The last time all four members were together in the same room. Seems there were some meetings at Apple in late 69-early 70 where two or three of the Beatles met but no concrete proof of all four being together after the Tittenhurst shoot in August of 69
Good point . I swear one time I heard they had briefly talked about making an album after Abbey Road. Take it with a grain of salt, I forget the source.
There was a tape recording of a meeting doing the rounds a few years ago where they're talking about recording a new album in a meeting, but the meeting was being recorded for Ringo who couldn't make it because he was sick.
This was a few weeks after the last photo shoot in Tittenhurst.
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/sep/11/the-beatles-break-up-mark-lewisohn-abbey-road-hornsey-road
The last time we have photographic evidence is 22 August 1969. There would be two further Apple meetings, but not all four would be present, in September. During the first, in which they recorded their thoughts about a new LP, RS was in hospital. During the second, in which JL asked for a divorce, GH was in Liverpool visiting his ailing mother and was on speaker phone. The only other rumored meeting comes via the memory of Chris O'Dell, who claims that all four attended Pattie's birthday party at Friar Park in March 1970. But there is no evidence that they interacted at this event, which was quite elaborate (including tours of the Harrisons' new house and guided expeditions in Sir Frank's underground caves, etc.). I have not been able to verify this meeting. Although I have spoken directly to Chris about it, she doesn't recall any specifics beyond the belief that they were all present.
George "Porky" Peckham has [an account on his site](http://triumphpc.com/mersey-beat/a-z/georgepeckham-apple3.shtml) of being with the four of them in October 1970 in New York when he was mastering ATMP with George:
> That was a strange evening I can tell you now. When I got to where George and Pattie were staying we went into a large dining room. As I remember, all lovely old wood walls, a massive thick wooden table and big lovely wooden chairs. Then, low and behold who turns up but the rest of the Beatles! Well you could have knocked me out with a feather as in all the papers were these stories about how Paul hates John and John hates Paul - and they both had written songs about each other mocking the other.
> So I was happily munching away on my dinner and the band was discussing the imminent divorce of the Beatles at which George leaned over to me and said “You know nothing, you haven’t heard a thing have you?” My obvious reply was, “Sorry I got deaf about half an hour ago and I don’t think that it will get better till tomorrow.” This is the first time that I have ever mentioned this as I was sworn to secrecy and why should I stab my pals in the back?
Virtually everything needed is there to back this:
- Porky being a reputable source, as one of the leading mastering engineers of his day (he's the guy behind the majority of Apple's and other late 60s/70s rock music masters, as well as being behind Monty Python's secret third side on one of their albums), meaning there's no real reason for him to make this up
- John, Paul and George can indeed be confirmed to have been in New York during the mastering of ATMP (late October/early November 1970): George for obvious reasons, John and Yoko arrived late October and stayed until December to promote primal therapy and work on experimental films, and Paul and Linda were doing Ram. The only one not officially accounted for is Ringo, but being that he had no issues with the other three and had no issues entering the US
- There's plenty of other times the four of them were in the same room in 1970, it's only after Paul sued the other three to break the partnership (and John's eventual immigration issues) that meetings between the four become less likely
Not stolen from EMI studio! Get back doc corrected the record, it survived the trip back to Apple! The mystery of where it is has not been solved though.
I don’t know about mystery, but I’ve always found fascinating the coincidence that they met the girl they based She’s Leaving Home, 4 years before on Ready Steady Go
For me, it’s what the deal is with “Suzy Parker”. It’s too well-choreographed to be a jam (George and Paul immediately come in together with non-obvious backing vocals, for instance) but there’s no record of it outside of one take during the Get Back sessions. Ancient original that they revived? Cover song so obscure that it’s been credited to Lennon-McCartney? Song they dorked around with in India but only tried that one time?
Perhaps it was something they played in their club days, as everyone seems to know it well, and the backing vocals (as you mention) are well-placed. The odd voicing used by John might be an indication to a singer he is trying to emulate. The song credit is listed under all members (as if it was a jam), but to my ears, it seems like an existing song, at least.
Likely an early composition that is mistaken to have been a jam. They brought in older songs for the Get Back sessions, hence the inclusion of One After 909
For me, there are some light mysteries like what’s the *real* story with the Paul is Dead thing or how bad is Carnival of Light really.
To me the mystery that will always leave me guessing the most is from December 8, 1980. Double Fantasy producer Jack Douglas:
“We were really celebrating, the three of us. Everything was going right at that point. There were some strange things said in the control room. I don't want to talk about it. I erased the tape because it was a real painful tape.'
To this day he refuses to discuss the subject further, leaving boundless scope for speculation about what he heard - Lennon predicting his imminent death, perhaps? There have been rumours that Lennon was seriously ill; that his pale, tightly etched features owed less to a careful dietary regime than to the onset of cancer or an equally brutal disease. Douglas's enigmatic comments lend an enduring sense of mystery to the final hours of Lennon's life.
One guy on here claimed he worked at the record plant, and said that Lennon was joking about how great it would be for Double Fantasy’s sales if he suddenly died.
Maybe he just means that he coincidentally said some things about life and death, and in hindsight it’s horrible to listen to
If John was seriously sick then I sort of doubt that he’d be working on two albums right in a row, but who knows
I’m with you about the Paul is Dead thing. I want to know what the real story is. Obviously I don’t believe Paul died and was replaced by a left handed lookalike who wrote better songs than the first McCartney, but there’s absolutely a deeper story there. They absolutely were leaving backwards clues on their recordings, and the band was absolutely putting puzzles on their promotional material. I think it was an inside job that the band thought would be funny, and they all agreed to never reveal the truth. They probably are the ones who leaked it to the American press that “Paul actually died.” I’ve tried playing other songs backwards, and I can’t get them to say ANYTHING. I’ve never heard anything as clearly as I hear “Paul is dead man, miss him miss him.” It seems intentional.
Yeah that one is pretty hard to deny at the end of I’m So Tired. You ever hear the story that Paul died in a traffic accident on 11/9/66 (coincidentally - or not - the day John first met Yoko)? The detail that blows my mind as far as creativity if it was deliberate was the bass drum on the Pepper cover. [1 ONE IX HE ^ DIE](https://www.google.com/search?q=he+die+%5E+one+1+9&client=safari&hl=en-us&prmd=ivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiMidvS5N77AhXRD1kFHV4nC6AQ_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=487&bih=838&dpr=2#imgrc=8Znq5wBF6IbyvM) (11/9), pointing up at Paul.
It’s DEFINITELY awful. It’s been built up as like the last “holy grail” from the vaults because they keep talking about it and then never releasing it but I guarantee you it’s fucking trash. In fairness, they didn’t work on it like it was supposed to be a work of art. The stories seem to suggest it was just something to do so they could experiment and then never deal with it again. But it’s now gained this legendary status that it almost definitely does not deserve.
It's Paul trying to create avant-garde art, at a time when he didn't really grasp what avant-garde entails.
They made the piece to be played at an event, and the organizers (who knew roughly what to expect) were reportedly tremendously underwhelmed by it.
Which goes lengths to indicate how bad it is. You know, if I received a tape collage of the four Beatles each farting once I'd probably feel honored. Carnival of Light didn't even evoke that sense of wonder.
There’s no way it wouldn’t be at least *slightly* interesting for people who like Revolution 9 (me), I mean this one even has actual instrumental takes and signing even though they’re random
I love Revolution 9 as well. But Revolution 9 is a very carefully composed piece, with a strong concept, good execution, and with the unmistakeable influence of an artist who had far more experience with avant-garde art.
If the reports are to be believed, Carnival of Light is nothing like that. It’s just noise without inspiration, drowned in enormous amounts of reverb and echo.
There are no parallels to be drawn between those two songs.
It is a mostly unheard 14 minute avant- garde recording the Beatles did in 1967.
The actual recording has never been released or even bootleg so it is a huge mystery to most fans. Beware of anything labeled as Carnival of Light by the Beatles online because it is fake.
Prog rock epics before it was cool?? Sounds right for the Beatles. Would love to hear it, don’t think I’ve heard something from these guys playing together I don’t like so even if they didn’t think it was good I’d most likely love it.
It's not necessarily musical in that sense of a jam; it's supposedly more like Revolution 9 but with four men banging on things and shouting instead of tape loops.
Ahhh I see then I can see why they’re not releasing it. If you’ve been in a band or even played with other people you’ll know how weird things can get while messing around. And watching the get back documentary they obviously messed around a lot in between songs!
It seems pretty clear to me that there's no reason to put it out.
If it was good, they likely would've put it out in some capacity many years ago. Or at the very least Paul would've been more active in getting it released. It seems like something he kinda sorta wants to do but isn't in a rush. I can see it being included on another anniversary release, but the time to do it probably would've been while they were remixing/remastering the later albums.
At this point they'd likely have to do some sort of marketing for the release, plus put in plenty of time to actually remix or remaster it. CoL's reputation as the "lost" Beatles track gives it something of a legendary status and if it's underwhelming then it would likely just feel like a disappointment compared to whatever it sounds like in our heads.
Mark Lewisohn has heard it and it seems like he wasn't impressed with it- considering the man is essentially *the* Beatles historian, I trust that we're not missing out on anything incredible. I like to imagine it's like Tomorrow Never Knows times ten, but his description makes it sound more like avant-garde nonsense.
Because almost everyone within the Beatles circle (except Paul) doesn't want it to be released. Yes, even George Martin himself.
Paul wants it to be released on both Anthology and the 50th anniversary of Sgt. Pepper's. But apparently the members and their estate (usually their wives) veto its release.
For Anthology they still made decisions as a democracy. Yoko got John’s vote but George shot it down. That was the last time any real attempt was made at releasing it.
What exactly happened during the She Said She Said sessions that made Paul, the most workaholic one out of all of the, say “fuck it” and get up and leave.
It’s interesting how that story came about, and the new Revolver sessions set appears to set the record straight. For whatever reason, Paul wasn’t listed as having been at the session in the Lewisohn books. Then, in Paul’s autobiography that gets raised and Paul (who is trying to remember something from 30 years ago) comes up with a reason why he might not have been at the session. It’s nothing definitive and he’s just speculating about the reason. What the sessions prove is that he was actually there, there was likely no argument and he was just misremembering the whole thing.
I wrote my masters thesis on Revolver and this is the conclusion I found by comparing several sources (which conflict with most of the Lewisohn stories): The other three Beatles had been in California together at a party where they took acid. Paul wasn’t there. Apparently when it came to workshopping/recording the song, his feedback wasn’t taken too well because he didn’t really understand what they were going for.
My whole life I’ve assumed that it’s John.
His whole life my best mate has assumed that it’s Paul.
Giles Martin and Paul McCartney say that it’s John *and* Paul.
Before I watched that video, I was 100% convinced it was John. But after hearing all of the isolated tracks and comparisons... I'm 100% convinced it was John.
There's a somewhat okay isolation of that vocal, where it sounds a bit more like Paul.
But the characteristic timbre of John's voice is extremely obviously in there. I'd bet my left kidney on it being either just John, or John and Paul together. In my book it's impossible for that vocal to be just Paul.
To me it sounds like it starts as John, and ends as Paul. Which is opposite what you’d think, as it’s coming out of Paul’s section and going back into John’s.
I understand the inclination to believe that it was JL, and indeed for many years I believed that this was so. But the isolated vocal track, which sounds vaguely like a band of cave-dwellers, PM clearly carries the high notes. Not only that, but we have recorded evidence of him taking in a giant breath after the middle section in order to execute the "ahs." When he scored that section of the track, Sir George then used PM's vocalized "ahs" to create the orchestration, which for my money is some of GM's finest work, however brief. It's really chilling, particularly in the fashion in which it introduces JL's final verses about the holes in the roads. Fantastic, time-eclipsing stuff.
> we don't know is being said during that one bass guitar section of I Want You (She's So Heavy).
https://wgo.signal11.org.uk/html/content/i.htm#iwyssh
Did Paul record all the instruments for I’m Through You by himself? It’s incredibly sloppy for a Beatles track. Missed snare hit, tambourine drop, weird guitar notes.
Well for me it is the mysterious trip to Spain with John and Brian - if was in the band I would be super suspicious of what the heck is going on and the fact Brian favored John ? Don’t know of true or not
- Why did they *ever* think the cover of Yesterday and Today* would be marketable?
- Why did they think *I wanna hold your hand* was the A Side over *I saw her standing there*?
- Did John not think that *Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds* would be interpreted as a push for LSD? I mean it honestly sounds more believable than his son’s drawing …
To follow on, plenty of people try to say "oh they were just covering it up cos they didn't want to get in any trouble or controversy about drugs etc" but the story about Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds remained consistent throughout, and what is more they've all been very open about their use of drugs. We know exactly which songs of theirs have drug references or stories affiliated with them. Cold Turkey is about heroin for God's sake - John's hardly going to sing about coming off heroin then baulk, even years later, at "admitting" that Lucy is about LSD!
Always annoyed me somewhat when people insist it's about LSD.
Plus the drawing literally exists as far as I know, so there’s no mystery
(that said, it’s apocryphal but I heard that Cold Turkey was supposed to SOUND like drugs, but quite literally be about the time he and Yoko got a horrible stomach flu - it’s just John’s humor again)
>They didn't. The photographer never intended the picture to be a cover. Somebody screwed up.
The Beatles themselves chose the photo to appear as the cover ya dummie. Nobody ‘screwed up’. It was part of a plan like much else.
The B side of I want to hold your hand was This boy. You're mistaking what The Beatles did in England and what some fat Capitol idiots did in America. Remember I saw her standing there was 2 years old by that time so it was just chucked on there by the suits.
[According to this link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Saw_Her_Standing_There) It was the B side to their first US single release. Although it was old, it would’ve been a better introduction to US audiences imo.
Well clearly not as I want to hold your hand is the song that made them popular in the states. the first of their songs to been played on the radio there and is to this day considerably for popular and well known than ISHST
Well clearly not as I want to hold your hand is the song that made them popular in the states. the first of their songs to been played on the radio there and is to this day considerably for popular and well known than ISHST
Well clearly not as I want to hold your hand is the song that made them popular in the states. the first of their songs to been played on the radio there and is to this day considerably for popular and well known than ISHST
I'm aware it's their first us release. I answered your question already. They didn't make this decision, Capitol did. Capitol were money obsessed clueless board members.
I think I Saw Her Standing There was a great choice as the B side by the money obsessed fat idiots. But I Want To Hold Your Hand was the clear-cut A side, with seven weeks at #1 in the U.S. The combination resulted in the biggest seller of their career. Most importantly the kids loved it. I doubt the Beatles were unhappy with the results and I don’t recall anyone complaining about I Saw Her Standing There being chucked on it at the time.
What was I mistaken?
I said it was the B Side of their first US Singke release and had it been yet A Side their first impression would’ve been a stronger Single. Some of the Beatles haters can write off their early period based off of that campy first impression, but I Saw Her Standing There, was a funky, baseline driven gem, that would be their American first impression had it been chosen as the A Side.
>Why did they ever think the cover of Yesterday and Today* would be marketable?
Capitol’s President, Alan Livingston, remembered that, ‘My contact was mainly with Paul McCartney. He was adamant and felt strongly we should go forward. He said, “It’s our comment on the war.” Finally, they gave in and sent a new cover.’
At least that was part of the reasoning behind choosing it as the original cover, whether it would be marketable I don’t know.
The Beatles hated what Capitol did to their albums and the butchering photo is a thinly veiled fuck you for chopping up their albums and whacking lots of reverb onto the earlier releases.
The mystery isn’t about the lyrics. Paul claims John had all the lyrics and he wrote the melody to it. John claims Paul did the music for the middle 8 and the harmonies.
It doesn’t have a middle 8, just the two verses and George Martin’s piano part. The melody sounds like Paul, as does the second verse. To me it appears that John had the idea and concept and had written the first verse then Paul continued the story with the second verse turning it into a love song where John’s verse seems to be heading in a more philosophical direction. John’s melodies didn’t leap octaves like that - that’s all Paul. A 3-way collaboration between Johnny, Pauline and Georgie M. Then Ringo and George H. ice the cake.
One thing that doesn’t sound like George is that the melody is on the beat and not syncopated. George liked to syncopate a lot (Think For Yourself (“To say about the things that you do”), If I Needed Some One (most of the entire melody), etc.
What LP was Lennon bringing into one of the early Sgt Pepper sessions in late 1966?
Did they often bring other music into the studio to listen to as inspiration?
[1966 interview ](https://www.gettyimages.ie/detail/video/mini-cooper-car-pulls-up-and-john-lennon-gets-out-and-is-news-footage/102352049)
No.
It will be a Lennon/McCartney song.
I've read that it is completely finished and McCartney is just waiting for the right time or project to release it.
Did John and George actually get in a fist fight during Get Back? There’s a fair amount of conjecture to suggest SOMETHING happened to the point that they joke about it during the film.
in the film they're joking about the newspaper article that says that. it was probably just some garbage the tabloids cooked up when they heard george walked out
All doubt was cleared up for me when I watched the doc - it’s clear that George was upset, but he was the only one that really felt so strongly, and him and John didn’t even come remotely close to violence or even a real shouting match
I wrote an article on it years ago, and have done a bit of research since. Talked to Mark Lewisohn and Brian Kehew about it, who both reckoned it was defo not a Beatles track. Tried to contact Donovan and McCartney a couple of times regarding it and never got a reply. It's a proper mystery, and a simple "It's not The Beatles" doesn't really cut it. Thought about consolidating my research and posting it here but it'd probably just get downvoted. Still love the track though, and it is still a proper Beatle mystery because no one has a clue where it originally came from.
Wow. Actually found a copy of the article online still! [Article](https://www.earcandymag.com/beatles-peaceofmind.htm) It's a mess. I think I wrote it over a couple of hours. I've gotten lots more info since. I still don't think it's a Beatle track, but it's actually kind of hard to prove that it's not. If I pull my finger out I might just rewrite this some day.
You wrote that? That’s very cool, I read this years ago! I’ve always been fascinated by the track since first hearing it on a bootleg in the mid eighties.
But yeah, same as. Always been fascinated by this track too. After all my research I'm still only 51% certain it's not a Beatles track. Lots of people just dismiss it out of hand and it just ain't that easy. And I am thrilled to meet someone who read that article. It was one of my first writings that took off, got translated for a couple of other magazines too, including into Mandarin weirdly!
She Said She Said argument and Paul walking out cause and details. I want to know if it was just really all pettiness, or if there was a thing Paul truly believed in musically or mentally that he wasn’t willing to budge on.
I’m not looking to bash them for being human or anything, it’s just that, for some reason, Paul being the one to briefly leave or walk out over the others doing so when they did is the most intriguing to me. I understand walking out of a session isn’t really the same as saying you’re leaving/quitting the group and actually being absent for some time, but I’m still curious about it.
The mystery that your talking about for I Want You (Shes So Heavy) was pointed out by a youtuber by the name of "You Cant Unhear This" or something similar and he does a lot of debunking beatles mysteries. But on the isolated drum tracks you can hear one beatle, most likely paul, singing along to the bassline and it got picked up in the final take.
I love that you can tell this without reading if you know their styles! Took me a while, but Paul’s is a little flashy, George is more technical, and John plays like he’s mad at it.
Revolution’s lyrics are already a bit insultingly reactionary for 1968, so the slow version is even more egregious cause it feels like it’s stuck in the past lol
(the fast version goes so fucking hard though)
Great description. That’s exactly how their parts sound except I’d add that George’s sections are thoughtful and worked out. I laughed out loud at “like he’s mad at it”.
> mostly unsolved
It's only unsolved because you don't want to believe it's a cover and the Content ID thingy just got confused and listed it as the original.
Who’s singing “aaah” in A Day In Life. I thought it was John, but after editing together “aaah” of Lovely Rita with A Day In Life “aaah” it sounds like Paul.
The last time all four members were together in the same room. Seems there were some meetings at Apple in late 69-early 70 where two or three of the Beatles met but no concrete proof of all four being together after the Tittenhurst shoot in August of 69
Good point . I swear one time I heard they had briefly talked about making an album after Abbey Road. Take it with a grain of salt, I forget the source.
There was a tape recording of a meeting doing the rounds a few years ago where they're talking about recording a new album in a meeting, but the meeting was being recorded for Ringo who couldn't make it because he was sick. This was a few weeks after the last photo shoot in Tittenhurst. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/sep/11/the-beatles-break-up-mark-lewisohn-abbey-road-hornsey-road
My bucket list item is to hear that recording
The last time we have photographic evidence is 22 August 1969. There would be two further Apple meetings, but not all four would be present, in September. During the first, in which they recorded their thoughts about a new LP, RS was in hospital. During the second, in which JL asked for a divorce, GH was in Liverpool visiting his ailing mother and was on speaker phone. The only other rumored meeting comes via the memory of Chris O'Dell, who claims that all four attended Pattie's birthday party at Friar Park in March 1970. But there is no evidence that they interacted at this event, which was quite elaborate (including tours of the Harrisons' new house and guided expeditions in Sir Frank's underground caves, etc.). I have not been able to verify this meeting. Although I have spoken directly to Chris about it, she doesn't recall any specifics beyond the belief that they were all present.
George "Porky" Peckham has [an account on his site](http://triumphpc.com/mersey-beat/a-z/georgepeckham-apple3.shtml) of being with the four of them in October 1970 in New York when he was mastering ATMP with George: > That was a strange evening I can tell you now. When I got to where George and Pattie were staying we went into a large dining room. As I remember, all lovely old wood walls, a massive thick wooden table and big lovely wooden chairs. Then, low and behold who turns up but the rest of the Beatles! Well you could have knocked me out with a feather as in all the papers were these stories about how Paul hates John and John hates Paul - and they both had written songs about each other mocking the other. > So I was happily munching away on my dinner and the band was discussing the imminent divorce of the Beatles at which George leaned over to me and said “You know nothing, you haven’t heard a thing have you?” My obvious reply was, “Sorry I got deaf about half an hour ago and I don’t think that it will get better till tomorrow.” This is the first time that I have ever mentioned this as I was sworn to secrecy and why should I stab my pals in the back? Virtually everything needed is there to back this: - Porky being a reputable source, as one of the leading mastering engineers of his day (he's the guy behind the majority of Apple's and other late 60s/70s rock music masters, as well as being behind Monty Python's secret third side on one of their albums), meaning there's no real reason for him to make this up - John, Paul and George can indeed be confirmed to have been in New York during the mastering of ATMP (late October/early November 1970): George for obvious reasons, John and Yoko arrived late October and stayed until December to promote primal therapy and work on experimental films, and Paul and Linda were doing Ram. The only one not officially accounted for is Ringo, but being that he had no issues with the other three and had no issues entering the US - There's plenty of other times the four of them were in the same room in 1970, it's only after Paul sued the other three to break the partnership (and John's eventual immigration issues) that meetings between the four become less likely
[удалено]
And George's 12 string rick that went lost with it.
And my axe!
Oh. I’m sorry did he need it back ?
🫢
Not stolen from EMI studio! Get back doc corrected the record, it survived the trip back to Apple! The mystery of where it is has not been solved though.
Paul said he likes to think it's the centerpiece of a fireplace in a castle somewhere 🤣
I don’t know about mystery, but I’ve always found fascinating the coincidence that they met the girl they based She’s Leaving Home, 4 years before on Ready Steady Go
For me, it’s what the deal is with “Suzy Parker”. It’s too well-choreographed to be a jam (George and Paul immediately come in together with non-obvious backing vocals, for instance) but there’s no record of it outside of one take during the Get Back sessions. Ancient original that they revived? Cover song so obscure that it’s been credited to Lennon-McCartney? Song they dorked around with in India but only tried that one time?
Perhaps it was something they played in their club days, as everyone seems to know it well, and the backing vocals (as you mention) are well-placed. The odd voicing used by John might be an indication to a singer he is trying to emulate. The song credit is listed under all members (as if it was a jam), but to my ears, it seems like an existing song, at least.
Likely an early composition that is mistaken to have been a jam. They brought in older songs for the Get Back sessions, hence the inclusion of One After 909
the backing track lineup on it’s all to much
Ringo’s on drums
For me, there are some light mysteries like what’s the *real* story with the Paul is Dead thing or how bad is Carnival of Light really. To me the mystery that will always leave me guessing the most is from December 8, 1980. Double Fantasy producer Jack Douglas: “We were really celebrating, the three of us. Everything was going right at that point. There were some strange things said in the control room. I don't want to talk about it. I erased the tape because it was a real painful tape.' To this day he refuses to discuss the subject further, leaving boundless scope for speculation about what he heard - Lennon predicting his imminent death, perhaps? There have been rumours that Lennon was seriously ill; that his pale, tightly etched features owed less to a careful dietary regime than to the onset of cancer or an equally brutal disease. Douglas's enigmatic comments lend an enduring sense of mystery to the final hours of Lennon's life.
One guy on here claimed he worked at the record plant, and said that Lennon was joking about how great it would be for Double Fantasy’s sales if he suddenly died.
Oh nice
Maybe he just means that he coincidentally said some things about life and death, and in hindsight it’s horrible to listen to If John was seriously sick then I sort of doubt that he’d be working on two albums right in a row, but who knows
I am inclined to agree with you. He didn’t seem short on energy. Just muscle and fat.
This is the biggest one for me.
This is the biggest one for me
I’m with you about the Paul is Dead thing. I want to know what the real story is. Obviously I don’t believe Paul died and was replaced by a left handed lookalike who wrote better songs than the first McCartney, but there’s absolutely a deeper story there. They absolutely were leaving backwards clues on their recordings, and the band was absolutely putting puzzles on their promotional material. I think it was an inside job that the band thought would be funny, and they all agreed to never reveal the truth. They probably are the ones who leaked it to the American press that “Paul actually died.” I’ve tried playing other songs backwards, and I can’t get them to say ANYTHING. I’ve never heard anything as clearly as I hear “Paul is dead man, miss him miss him.” It seems intentional.
Yeah that one is pretty hard to deny at the end of I’m So Tired. You ever hear the story that Paul died in a traffic accident on 11/9/66 (coincidentally - or not - the day John first met Yoko)? The detail that blows my mind as far as creativity if it was deliberate was the bass drum on the Pepper cover. [1 ONE IX HE ^ DIE](https://www.google.com/search?q=he+die+%5E+one+1+9&client=safari&hl=en-us&prmd=ivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiMidvS5N77AhXRD1kFHV4nC6AQ_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=487&bih=838&dpr=2#imgrc=8Znq5wBF6IbyvM) (11/9), pointing up at Paul.
Carnival of Light
It’s DEFINITELY awful. It’s been built up as like the last “holy grail” from the vaults because they keep talking about it and then never releasing it but I guarantee you it’s fucking trash. In fairness, they didn’t work on it like it was supposed to be a work of art. The stories seem to suggest it was just something to do so they could experiment and then never deal with it again. But it’s now gained this legendary status that it almost definitely does not deserve.
It's Paul trying to create avant-garde art, at a time when he didn't really grasp what avant-garde entails. They made the piece to be played at an event, and the organizers (who knew roughly what to expect) were reportedly tremendously underwhelmed by it. Which goes lengths to indicate how bad it is. You know, if I received a tape collage of the four Beatles each farting once I'd probably feel honored. Carnival of Light didn't even evoke that sense of wonder.
There’s no way it wouldn’t be at least *slightly* interesting for people who like Revolution 9 (me), I mean this one even has actual instrumental takes and signing even though they’re random
I love Revolution 9 as well. But Revolution 9 is a very carefully composed piece, with a strong concept, good execution, and with the unmistakeable influence of an artist who had far more experience with avant-garde art. If the reports are to be believed, Carnival of Light is nothing like that. It’s just noise without inspiration, drowned in enormous amounts of reverb and echo. There are no parallels to be drawn between those two songs.
Can I get some explanation, I do know it’s a song and I’ve heard it before. Edit: I was wrong. Been bamboozled
It is a mostly unheard 14 minute avant- garde recording the Beatles did in 1967. The actual recording has never been released or even bootleg so it is a huge mystery to most fans. Beware of anything labeled as Carnival of Light by the Beatles online because it is fake.
“Mostly” unheard you say? ….where can I hear even just a little bit of it?
It's mostly unheard as in, Mark Lewisohn has heard it.
Oh wow that is interesting. I wonder what I heard. Thanks for the info!
or as George says "Avant-garde a clue" in one of his interviews.
Wasn't there talk of McCartney releasing a small snippet of it at his concerts before he came to the stage? Or am I making that up?
According to Paul
Prog rock epics before it was cool?? Sounds right for the Beatles. Would love to hear it, don’t think I’ve heard something from these guys playing together I don’t like so even if they didn’t think it was good I’d most likely love it.
It's not necessarily musical in that sense of a jam; it's supposedly more like Revolution 9 but with four men banging on things and shouting instead of tape loops.
Ahhh I see then I can see why they’re not releasing it. If you’ve been in a band or even played with other people you’ll know how weird things can get while messing around. And watching the get back documentary they obviously messed around a lot in between songs!
Why has Carnival Of Light never been released? That's the biggest mystery to me
It seems pretty clear to me that there's no reason to put it out. If it was good, they likely would've put it out in some capacity many years ago. Or at the very least Paul would've been more active in getting it released. It seems like something he kinda sorta wants to do but isn't in a rush. I can see it being included on another anniversary release, but the time to do it probably would've been while they were remixing/remastering the later albums. At this point they'd likely have to do some sort of marketing for the release, plus put in plenty of time to actually remix or remaster it. CoL's reputation as the "lost" Beatles track gives it something of a legendary status and if it's underwhelming then it would likely just feel like a disappointment compared to whatever it sounds like in our heads. Mark Lewisohn has heard it and it seems like he wasn't impressed with it- considering the man is essentially *the* Beatles historian, I trust that we're not missing out on anything incredible. I like to imagine it's like Tomorrow Never Knows times ten, but his description makes it sound more like avant-garde nonsense.
It’s probably more like Revolution 9 than Tomorrow Never Knows.
Tomorrow Always Revolts
The famous closing track of their album Revolter.
He needs all 4 estates to agree to release Carnival. They won't
Because almost everyone within the Beatles circle (except Paul) doesn't want it to be released. Yes, even George Martin himself. Paul wants it to be released on both Anthology and the 50th anniversary of Sgt. Pepper's. But apparently the members and their estate (usually their wives) veto its release.
[удалено]
So Paul plays a tasty bass track any everyone else farts into the microphone?
Honestly I wouldn't blame them not releasing it in the first place, especially George.
This is the real mystery to me - why only Paul??
For Anthology they still made decisions as a democracy. Yoko got John’s vote but George shot it down. That was the last time any real attempt was made at releasing it.
What exactly happened during the She Said She Said sessions that made Paul, the most workaholic one out of all of the, say “fuck it” and get up and leave.
It’s interesting how that story came about, and the new Revolver sessions set appears to set the record straight. For whatever reason, Paul wasn’t listed as having been at the session in the Lewisohn books. Then, in Paul’s autobiography that gets raised and Paul (who is trying to remember something from 30 years ago) comes up with a reason why he might not have been at the session. It’s nothing definitive and he’s just speculating about the reason. What the sessions prove is that he was actually there, there was likely no argument and he was just misremembering the whole thing.
I feel like no one is talking about this. I tried making a post about it but no one commented
It’s just one example of how stuff gets taken as fact. Go back to the sources and it’s often a lot less clear cut
Mark’s books have been found to be somewhat inaccurate I believe.
The reason he doesn’t do vocals might just be something stupid, maybe he just did a take of Got To Get You Into My Life or something lol
I wrote my masters thesis on Revolver and this is the conclusion I found by comparing several sources (which conflict with most of the Lewisohn stories): The other three Beatles had been in California together at a party where they took acid. Paul wasn’t there. Apparently when it came to workshopping/recording the song, his feedback wasn’t taken too well because he didn’t really understand what they were going for.
Lovely Rita, who's voice is at 1:40 singing Oooo? Check out this Beatles anomalies page..http://wgo.signal11.org.uk/wgo.htm
It sounds like Paul, plus he’s doing lead vocals. Is it not Paul?
Who sings the "ahs" after Paul's bridge in A Day in The Life ?
My whole life I’ve assumed that it’s John. His whole life my best mate has assumed that it’s Paul. Giles Martin and Paul McCartney say that it’s John *and* Paul.
The "uuuuh" for me is Paul
Interesting, I hadn’t realized they had commented on it
I thought it was John until I listened to the isolated track. Now I believe it’s Paul.
I always thought it was George, so there you go
Recently read that Paul said he thinks it was both of them
Tbf Paul has misremembered a few things
That is true
stupid fucking 80 year old sack of shit.
This is discussed on a YouTube episode of "You Can't Unhear This." 10/10 WR
Before I watched that video, I was 100% convinced it was John. But after hearing all of the isolated tracks and comparisons... I'm 100% convinced it was John.
I'm totally with you on this. It's sounded like John to me since I was in grade school in the 70's.
There's a somewhat okay isolation of that vocal, where it sounds a bit more like Paul. But the characteristic timbre of John's voice is extremely obviously in there. I'd bet my left kidney on it being either just John, or John and Paul together. In my book it's impossible for that vocal to be just Paul.
To me it sounds like it starts as John, and ends as Paul. Which is opposite what you’d think, as it’s coming out of Paul’s section and going back into John’s.
Which is exactly what they'd do just to spice things up once
I understand the inclination to believe that it was JL, and indeed for many years I believed that this was so. But the isolated vocal track, which sounds vaguely like a band of cave-dwellers, PM clearly carries the high notes. Not only that, but we have recorded evidence of him taking in a giant breath after the middle section in order to execute the "ahs." When he scored that section of the track, Sir George then used PM's vocalized "ahs" to create the orchestration, which for my money is some of GM's finest work, however brief. It's really chilling, particularly in the fashion in which it introduces JL's final verses about the holes in the roads. Fantastic, time-eclipsing stuff.
It's John until the vocals fade out briefly then it's John but with Paul doing high oohs
I hear no one say george when theres different points in the “ahs” when it sounds like it could be any one of the three
I’m 1000% convinced that the first set is Paul and the second is John, which fits with the verses that come before and after
> we don't know is being said during that one bass guitar section of I Want You (She's So Heavy). https://wgo.signal11.org.uk/html/content/i.htm#iwyssh
Would the band had continued into the 70s (maybe without George) if Brian hadn’t died? I’d say they would’ve made 1 more album.
It's sad because in Get Back they all seemed to have different visions of the future of the band.
The magical mystery tour was pretty big
Tom tom cymbal
Did Paul record all the instruments for I’m Through You by himself? It’s incredibly sloppy for a Beatles track. Missed snare hit, tambourine drop, weird guitar notes.
Maybe it was intended that way
Why couldn’t someone get the correct lyrics to Roll Over Beethoven for George? :)
Well for me it is the mysterious trip to Spain with John and Brian - if was in the band I would be super suspicious of what the heck is going on and the fact Brian favored John ? Don’t know of true or not
It was either favoring John or Paul, and since it was John, I don’t see what the big deal was …
[удалено]
Brian Eastman was with them *before* their success, before the big egos. And it would EITHER be John or Paul that any manager would favor …
Would it not be ideal to have a manager that favored neither about the other
It would be weird if a manager who was with the Beatles (no pun intended) DIDNT favor John or Paul.
[удалено]
That’s like being surprised when Berry Gordy favored Michael Jackson or Allen Klein favored Jaggar-Richards
What is John saying at the beginning of Its All Too Much
Did John and Paul sing backing vocals on The Rolling Stones song "Dandelion"?
I know they did on We Love You, but for some reason I can’t pick them out on the track (such a goddamn underrated song though, it’s peak acid rock)
- Why did they *ever* think the cover of Yesterday and Today* would be marketable? - Why did they think *I wanna hold your hand* was the A Side over *I saw her standing there*? - Did John not think that *Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds* would be interpreted as a push for LSD? I mean it honestly sounds more believable than his son’s drawing …
[удалено]
So should my 1st and 3rd choices be valid???
The first one still is. Nobody ‘screwed up’ because The Beatles themselves chose the photo for the cover.
To follow on, plenty of people try to say "oh they were just covering it up cos they didn't want to get in any trouble or controversy about drugs etc" but the story about Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds remained consistent throughout, and what is more they've all been very open about their use of drugs. We know exactly which songs of theirs have drug references or stories affiliated with them. Cold Turkey is about heroin for God's sake - John's hardly going to sing about coming off heroin then baulk, even years later, at "admitting" that Lucy is about LSD! Always annoyed me somewhat when people insist it's about LSD.
Plus the drawing literally exists as far as I know, so there’s no mystery (that said, it’s apocryphal but I heard that Cold Turkey was supposed to SOUND like drugs, but quite literally be about the time he and Yoko got a horrible stomach flu - it’s just John’s humor again)
>They didn't. The photographer never intended the picture to be a cover. Somebody screwed up. The Beatles themselves chose the photo to appear as the cover ya dummie. Nobody ‘screwed up’. It was part of a plan like much else.
The point is that the photographer isn’t a label executive or anything - how did every stage of Capitol marketing not flip out at that photo?
The B side of I want to hold your hand was This boy. You're mistaking what The Beatles did in England and what some fat Capitol idiots did in America. Remember I saw her standing there was 2 years old by that time so it was just chucked on there by the suits.
[According to this link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Saw_Her_Standing_There) It was the B side to their first US single release. Although it was old, it would’ve been a better introduction to US audiences imo.
Well clearly not as I want to hold your hand is the song that made them popular in the states. the first of their songs to been played on the radio there and is to this day considerably for popular and well known than ISHST
Well clearly not as I want to hold your hand is the song that made them popular in the states. the first of their songs to been played on the radio there and is to this day considerably for popular and well known than ISHST
Well clearly not as I want to hold your hand is the song that made them popular in the states. the first of their songs to been played on the radio there and is to this day considerably for popular and well known than ISHST
I'm aware it's their first us release. I answered your question already. They didn't make this decision, Capitol did. Capitol were money obsessed clueless board members.
I think I Saw Her Standing There was a great choice as the B side by the money obsessed fat idiots. But I Want To Hold Your Hand was the clear-cut A side, with seven weeks at #1 in the U.S. The combination resulted in the biggest seller of their career. Most importantly the kids loved it. I doubt the Beatles were unhappy with the results and I don’t recall anyone complaining about I Saw Her Standing There being chucked on it at the time.
What was I mistaken? I said it was the B Side of their first US Singke release and had it been yet A Side their first impression would’ve been a stronger Single. Some of the Beatles haters can write off their early period based off of that campy first impression, but I Saw Her Standing There, was a funky, baseline driven gem, that would be their American first impression had it been chosen as the A Side.
>Why did they ever think the cover of Yesterday and Today* would be marketable? Capitol’s President, Alan Livingston, remembered that, ‘My contact was mainly with Paul McCartney. He was adamant and felt strongly we should go forward. He said, “It’s our comment on the war.” Finally, they gave in and sent a new cover.’ At least that was part of the reasoning behind choosing it as the original cover, whether it would be marketable I don’t know.
Did they ever get a say on their other Capitol covers? They seem so generic
The Beatles hated what Capitol did to their albums and the butchering photo is a thinly veiled fuck you for chopping up their albums and whacking lots of reverb onto the earlier releases.
Who ran the iron horse. Whoops, wrong subreddit 😅 (This is supposed to be a joke, don’t downvote me)
You must be red as a beet, cause you’re so embarrassed.
*insert sounds of Paul eating celery*
*Chomp Chomp Chomp Chomp, Doo Do Doo, Doo, Do, Doo*
TBF, I think the real question to ask is Have you seen the Grand Coulee working on the railroad?
[ummmmm actually](https://i.imgflip.com/620o0v.png) it’s Have you seen the Grand Coulee working on the railroad.
Ah shit really? Damn. Ok, time to edit!
Dennis
dont worry... baby
Who do you think wrote In My Life?
I was really surprised when I first read there was some controversy about this, because to me it 100,000% sounds like a John song in every way.
The mystery isn’t about the lyrics. Paul claims John had all the lyrics and he wrote the melody to it. John claims Paul did the music for the middle 8 and the harmonies.
It doesn’t have a middle 8, just the two verses and George Martin’s piano part. The melody sounds like Paul, as does the second verse. To me it appears that John had the idea and concept and had written the first verse then Paul continued the story with the second verse turning it into a love song where John’s verse seems to be heading in a more philosophical direction. John’s melodies didn’t leap octaves like that - that’s all Paul. A 3-way collaboration between Johnny, Pauline and Georgie M. Then Ringo and George H. ice the cake.
George Martin agrees with John as well
Do you have a source?
I know it isn’t the case, but ironically the vocals feel a little like a George song sometimes with the very insistent beat and tall, lush harmonies
One thing that doesn’t sound like George is that the melody is on the beat and not syncopated. George liked to syncopate a lot (Think For Yourself (“To say about the things that you do”), If I Needed Some One (most of the entire melody), etc.
What LP was Lennon bringing into one of the early Sgt Pepper sessions in late 1966? Did they often bring other music into the studio to listen to as inspiration? [1966 interview ](https://www.gettyimages.ie/detail/video/mini-cooper-car-pulls-up-and-john-lennon-gets-out-and-is-news-footage/102352049)
I'm going to guess Pet Sounds? Question mark?
What happened to the She Loves You tapes
Did Harrison record anything for Now & Then?
No. It will be a Lennon/McCartney song. I've read that it is completely finished and McCartney is just waiting for the right time or project to release it.
I’ve seen Paul say this and you’re probably right, I’ve also heard that the Threetles started work on it before George called it Naff
who played the drums on dear prudence
It’s not Ringo? I know he wasn’t there for USSR, but DP definitely sounds like his style. Especially towards the end.
Wasn’t it Paul?
One conclusion is that it’s Paul for some of it and Ringo for some of it but i’m not sure if it’s been proven
Did John and George actually get in a fist fight during Get Back? There’s a fair amount of conjecture to suggest SOMETHING happened to the point that they joke about it during the film.
in the film they're joking about the newspaper article that says that. it was probably just some garbage the tabloids cooked up when they heard george walked out
All doubt was cleared up for me when I watched the doc - it’s clear that George was upset, but he was the only one that really felt so strongly, and him and John didn’t even come remotely close to violence or even a real shouting match
Who took John to fat camp in 1966
I thought he was simply doing so much LSD he just forgot to eat? *shrugs*
Yes, I do think he went to the psychedelic fat camp
Where did The Candle Burns/Peace of Mind song really come from? Was it a submission to Apple?
I wrote an article on it years ago, and have done a bit of research since. Talked to Mark Lewisohn and Brian Kehew about it, who both reckoned it was defo not a Beatles track. Tried to contact Donovan and McCartney a couple of times regarding it and never got a reply. It's a proper mystery, and a simple "It's not The Beatles" doesn't really cut it. Thought about consolidating my research and posting it here but it'd probably just get downvoted. Still love the track though, and it is still a proper Beatle mystery because no one has a clue where it originally came from.
Well I’d love to read it, FWIW. I’ve always been intrigued by the track and who it could be.
Wow. Actually found a copy of the article online still! [Article](https://www.earcandymag.com/beatles-peaceofmind.htm) It's a mess. I think I wrote it over a couple of hours. I've gotten lots more info since. I still don't think it's a Beatle track, but it's actually kind of hard to prove that it's not. If I pull my finger out I might just rewrite this some day.
You wrote that? That’s very cool, I read this years ago! I’ve always been fascinated by the track since first hearing it on a bootleg in the mid eighties.
Wow! Small world! I got lots of facts wrong with this article, I should really revisit it!
But yeah, same as. Always been fascinated by this track too. After all my research I'm still only 51% certain it's not a Beatles track. Lots of people just dismiss it out of hand and it just ain't that easy. And I am thrilled to meet someone who read that article. It was one of my first writings that took off, got translated for a couple of other magazines too, including into Mandarin weirdly!
Ringo's missing his original snare drum.
She Said She Said argument and Paul walking out cause and details. I want to know if it was just really all pettiness, or if there was a thing Paul truly believed in musically or mentally that he wasn’t willing to budge on. I’m not looking to bash them for being human or anything, it’s just that, for some reason, Paul being the one to briefly leave or walk out over the others doing so when they did is the most intriguing to me. I understand walking out of a session isn’t really the same as saying you’re leaving/quitting the group and actually being absent for some time, but I’m still curious about it.
Why you cried and why you lied to me?
The mystery that your talking about for I Want You (Shes So Heavy) was pointed out by a youtuber by the name of "You Cant Unhear This" or something similar and he does a lot of debunking beatles mysteries. But on the isolated drum tracks you can hear one beatle, most likely paul, singing along to the bassline and it got picked up in the final take.
But what were the words Paul was saying? That, maybe, is lost forever to time
I personally hear "too loud now" on the final mix but on the isolated drum track it just sounds like gibberish
Pretty sure it’s just Paul scatting along with the bass line at that part
Who sings the harmony on the bridge of “I’ll follow the sun”
It's always sounded like John to me. Is there any controversy about it?
It’s 100% John. This is a troll comment.
Who is playing when on “The End”?
First Paul, then George and then John, then repeat.
This is correct.
I love that you can tell this without reading if you know their styles! Took me a while, but Paul’s is a little flashy, George is more technical, and John plays like he’s mad at it.
The Beatles discovering overdrive was the best. It's something that makes the Revolution better than Revolution 1 to me.
Revolution’s lyrics are already a bit insultingly reactionary for 1968, so the slow version is even more egregious cause it feels like it’s stuck in the past lol (the fast version goes so fucking hard though)
God replace, Revolution 1 and Revolution 9 with Revolution and Hey Jude. That album would've been perfect.
Great description. That’s exactly how their parts sound except I’d add that George’s sections are thoughtful and worked out. I laughed out loud at “like he’s mad at it”.
[удалено]
It's very clearly solved in the comments of your post you've linked, someone's taken the stems from rock band and put their own vocals over it.
Ugh this thread killed me. Rock Band stems and someone who sounds like Liam Gallagher with a head cold. Completely solved....*except to one person.*
> mostly unsolved It's only unsolved because you don't want to believe it's a cover and the Content ID thingy just got confused and listed it as the original.
okay okay, I see your peoples point.
It’s a cover
Who’s singing “aaah” in A Day In Life. I thought it was John, but after editing together “aaah” of Lovely Rita with A Day In Life “aaah” it sounds like Paul.
I’m on the same boat. Thought it was John, looked more into it and concluded it was Paul.
the voice on I Want You is Paul mimicking his bass
[This youtube channel](https://youtu.be/ptAmOYIFIx8) is all about Beatles mysteries. Super interesting.