BBC4 TV - Sgt Pepper's Musical Revolution with Howard Goodall

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • waldo
    Full Member
    • Mar 2013
    • 449

    #31
    Originally posted by johncorrigan
    The way 'All My Loving' kicks in with no intro...stunning!
    Yes, I'm always impressed with that. McCartney has perfect pitch, so I suppose it isn't hard for him to start on the right note!

    I'm reminded of something Lennon and McCartney talked about a lot, which was that they always tried to do something different with each song - never the same kind of intro, never the same style of ending, never the same chord patterns etc. Once they'd used a particular device, they moved on. This must have been their "start without an intro" song.

    Comment

    • cloughie
      Full Member
      • Dec 2011
      • 22127

      #32
      B
      Originally posted by waldo View Post
      Yes, I'm always impressed with that. McCartney has perfect pitch, so I suppose it isn't hard for him to start on the right note!

      I'm reminded of something Lennon and McCartney talked about a lot, which was that they always tried to do something different with each song - never the same kind of intro, never the same style of ending, never the same chord patterns etc. Once they'd used a particular device, they moved on. This must have been their "start without an intro" song.
      The first of many!

      Comment

      • teamsaint
        Full Member
        • Nov 2010
        • 25210

        #33
        Originally posted by waldo View Post
        Yes, I'm always impressed with that. McCartney has perfect pitch, so I suppose it isn't hard for him to start on the right note!

        I'm reminded of something Lennon and McCartney talked about a lot, which was that they always tried to do something different with each song - never the same kind of intro, never the same style of ending, never the same chord patterns etc. Once they'd used a particular device, they moved on. This must have been their "start without an intro" song.
        A Hard Days Night is a fantastic lesson in songwriting, As you say, lots of clever little devices that give the songs real originality and difference, without appearing to. The one I love is the long held first vocal note in " I should have known better".
        I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.

        I am not a number, I am a free man.

        Comment

        • Richard Barrett
          Guest
          • Jan 2016
          • 6259

          #34
          Originally posted by Lat-Literal View Post
          I wasn't defending LSD but supporting your view that it was in 1967 "still viewed as.....possibly liberating". It seemed to me when I wrote my comment that heroin had had a worse impact on jazz musicians overall.
          I would say that LSD and hallucinogens in general have done a lot less damage than heroin, or alcohol, or for that matter tobacco, all of which are much more addictive and used by far more people.

          Regarding Sgt Pepper it would have been easy to add two more tracks, or even half a dozen. (Todd Rundgren's Initiation from 1975 is 67 and a half minutes long.) But that would be like adding another movement to a symphony. The Beatles had quite a few singles that don't appear on albums.

          As for George Martin, it shouldn't be forgotten that he was responsible for most of the arranging as well as production, and that he was one of the most imaginative and original arrangers in the history of pop music

          Comment

          • MrGongGong
            Full Member
            • Nov 2010
            • 18357

            #35
            Originally posted by Richard Barrett View Post

            As for George Martin, it shouldn't be forgotten that he was responsible for most of the arranging as well as production, and that he was one of the most imaginative and original arrangers in the history of pop music
            I'm not a Beatles enthusiast at all
            BUT I think that some of the opinions about George Martin reflect a misunderstanding of what constitutes the "stuff" (i'm sure there's a better word?) of the music. If one thinks that music is made of melodies and harmonies which are then emblemished by "arrangements", "production", "mastering" etc etc then that might be true.
            BUT I don't think that's always the most useful way to think about the music as a whole.
            So, to my ears, what stands out as the defining factor of much of this music IS the overall sound, the "arrangements" and the instrumental choices which is largely the creation of George Martin given that McCartney still insists that he doesn't understand anything about music notation (which I find hard to believe given that he has spent his entire life with people who use it all the time... but that's a whole other thing all together).

            Comment

            • Eine Alpensinfonie
              Host
              • Nov 2010
              • 20570

              #36
              Originally posted by Richard Barrett View Post

              As for George Martin, it shouldn't be forgotten that he was responsible for most of the arranging as well as production, and that he was one of the most imaginative and original arrangers in the history of pop music

              Absolutely, though I hope it wasn't his idea to add the 8-hour ending to "Hey, Jude".

              Comment

              • waldo
                Full Member
                • Mar 2013
                • 449

                #37
                Originally posted by MrGongGong
                So, to my ears, what stands out as the defining factor of much of this music IS the overall sound, the "arrangements" and the instrumental choices which is largely the creation of George Martin.......
                That's just factually untrue. The Beatles did their own arrangements and made all instrumental choices for every song - with the qualified exception of those that used "classical" instruments. That takes care of about 95% of their songs. The small minority that had orchestras, string quartets, French horns etc did have input from George Martin, but this was generally based on detailed instructions etc from the Beatles (usually McCartney). Typically, when an "arrangement" had to be done, McCartney would sit next to Martin on the piano and would show him what he wanted. McCartney would sing or play the melody lines and Martin would transcribe. The Beatles would usually specify instruments, too. In a very very small number of cases, Martin came up with his own thing - I believe Eleanor Rigby falls into this bracket - but that was very much the exception. Even when full orchestras were involved (a Day in the Life), the whole thing was directed by the Beatles, with Martin providing technical assistance.

                The Beatles also managed their own "sound", at least in the sense that they would instruct Martin and Emerick to provide a certain kind of effect and atmosphere etc Much of this was genuinely collaborative - this box was plugged in and experimented on, then someone would try a different microphone position etc - and final decisions would be made by the Beatles themselves. In some cases, Martin didn't like what they did, but he just had to accept it (Harrison's Savoy Truffle is a good example here).

                Comment

                • MrGongGong
                  Full Member
                  • Nov 2010
                  • 18357

                  #38
                  Originally posted by waldo View Post
                  That's just factually untrue. The Beatles did their own arrangements and made all instrumental choices for every song - with the qualified exception of those that used "classical" instruments. That takes care of about 95% of their songs. The small minority that had orchestras, string quartets, French horns etc did have input from George Martin, but this was generally based on detailed instructions etc from the Beatles (usually McCartney). Typically, when an "arrangement" had to be done, McCartney would sit next to Martin on the piano and would show him what he wanted. McCartney would sing or play the melody lines and Martin would transcribe. The Beatles would usually specify instruments, too. In a very very small number of cases, Martin came up with his own thing - I believe Eleanor Rigby falls into this bracket - but that was very much the exception. Even when full orchestras were involved (a Day in the Life), the whole thing was directed by the Beatles, with Martin providing technical assistance.

                  The Beatles also managed their own "sound", at least in the sense that they would instruct Martin and Emerick to provide a certain kind of effect and atmosphere etc Much of this was genuinely collaborative - this box was plugged in and experimented on, then someone would try a different microphone position etc - and final decisions would be made by the Beatles themselves. In some cases, Martin didn't like what they did, but he just had to accept it (Harrison's Savoy Truffle is a good example here).
                  I don't think you understood what I wrote

                  No problem though

                  McCartney is well known for his "hey man, I don't do that notation stuff.... you have a problem with that?" stance
                  I'm not really convinced that he has/had enough interest in the instruments on the records to bother with learning enough about them to be able to make decisions about what textures/voicings etc would work.

                  But, like I said, i'm no expert nor am I that interested in their music. (though I did enjoy going to cub camp on Cynthia Lennons farm in North Wales in the 1970's

                  Comment

                  • waldo
                    Full Member
                    • Mar 2013
                    • 449

                    #39
                    Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
                    I don't think you understood what I wrote

                    No problem though

                    McCartney is well known for his "hey man, I don't do that notation stuff.... you have a problem with that?" stance
                    I'm not really convinced that he has/had enough interest in the instruments on the records to bother with learning enough about them to be able to make decisions about what textures/voicings etc would work.

                    But, like I said, i'm no expert nor am I that interested in their music. (though I did enjoy going to cub camp on Cynthia Lennons farm in North Wales in the 1970's
                    Yes, McCartney can be very irritating with this sort of amateurism.........In some ways, odd as this may seem, I suspect he is really quite lazy: not in the sense that he doesn't work very hard, but rather that he avoids the necessary challenge when it comes up. Finished! That will do! Next song! Next oratorio! One reason, perhaps, why his post-Beatles stuff is so terrible.

                    I see what you are saying, I just took exception to what seemed to be a rather comprehensive claim about Martin's contribution. As I said, these sorts of esoteric instruments really only appear on a small minority of songs anyway. Plenty of other bands were doing this in the sixties and no-one really cares who did the arranging etc. Sticking a string quartet on a pop song is really about as low down the composing chain as you can get.

                    Comment

                    • Lat-Literal
                      Guest
                      • Aug 2015
                      • 6983

                      #40
                      Originally posted by Richard Barrett View Post
                      I would say that LSD and hallucinogens in general have done a lot less damage than heroin, or alcohol, or for that matter tobacco, all of which are much more addictive and used by far more people.

                      Regarding Sgt Pepper it would have been easy to add two more tracks, or even half a dozen. (Todd Rundgren's Initiation from 1975 is 67 and a half minutes long.) But that would be like adding another movement to a symphony. The Beatles had quite a few singles that don't appear on albums.

                      As for George Martin, it shouldn't be forgotten that he was responsible for most of the arranging as well as production, and that he was one of the most imaginative and original arrangers in the history of pop music
                      Yes, thank you - I accept all these points.

                      I have also read all the other comments on the thread with interest.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X