If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Spinner)   Every Beatles song broken down by instrument   (spinner.com) divider line 69
    More: Cool, Beatles, Beatles songs, Spinner  
•       •       •

4828 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 26 Mar 2013 at 2:19 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



69 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-26 01:39:57 AM
Cool, indeed, and the product of some serious research.
 
2013-03-26 02:27:41 AM
Wait... Paul was the only one who played bass? I knew they all (aside from Ringo) traded off vocal/lead guitar/rhythm guitar/piano duty, and I always thought that included bass duty.

/Meh, not a huge Beatles fan
//Only 24, so The Beatles aren't really relevant to me for the most part
 
2013-03-26 02:31:36 AM
The Beatles are cool and all, but why did subby link to farking spirographs?
 
2013-03-26 02:37:39 AM
an instrument of torture maybe!!!!

cache2.allpostersimages.com

Number nine
Number nine
Number nine....
www.singg.tv
That's numberwang!
 
2013-03-26 02:48:50 AM

lacydog: Only 24, so The Beatles aren't really relevant to me for the most part


There's no accounting for taste of course, but how does your age figure in on whether you like an artist or not?

Is all classical music off your playlists for all time?

Not trying to be a Richard, just curious .
 
2013-03-26 02:54:17 AM
It' kinda been done.
 
2013-03-26 03:06:41 AM

TomD9938: lacydog: Only 24, so The Beatles aren't really relevant to me for the most part

There's no accounting for taste of course, but how does your age figure in on whether you like an artist or not?

Is all classical music off your playlists for all time?

Not trying to be a Richard, just curious .


Exactly. I find more emotional resonance in Howlin' Wolf than I ever did from Pearl Spam.
 
2013-03-26 03:07:50 AM
find it hard to believe The Beatles never used stand-ins or session men when recording. it's difficult to have everyone together for each and every recording session. people get tired. people get sick. maybe a friend in another band plays a specific instrument very well and they're on a track. these things happen.
 
2013-03-26 03:18:11 AM
No Billy Preston?
No Eric Clapton?

/bah
 
2013-03-26 03:18:39 AM

KrispyKritter: find it hard to believe The Beatles never used stand-ins or session men when recording. it's difficult to have everyone together for each and every recording session. people get tired. people get sick. maybe a friend in another band plays a specific instrument very well and they're on a track. these things happen.


They used Billy Preston, (whom I did my first pro gig with ever, way back when), on keys quite a bit in their later days,
Yes, there was a black guy in The Beatles.
 
2013-03-26 03:25:15 AM
A More accurate chart

i1048.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-26 03:28:16 AM

nucal: No Billy Preston?
No Eric Clapton?

/bah


Yeah, I forgot about Clapton.
 
2013-03-26 03:34:41 AM
Both of the these pictures look like a car, to me. Beep beep'm beep beep yeah?

www.blogcdn.com
www.blogcdn.com
 
2013-03-26 03:44:15 AM

Dahnkster: Both of the these pictures look like a car, to me. Beep beep'm beep beep yeah?


Boom bip bip boom bip bip yeah!
 
2013-03-26 03:59:37 AM

nucal: No Billy Preston?


Or "Ted" Theodore Logan?
 
2013-03-26 04:03:32 AM

TomD9938: lacydog: Only 24, so The Beatles aren't really relevant to me for the most part

There's no accounting for taste of course, but how does your age figure in on whether you like an artist or not?

Is all classical music off your playlists for all time?

Not trying to be a Richard, just curious .


Classical music was more an 18th century thing, really.
 
2013-03-26 04:29:19 AM

lacydog: //Only 24, so The Beatles aren't really relevant to me for the most part


What do you mean by that? I'm 23 and had my Beatles phase (10 years ago I'd say), so I'm not sure age has anything to do with it. You must admit they are influential when it comes to modern music. Then again, our generation sees Gen X (80s, 90s) music as more relevant (alternative, hip hop, electronic..). In the end, certain artists end up being timeless. For example, do you really think Hendrix or Marley will be forgotten in 20 years? How about Beethoven or Bach? The best music is stuff that holds up, and the late 60s Beatles does in my opinion.
 
2013-03-26 05:17:55 AM
lacydog:  Only 24, so The Beatles aren't really relevant to me for the most part

Only 57 and they don't do a lot for me either. I do own one of their albums though.

/the one with the cool little drum solo
 
2013-03-26 06:58:19 AM

KrispyKritter: find it hard to believe The Beatles never used stand-ins or session men when recording.


Billy Preston would find it hard to believe, too.
 
2013-03-26 07:05:44 AM

JerkyMeat: A More accurate chart

[i1048.photobucket.com image 611x827]


That is hilarious! And to the point. The visuals in the article were a mess.
 
2013-03-26 07:09:29 AM
Needs more mellotron.
 
2013-03-26 07:17:24 AM

lacydog: Only 24, so The Beatles aren't really relevant to me for the most part


facepalm.jpg

Do you listen to any modern rock or pop music?  Then they're relevant to you.  You just don't know why - which is why you should listen to them.  :-)
 
2013-03-26 07:23:53 AM
Did they include George Martin playing on "in my life"? I wish I had time like other people to do things like this. I would make an animated rap video featuring the 90 year old machinists and inept salesman at my last shop.
 
2013-03-26 08:14:15 AM
To other's comments above....

Billy Preston   and George Martin

/especially George Martin
 
2013-03-26 08:29:25 AM
An infographic that is pretty to look at, but hard to read and understand, is worse than worthless.
 
2013-03-26 08:35:54 AM

lacydog: Wait... Paul was the only one who played bass?


He wasn't, though John and George tended to play the guitar like Fender Bass VI when they played bass parts.
 
2013-03-26 09:06:12 AM
What's that about Preston and Martin (or Clapton or Hopkins)? Their instruments are there, want to confuse the graphic even more by adding the names?

/so many people played on Beatles recordings, for example trumpeter David Mason
 
2013-03-26 09:29:31 AM

Dahnkster: Number nine
Number nine
Number nine....



This is the 2nd time I've heard someone commenting on "Number Nine..."
At face value, yes, it's ridiculous.  Didn't you kids ever play your records backwards?
 
2013-03-26 09:32:45 AM

KrispyKritter: find it hard to believe The Beatles never used stand-ins or session men when recording. it's difficult to have everyone together for each and every recording session. people get tired. people get sick. maybe a friend in another band plays a specific instrument very well and they're on a track. these things happen.


When they started out, recording was a job, so they were all there, five days a week when they were recording.  They were also cutting everything live in the studio, so they all had to be there at the same time.

As time went on, recording technology got better, and they drifted apart, how they recorded depended on whose song it was.  If it was a John song, it might be John, Ringo and George in the studio, and Paul would do overdubs later.  Or vice versa.

Towards the end, when things got really bad, they weren't all on every record.  "Ballad of John & Yoko" is just John and Paul (Ringo was on vacation, so Paul played drums).  "Old Brown Shoe" is just George, without anyone else.

Yes, they did bring Billy Preston in to try to calm the waters during the Get Back sessions, but one of the shocking things is how infrequently other musicians (aside from string and horn players) are on their tracks.  Eric Clapton only played on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps".  Nicky Hopkins was brought in to do piano on "Ob La Di", and there are a few others here and there.
 
2013-03-26 09:35:59 AM
Music in large part builds upon the last iteration.  To understand SRV you need to know Jimi Hendrix who understood Albert King who understood Muddy Waters who understood Robert Johnson.

Following that chain means in great part "getting" the whole scope of music.

However "getting" doesn't mean you need to sit around and obsess about every little aspect of the very roots of it all.

I encourage musicians to spend as much time understanding the history as creating and listening to what's going on today.

This whole cult of dwelling on the Beatles does more to harm the evolution of music and musicians than it does to promote anything positive as the result of it.  We get it.  We got it.  It's over and done.  There's nothing more that can be said, done, re-released, re-mastered or remixed which does anything but buy Paul another castle, Yoko another NYC apartment or Ringo another....well...whatever the Hell he is into.  You're not helping anyone make good music; you're just annoying those who have moved on in a musical evolution.
 
2013-03-26 09:45:30 AM

poot_rootbeer: lacydog: Wait... Paul was the only one who played bass?

He wasn't, though John and George tended to play the guitar like Fender Bass VI when they played bass parts.


Yep.....John played the bass on "The Long and Winding Road." If you listen closely, you can tell because it's really crappy. Paul was pretty pissed that it made it into the song's final mix, especially since Phil Spector had already added the horrific choir and strings to the track (which pissed Paul off even more)....why not ask McCartney to come in and overdub and decent bass part as well?
 
2013-03-26 09:48:00 AM

Hawk24: why not ask McCartney to come in and overdub and decent bass part as well?


Because the ground rule for the Get Back sessions was "No Overdubs!" That's the other reason they brought in Billy Preston: they needed a keyboard player.

/yes, when they finally handed the tapes to Spector to sort out, he overdubbed all over the place, but he was trying to "fix" things the only way he knew how.
//wrong guy for the job
 
2013-03-26 09:52:43 AM

Dwight_Yeast: Hawk24: why not ask McCartney to come in and overdub and decent bass part as well?

Because the ground rule for the Get Back sessions was "No Overdubs!" That's the other reason they brought in Billy Preston: they needed a keyboard player.

/yes, when they finally handed the tapes to Spector to sort out, he overdubbed all over the place, but he was trying to "fix" things the only way he knew how.
//wrong guy for the job


It was a big hairy situation.  Could you almost say he - murdered - those tracks?
 
2013-03-26 10:01:24 AM

Dwight_Yeast: Hawk24: why not ask McCartney to come in and overdub and decent bass part as well?

Because the ground rule for the Get Back sessions was "No Overdubs!" That's the other reason they brought in Billy Preston: they needed a keyboard player.

/yes, when they finally handed the tapes to Spector to sort out, he overdubbed all over the place, but he was trying to "fix" things the only way he knew how.
//wrong guy for the job


Correct...but as you said, the spirit of the "no overdubs" ground rule had already been broken...put a competent bass part on the darned thing.

/most definitely the wrong guy for the job
 
2013-03-26 10:02:25 AM

Nana's Vibrator: Dwight_Yeast: Hawk24: why not ask McCartney to come in and overdub and decent bass part as well?

Because the ground rule for the Get Back sessions was "No Overdubs!" That's the other reason they brought in Billy Preston: they needed a keyboard player.

/yes, when they finally handed the tapes to Spector to sort out, he overdubbed all over the place, but he was trying to "fix" things the only way he knew how.
//wrong guy for the job

It was a big hairy situation.  Could you almost say he - murdered - those tracks?


Nicely done.
 
2013-03-26 10:11:10 AM
I'm in agreement with those calling these graphs as visual mess and, as already mentioned, it excludes key contributions like George Martin's piano on "In My Life" and Eric Clapton's lead guitar on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps". None of this is really new anyway - a handful of books breaking down in detail who played what instruments have been published throughout the years.
 
2013-03-26 10:12:02 AM
kinda cool but I would start to follow a line and then get lost with another line so I closed it.
 
2013-03-26 10:24:02 AM

Hawk24: Correct...but as you said, the spirit of the "no overdubs" ground rule had already been broken...put a competent bass part on the darned thing.


Uh, no.  Remember that Let it Be is released AFTER Abbey Road.  Spector's work was done after the Beatles completed their final album, and none of them came back in to do overdubs.

This let to all sorts of weirdness, like the song "Two of Us", which wasn't long enough, so Spector just copied and pasted (tape spliced), repeating the first first as the last to pad it out.

And if you're interested in who played what and when, I suggest Mark Lewishon's "Complete Beatles Reocrding Sessions"; he was allowed to listen to every tape the Beatles cut in the studio and his book is a digest of that.  He also includes things like the pay sheets for the session musicians.
 
2013-03-26 10:24:07 AM

lacydog: //Only 24, so The Beatles aren't really relevant to me for the most part


My 18 year-old son and 16-year old daughter would find fault with your logic.  While I am not a HUGE Beatles fan, those two love them.

My son's entire room is covered with Beatles posters, he has several original pressings of 45s, and an original pressing of Abbey Road.  He's a prog-metal drummer, and claims Ringo as one of his biggest influences.

My daughter has learned most of the Lennon/McCartney catalog on guitar and keyboards, and writes much of her own music (with an obvious influence from the Beatles).

I guess what I am getting at is that you don't have to be a Baby Boomer for the Beatles to be relevant to you.  I don't think your age has anything to do with it.
 
2013-03-26 10:41:00 AM
Could be interesting, if it were readable.
 
2013-03-26 10:41:35 AM

Dwight_Yeast: Hawk24: Correct...but as you said, the spirit of the "no overdubs" ground rule had already been broken...put a competent bass part on the darned thing.

Uh, no.  Remember that Let it Be is released AFTER Abbey Road.  Spector's work was done after the Beatles completed their final album, and none of them came back in to do overdubs.

This let to all sorts of weirdness, like the song "Two of Us", which wasn't long enough, so Spector just copied and pasted (tape spliced), repeating the first first as the last to pad it out.

And if you're interested in who played what and when, I suggest Mark Lewishon's "Complete Beatles Reocrding Sessions"; he was allowed to listen to every tape the Beatles cut in the studio and his book is a digest of that.  He also includes things like the pay sheets for the session musicians.


I know the sequence of the recordings/albums quite well, thank you very much, and have read Lewishon's book.

All I'm saying is that since Spector was already farting around with the tapes anyway (you yourself stated that he..."he overdubbed all over the place") why not also add a decent bass part? And they did do a few overdubs themselves despite stated "live" intent of the album.....Harrison overdubbed 2 different guitar solos on top of the basic track of "Let it Be."
 
2013-03-26 11:19:09 AM

Hawk24: All I'm saying is that since Spector was already farting around with the tapes anyway (you yourself stated that he..."he overdubbed all over the place") why not also add a decent bass part? And they did do a few overdubs themselves despite stated "live" intent of the album.....Harrison overdubbed 2 different guitar solos on top of the basic track of "Let it Be."


Short answer: Paul wouldn't work with Spector (he was John and George's hire).

I was just thinking about "Let it Be" and I'm not sure when the two solos were added.  My understanding is that Spector was surprised when he put the tape on and found two different solos.  They ended up using one for the album and another for the single.  Let me check Lewishon.
 
2013-03-26 11:38:05 AM
cyberspacedout:

TomD9938:Is all classical music off your playlists for all time __ ____?

Classical music was more an 18th century thing, really.


I should have stuck an "as well" on the end of that question.

/ poorly worded sentence is poorly worded...
 
2013-03-26 11:41:09 AM

lacydog: Wait... Paul was the only one who played bass? I knew they all (aside from Ringo) traded off vocal/lead guitar/rhythm guitar/piano duty, and I always thought that included bass duty.

/Meh, not a huge Beatles fan
//Only 24, so The Beatles aren't really relevant to me for the most part


If that's whatnot said its wrong. Off the top of my head I know George played bass on Helter Skelter and John played on Long and Winding Road (badly).
 
2013-03-26 11:41:43 AM
So the two guitar solos were taped on 30 April 1969, when Glyn Johns was working on putting the Get Back album together.  The song had been recorded on 31 Jan 1969, the day after the rooftop performance.

So somewhere between those two dates, the Beatles have up on the "No overdubs" plan.  Spector didn't actually work on the track until 4 January 1970.

/this is why I love Lewishon's book.
 
2013-03-26 11:43:03 AM

KrispyKritter: find it hard to believe The Beatles never used stand-ins or session men when recording. it's difficult to have everyone together for each and every recording session. people get tired. people get sick. maybe a friend in another band plays a specific instrument very well and they're on a track. these things happen.


Only present in Abbey Road and Clapton on WMGGW. Paul could play everything so as long as he showed up they were ok.

Fun fact - drums on Fear Prundance? Paul.
 
2013-03-26 11:49:29 AM

Waxing_Chewbacca: KrispyKritter: find it hard to believe The Beatles never used stand-ins or session men when recording. it's difficult to have everyone together for each and every recording session. people get tired. people get sick. maybe a friend in another band plays a specific instrument very well and they're on a track. these things happen.

Only present in Abbey Road and Clapton on WMGGW. Paul could play everything so as long as he showed up they were ok.

Fun fact - drums on Fear Prundance? Paul.


Dear Prudence

/ ftfm-iPhone
 
2013-03-26 12:08:22 PM

Waxing_Chewbacca: Waxing_Chewbacca: KrispyKritter: find it hard to believe The Beatles never used stand-ins or session men when recording. it's difficult to have everyone together for each and every recording session. people get tired. people get sick. maybe a friend in another band plays a specific instrument very well and they're on a track. these things happen.

Only present in Abbey Road and Clapton on WMGGW. Paul could play everything so as long as he showed up they were ok.

Fun fact - drums on Fear Prundance? Paul.

Dear Prudence

/ ftfm-iPhone


You sure about that? Far as I knew, the only White Album tracks Paul played drums on are "Back In The USSR" and "Why Don't We Do it In The Road" (though some sources disagree on the latter, citing Ringo on drums).
 
2013-03-26 12:28:05 PM

Evil-Imposter: Waxing_Chewbacca: Waxing_Chewbacca: KrispyKritter: find it hard to believe The Beatles never used stand-ins or session men when recording. it's difficult to have everyone together for each and every recording session. people get tired. people get sick. maybe a friend in another band plays a specific instrument very well and they're on a track. these things happen.

Only present in Abbey Road and Clapton on WMGGW. Paul could play everything so as long as he showed up they were ok.

Fun fact - drums on Fear Prundance? Paul.

Dear Prudence

/ ftfm-iPhone

You sure about that? Far as I knew, the only White Album tracks Paul played drums on are "Back In The USSR" and "Why Don't We Do it In The Road" (though some sources disagree on the latter, citing Ringo on drums).


He's correct...."Dear Prudence" was recorded during the time that Ringo had temporarily "quit" so Paul played the drums. Did a pretty good job, too.
 
2013-03-26 01:27:42 PM
My first memory of the Beatles was in 1965, when I was four. I was riding in my Uncle Robert's car in Southern California, and "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" came on the AM radio. I suggested to my uncle that they played good  music, and he told me that they were a crappy flash-in-the-pan.

In his defense, had I suggested that they were just shiatty noise, I'm sure he'd have told me how they were the greatest band ever recorded. You can't have a four-year-old dictating your musical tastes now, can you?
 
Displayed 50 of 69 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report