Beatles: Peter Jackson Gives a Sneak Peek of Get Back

[gjmalcyon]

Finished the third episode today - For me it changes the narrative about how it all ended into something much less acrimonious and bitter than what I assumed.

It is fascinating watching them workshopping songs, and contributing to each other's material.

And it's been and all-Beatle weekend. We saw this last night:

Saturday November 27th, 2021 | Past Masters®: The White Album, Front To Back

Victor Entertainment in creative partnership with NEMS® Enterprises present PAST MASTERS®: The White Album, Front To Back A live music & show production featuring the fabled 'Victor Company Players' (pop/rock and symphonic musicians & vocalists), stunning multimedia, stage effects, and a...

shopvictor.shop

The principal vocalist/rhythm guitarist/keyboard player was in the touring company of Rain (as Paul). They even somehow managed to pull off Revolution #9.

 

[Canard]

I often blame the con-artists, Robbie Robertson and Levon Helm (and co), for the romantically naive idea of amateurish native creativity that they seemed to have foisted off with The Band.

I thought Music from Big Pink was one of the most fraudulent things I had ever heard - it sort of presented an image of amateurish rootsy stuff, a bunch of dudes just casually grooving in a house, when this all was undercut by the obvious fact that they were hardcore, killer musicians of great ability. I later found out that they had played together (gigging most nights of the week) for a decade or more -- and nothing hones one's chops more than playing live night after night in a great band. I also found out that they worked really hard writing and rehearsing. Music from Big Pink was the fruition of creativity, hard-earned serious chops, and hard work writing (and editing), the hard work of well thought out arranging and the hard work of extensive rehearsing - and very disciplined playing. It definitely wasn't loosey-goosey, hippy-dippy stuff. It wasn't that I didn't like Music from Big Pink. I did. I just felt that there was a major disconnect between its presented image and tone and its substance. It was sort of like stopping at the Route 66 Magic Mushroom Granola Dinner and discovering that the short-order cook is a Michelin-5-Star-Rated chef. What's on the plate sort of looks like falafel meatloaf but it certainly ain't meatloaf and it ain't even falafel.

Music from Big Pink came out in 1968. It seduced a lot of people. Steve Winwood abandoned playing with skilled experienced musicians and headed off to a Berkshire cottage with Capaldi and Wood, then quite amateur musicians, because he wanted the musical authenticity that amateurism brings. Clapton was seduced, too.

I wonder. I wonder. The Beatles started on Let It Be in 1969. They didn't want studio wizardry. They wanted back to basics authenticity. They seemed to have tried working more collaboratively than before, albeit in a studio and not in a rural house or cottage. I wonder. I wonder.

Perhaps the coffee should have been served earlier. Robertson, Helm and Co weren't amateurs. At the time of Music from Big Pink, they were one of the most seasoned, most skilled, most hard-working bands on the planet.

 

[walrus]

Actually, the "stripped down" Beatles started with the White Album. As musicians they are in top form, but it certainly isn't Sgt. Pepper. They recorded "Yer Blues" live in a closet!

But your point about the influence of "Big Pink" (fraudulent or not) seems to be a common theme.

Here's just one of several articles that discuss it:

http://www.estheticlens.com/2018/02/04/albums-that-changed-the-world-music-from-big-pink/

A random FYI, I never cared for the album myself...

walrus

 

[Elderguilder]

Being a big Beatles fan I was disappointed with Let It Be, the album. Thought it was a collection of their weakest material, with a couple exceptions. Probably made as a last-ditch effort to collect money on what they knew would be a final "Beatles" album. Not gonna shell out good money to Disney to see the "acting camaraderie" of the 4, though I agree it would be great to see a similar movie during their Rubber Soul years and after.

 

[Canard]

Actually, the "stripped down" Beatles started with the White Album. As musicians they are in top form, but it certainly isn't Sgt. Pepper. They recorded "Yer Blues" live in a closet!

But your point about the influence of "Big Pink" (fraudulent or not) seems to be a common theme.

Here's just one of several articles that discuss it:

http://www.estheticlens.com/2018/02/04/albums-that-changed-the-world-music-from-big-pink/

Cool. It's nice to know that I am not a paranoid delusional or at least, if I am one, I am not alone.

A random FYI, I never cared for the album myself...

You might try listening again. There is a lot of meat to it, more than its folksy, rootsy surface shows.

 

[Canard]

Being a big Beatles fan I was disappointed with Let It Be, the album. Thought it was a collection of their weakest material, with a couple exceptions.

Me, too. But it has grown on me over the years.

Probably made as a last-ditch effort to collect money on what they knew would be a final "Beatles" album.

I have never gotten the impression or read anything to suggest that the project was mercenary. And I don't think any of them, even Ringo at that point, were anywhere near hard up.

I have always had the impression that it was an effort/exploration to see if they were still a group or could be one again, something that they hadn't been a in a while. That the projected failed is a big contributor to our collective disappointment. If the music here is their weakest material, I suspect it is only so because it was never finished and was released halfheartedly and half-baked.

 

[walrus]

Being a big Beatles fan I was disappointed with Let It Be, the album. Thought it was a collection of their weakest material, with a couple exceptions. Probably made as a last-ditch effort to collect money on what they knew would be a final "Beatles" album. Not gonna shell out good money to Disney to see the "acting camaraderie" of the 4, though I agree it would be great to see a similar movie during their Rubber Soul years and after.

I have never gotten the impression or read anything to suggest that the project was mercenary. And I don't think any of them, even Ringo at that point, were anywhere near hard up.

I have always had the impression that it was an effort/exploration to see if they were still a group or could be one again, something that they hadn't been a in a while. That the projected failed is a big contributor to our collective disappointment. If the music here is their weakest material, I suspect it is only so because it was never finished and was released halfheartedly and half-baked.

They didn't need the money.

More importantly, Let It Be was not their last recorded album. Abbey Road was. They knew Let It Be was not their best work. They got George Martin back, went back to their normal nocturnal recording schedule, with no cameras, and recorded one their best (THE best?) albums.

Given that the last song on Abbey Road is called "The End", one could say they knew THIS was their last album. Let It Be came out later because it was tied up in legal limbo with Phil Spector, Allen Klein, etc.

walrus

 

[Elderguilder]

More importantly, Let It Be was not their last recorded album. Abbey Road was. They knew Let It Be was not their best work. They got George Martin back, went back to their normal nocturnal recording schedule, with no cameras, and recorded one their best (THE best?) albums.

I'm reading that Abbey Road was released 26 September 1969 and Let It Be released 8 May 1970 by Apple. Maybe this info is inaccurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_discography
John

 

[Midnight Toker]

Being a big Beatles fan I was disappointed with Let It Be, the album. Thought it was a collection of their weakest material, with a couple exceptions. Probably made as a last-ditch effort to collect money on what they knew would be a final "Beatles" album. Not gonna shell out good money to Disney to see the "acting camaraderie" of the 4, though I agree it would be great to see a similar movie during their Rubber Soul years and after.

It's well worth the whopping $7.99 total you'll spend on 7.5+ hrs of watching the lads in creation mode. You'll not just get material from Let It Be, but you'll also be witnessing the infancy of many of the ideas that wind up on Abbey Road. Watching, it's hard to fathom that George was still just 26 years old here!!! Kids!! Crazy. I found it fascinating, and very well made by Jackson. The task set for them initially w/ writing/recording/performing a full Beatles album in 2 weeks time would have broken up most bands!!

 

[Midnight Toker]

I'm reading that Abbey Road was released 26 September 1969 and Let It Be released 8 May 1970 by Apple. Maybe this info is inaccurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_discography
John

Let it Be was recorded first...then held...then Abbey Road was recorded/released...then LIB was released after they broke up. Both are heavily connected by the same basic period of creativity....LIB was marred by the ridiculous predetermined task that was...filming an attempt to write/record/perform a complete album in a 2 week period....as shown in this film.(as was Spector's production!) The original project's director Michael Lindsay-Hogg and his over the top aspirations of taking this film to a fancy destination performance.....ugh. He comes off in a Spinal Tapesque manner and honestly deserves a swift kick in the nuts!!

 

[walrus]

I'm reading that Abbey Road was released 26 September 1969 and Let It Be released 8 May 1970 by Apple. Maybe this info is inaccurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_discography
John

It's correct, but Abbey Road was recorded last.

Let it Be was recorded first...then held...then Abbey Road was recorded/released...then LIB was released after they broke up. Both are heavily connected by the same basic period of creativity....LIB was marred by the ridiculous predetermined task that was...filming an attempt to write/record/perform a complete album in a 2 week period....as shown in this film.(as was Spector's production!) The original project's director Michael Lindsay-Hogg and his over the top aspirations of taking this film to a fancy destination performance.....ugh. He comes off in a Spinal Tapesque manner and honestly deserves a swift kick in the nuts!!

This.

One other thing as I alluded to above, they were required to come in "9 - 5" for Let It Be. Not good! Their normal routine from Rubber Soul/Revolver on was late at night, early in the morning. Literally overnight hours. That's how they did Abbey Road as well.

walrus

 

[MacGuild]

Rick Beato's musings (contains spoilers):

 

[lungimsam]

Is there any film of McCartney playing bass alone? That would be interesting to see.

 

[Midnight Toker]

I often blame the con-artists, Robbie Robertson and Levon Helm (and co), for the romantically naive idea of amateurish native creativity that they seemed to have foisted off with The Band.

I thought Music from Big Pink was one of the most fraudulent things I had ever heard - it sort of presented an image of amateurish rootsy stuff, a bunch of dudes just casually grooving in a house, when this all was undercut by the obvious fact that they were hardcore, killer musicians of great ability. I later found out that they had played together (gigging most nights of the week) for a decade or more -- and nothing hones one's chops more than playing live night after night in a great band. I also found out that they worked really hard writing and rehearsing. Music from Big Pink was the fruition of creativity, hard-earned serious chops, and hard work writing (and editing), the hard work of well thought out arranging and the hard work of extensive rehearsing - and very disciplined playing. It definitely wasn't loosey-goosey, hippy-dippy stuff. It wasn't that I didn't like Music from Big Pink. I did. I just felt that there was a major disconnect between its presented image and tone and its substance. It was sort of like stopping at the Route 66 Magic Mushroom Granola Dinner and discovering that the short-order cook is a Michelin-5-Star-Rated chef. What's on the plate sort of looks like falafel meatloaf but it certainly ain't meatloaf and it ain't even falafel.

Music from Big Pink came out in 1968. It seduced a lot of people. Steve Winwood abandoned playing with skilled experienced musicians and headed off to a Berkshire cottage with Capaldi and Wood, then quite amateur musicians, because he wanted the musical authenticity that amateurism brings. Clapton was seduced, too.

I wonder. I wonder. The Beatles started on Let It Be in 1969. They didn't want studio wizardry. They wanted back to basics authenticity. They seemed to have tried working more collaboratively than before, albeit in a studio and not in a rural house or cottage. I wonder. I wonder.

Perhaps the coffee should have been served earlier. Robertson, Helm and Co weren't amateurs. At the time of Music from Big Pink, they were one of the most seasoned, most skilled, most hard-working bands on the planet.

I don't know....I tend to think the whole project of filming themselves writing a complete album in 2 weeks time and performing the results on live tv was more the result of having a film division of Apple Corp on the books and just sitting around since Jan 68 after fulfilling their 3 picture deal w/ United Artists w/ Yellow Submarine. They were mulling over ideas for a fully in house project and if anything, hiring Michael Lindsay-Hogg showed the influence to perform live coming more from Hogg's prior Stones R&R Circus. As with most Beatles albums, they'd come in the studio and just sort of let things happen organically....and very quickly. Only difference here was not having George Martin acting as the 5th writer to add all the typical strings/horns/bells/whistles and studio trickery....because those things were exactly what stopped the Beatles from being able to faithfully perform their mid/latter material live as a 4 piece. I really don't think Music From The Big Pink influenced them to get back to stripped down methods....the ability to perform and record it live was the sole underlying factor. A short 3 weeks after the rooftop concert, while waiting on Ringo to finish filming w/ Peter Sellers, they were right back in the studio writing and recording Abbey Road...complete w/ Martin's full on bells and whistles again. Zero influence from The Band on that and it's not like musical influences get flipped on and off like a light switch from week to week. Outside of blatant rip offs from whatever the flavor of the month is, real musical influence lingers much longer...many many months, if not years.

Just my 2¢

 

[Canard]

Just my 2¢

And a cool and interesting 2¢ it is, too.

 

[walrus]

Is there any film of McCartney playing bass alone? That would be interesting to see.

Not from Let It Be that I know of, but here's a fun little bass lesson from Paul:




And if you search youtube for it, you can find some very cool isolated McCartney bass tracks. Here's the whole Abbey Road album, just bass guitar:




walrus

 

[Prince of Darkness]

Not from Let It Be that I know of, but here's a fun little bass lesson from Paul:




And if you search youtube for it, you can find some very cool isolated McCartney bass tracks. Here's the whole Abbey Road album, just bass guitar:




walrus

Just bass, but not just Paul! George played bass on three of the songs

 

[Midnight Toker]

Just bass, but not just Paul! George played bass on three of the songs

You mean John?

 

[Prince of Darkness]

You mean John?

No, although John was seen playing bass on the Let It Be sessions, it was usually George that switched to bass (usually a Bass VI).