show. I also saw the WIngs over America tour in the 70's and that was killer as well. Of course, he's got some pretty good material to work with.

I remember back in the days of wings, I think just before the 1st American tour, the drummer, Joe English, suddenly quit the band. The reason given by him was "creative differences with McCartney"

Excuse me, but when does a drummer get to have Creative Differences with Paul McCartney? Lordy.

McCartney is quite comfortable with the Beatle Legacy-much more than any of the others were, save for Ringo. And by the way, for a good time, go see Ringo's All Starrs if you get a chance. He always has a ton of monster musicians on the road with him, and there's some great loose jams, lots of Rock and Roll, and a bunch of old Beatles tunes as well. Price is usually reasonable too.

JB

------------------
Fulawka D-10 9&5
Fessenden D-10 8&8
Mullen Royal Precision D-10 8 & 5
"All in all, looking back, I'd have to say the best advice anyone ever gave me was 'Hands Up, Don't Move!"
www.johnbarnold.com/pedalsteel
www.buddycage.net

http://www.nrpsmusic.com/index.html

[This message was edited by JB Arnold on 08 April 2003 at 03:55 PM.]

Frank Parish · From: Nashville,Tn. USA

JB,
Sorry but the drummer is part of the band too, period. It was McCartneys band no doubt but your reference to "a drummer" made me take notice you don't condsider the drummers creativity to be worth your listening. It was the greatest four piece band I ever heard and I don't think I'm by myself. They inspired me to play music period. And they're not all dead as one of the previous posters said. Two of them remain (one is the dreaded drummer) and are still more active in the music business than any of us are and I think that's a safe statement to make here. These guys set records and did things that are talked about today over 30 years later that has yet to be rivaled. I'd give my left you know what to do what they did. Mike Perlowin,
I'd give the other one to have been there with you back then.

Michael Holland · From: Nashville, Tennessee, USA

I consider myself so lucky to have been a wide-eyed ten year old kid when I saw the Beatles' performances on the Ed Sullivan show in '64, and turned and said, "Mom, I want a guitar". And the rest, as they say, is history.

Bobby, the 'Back in the US' performance is superb. I saw it when it was broadcast and I'll have to pick up the DVD. The band of young guys was just excellent, especially the drummer. And Paul was playing the 1960 lefty Sunburst Les Paul! Doesn't get any better.

Click here for a close up of the 'burst

JB Arnold · From: Longmont,Co,USA (deceased)

Frank

Not to put down the drummer-I just have a hard time understanding how ANY sideman would quit McCartney's band over creative differences. If I was in that situation, and Paul said to me "No No see it needs to be like this..." My response would be Yes SIR! My point being, There's maybe 4 guys in the world who have any business arguing with McCartney-all from his previous band and their producer. Dude does not have many equals. I just thought it was strange then and still do now-but it could have been anyone, didn't have to be a drummer. I have a great appreciation for drummers. I've tried to play them and from what I can see some kind of magic must be involved-I can't even get 2 hands doing different things at the same time, let alone the feet. I don't care WHO you have in the band-if the drummer's no good, you are doomed.

Note-saveral of the books I have say that Paul actually re-recorded the drum takes on some of the White Album and Abbey Road-which had Ringo quit the band for awhile during those sessions, but he came back. I guess the atmosphere in the studio at the time was absolutely poisonous.

For an excellent read about the Beatles (and one that has been endorsed by them as being the closest to the truth) Read Peter Brown's "The Love You Make." He was their business manager for a long time, from way back in the beginning, and was always a member of the inner circle. Fascinating. And very detailed about sessions and stuff-who wrote what, where ideas came from, what was used, etc.

JB

------------------
Fulawka D-10 9&5
Fessenden D-10 8&8
Mullen Royal Precision D-10 8 & 5
"All in all, looking back, I'd have to say the best advice anyone ever gave me was 'Hands Up, Don't Move!"
www.johnbarnold.com/pedalsteel
www.buddycage.net

http://www.nrpsmusic.com/index.html

Alvin Blaine · From: Picture Rocks, Arizona, USA

Rolling Stone has Paul McCartney listed as musics top moneymaker for last year. Paul made $72.1 Million in 2002!!!
I heard on the news today that he just bought the Carl Perkins Catalogue. So now he owns the publishing on Buddy Holly and Carl Perkins songs.

Randy Pettit · From: North Texas USA

Add Little Richard's songs to Holly and Perkins, and he would own the rights to the songs of all of his childhood heroes. Amazing!

John Kavanagh · From: Kentville, Nova Scotia, Canada * R.I.P.

I don't think there's a big mystery about the "creative differences" line - it's like "amicable divorce"; a way of saying to nosy people that it's none of their business why you split up.

Of course, I'd also assume, not knowing anything else and it may not be true at all,
that the guy was fired (because who'd quit a job with Paul McCartney?), and that McCartney's being nice about it to the press.

Bobby Lee · From: Cloverdale, California, USA

I've heard that Paul McCartney is the richest musician in history. He's also one of the best - almost as good as Buddy Emmons!

Funny how being a great musician doesn't automatically make you rich...

------------------

Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (C6add9), Sierra Laptop 8 (D13), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6),
Roland Handsonic, Line 6 Variax

Forum Index > Music	Goto page 1, 2 Next	Next oldest topic :: Next newest topic