Beatles Get Back- New footage

[Trane]

No. Go to 2:17 of the video. For that wide shot, even though John's mic is pointed towards Paul, that is way more directly in front of him, and facing Paul head on. Right in the middle of the big rehearsal room. Really weird.

neil

yeah, you're right. Difficult to believe she sat there in the middle of things without being invited (negociated?) to do so.
After all, she did jam with them (below).

That's specifically why George invited Billy.

I do hope they document George's exit fairly. After he walked, no music was played the next day, I believe. The whole day's recording was dialog. Then, before George came back, the other three and, yes, Yoko did some jamming. Really heavy crazy shit, unlike anything they had been playing. You could tell they were really just letting it go. John even makes a crack, "Okay, George, take it." At one point John suggested that they can get Clapton to replace him.

Their Helter Skelter or lenghty version of Come Together was crazy heavy as well. I wish they'd rocked out more in that direction in their albums.

As for Lennon suggesting Clapton, was that nastyness (then I can understand why Harrison invited Preston)? When did the Patty Boyd theft came in the timeline?

[Top Cat]

As I said earlier, I think if George Martin had been involved in Let It Be, things might've been a bit different. He was the voice of reason and I believe reigned each individual in a bit when disagreements between the two main song writers Paul and John would take place, and find a compromise.

When I wrote about Yoko and John(and this is from my memory of the movie), at times it seemed she was sending John energy or something when Paul was in one of his "instruction" modes.
John was a strong character and after working with Paul for years, they knew how to deal with one another when disagreeing, but any protection thing going on may have just been Yoko watching over her man.(and this is just the impression I personally had from watching the film). But editing can be what you want it to show, and doesn't always tell the true story.

I do think at the time of this album, the pressures of stardom and to continually come up with something innovative for a band known as the best band in the world at the time, was difficult, and each individual was aching to do their own music without having to get it past the group's approval.

If I remember correctly following the recording of Let It Be, the guys realized they would soon be going their separate ways and decided to get back together with George Martin and make the best Beatle's album ever, and leave with something they could all be proud of.
I personally think Abbey Road IS their best work, the production, the writing, the performances are perfect and pure magic.

I honestly feel, doing the White Album extended the life of the Beatles by 1-2 years. It gave each member a chance to do their own thing, and was a welcome break.
But I think cracks in the group were already starting to show, so for me, I think it helped them step away from each other a bit, spread their wings and get a fresh breather to carry on.
But I think the White Album also awakened them to the desire of doing solo stuff.
I love the White Album, and it's still one of my favorite albums from them.

[calyx]

If I remember correctly following the recording of Let It Be, the guys realized they would soon be going their separate ways and decided to get back together with George Martin and make the best Beatle's album ever, and leave with something they could all be proud of.

Well, you're remembering correctly, but the whole point of the discussion is whether this is truly what was said amongst themselves or the sugar-coated "official story" that was made up after the fact.

This is actually contradicted by facts. What happened after the January 1969 "Get Back" project was that they didn't wait too long to resume work on some new material. In fact George Martin came back towards the end of "Get Back", for the final sessions at Apple [from which everything on "Let It Be" that wasn't from the rooftop concert was drawn], and in contrast, "I Want You (She's So Heavy)", on which work began in February at Trident, didn't involve Martin initially. It seems the plan at this transitional point was to possibly make an album that would combine the best of the January recordings with newly recorded songs. Then in April (after the one-off Lennon/McCartney only single "Ballad of John and Yoko") they began making "Something", which is when what became the "Abbey Road" album began as a project totally separate from "Get Back"/"Let It Be" (note that the song "Get Back" was released as a single in April 1969, a year ahead of the "Let It Be" album that included it).

This, and the very fact that they had this discussion in September 1969, just as "Abbey Road" was getting released, seems evidence that the "farewell album" theory had yet to be invented at that point.

(Extra note: September 1969 was the last time all four Beatles were ever in the same room.)

[calyx]

I wasn't born at the time, so I'm not speaking from personal experience. I am simply trying to confront the "official story" as it was told for PR purposes at the time with what researchers have unearthed since on the basis of various written and recorded documents.

If you read Mark Lewisohn's biography of the Beatles (I own, and have twice read, the 1,700-page version of the first volume, which only takes us to late 1962), you'll see that a lot of things people have taken for granted (including the Beatles themselves) can be proven to be factually impossible. For instance, he demonstrates that the story of George Martin signing the Beatles is much more complex that what was said about it later, including by George himself, who had apparently come to believe his own simplified and self-serving version. (Neither Mark L nor I mean to say that Martin wasn't instrumental in making the Beatles what they became, just that it wasn't love at first sight... well, it was on a personal level, rather than a musical one.)

This may not square with your memory of what happened at the time, but what you remember happening is, to some extent, what the Beatles and the people around them chose to tell you. A lot of it was true, but some of it less so, as we have since discovered.

[ronmac]

As for Lennon suggesting Clapton, was that nastyness (then I can understand why Harrison invited Preston)? When did the Patty Boyd theft came in the timeline?

John made the comment after George quit. George wasn't there at the time.

I do think at the time of this album, the pressures of stardom and to continually come up with something innovative for a band known as the best band in the world at the time, was difficult, and each individual was aching to do their own music without having to get it past the group's approval.

Except that the whole purpose of the "Get Back" album was to jettison those pressures and NOT come up with something innovative. They were reverting to their simpler roots.

[Top Cat]

I wasn't born at the time, so I'm not speaking from personal experience. I am simply trying to confront the "official story" as it was told for PR purposes at the time with what researchers have unearthed since on the basis of various written and recorded documents.

If you read Mark Lewisohn's biography of the Beatles (I own, and have twice read, the 1,700-page version of the first volume, which only takes us to late 1962), you'll see that a lot of things people have taken for granted (including the Beatles themselves) can be proven to be factually impossible. For instance, he demonstrates that the story of George Martin signing the Beatles is much more complex that what was said about it later, including by George himself, who had apparently come to believe his own simplified and self-serving version. (Neither Mark L nor I mean to say that Martin wasn't instrumental in making the Beatles what they became, just that it wasn't love at first sight... well, it was on a personal level, rather than a musical one.)

This may not square with your memory of what happened at the time, but what you remember happening is, to some extent, what the Beatles and the people around them chose to tell you. A lot of it was true, but some of it less so, as we have since discovered.

Thanks for your entertaining and informative reply. I find this discussion to be a lot of fun and interesting.
I deleted my post in response to your previous one, because I'm not an expert, and my beliefs are based purely on personal recollection, news stories of the time, and interviews(especially Paul, who seems to be the most interested in sharing the good and bad history).

[Top Cat]

Except that the whole purpose of the "Get Back" album was to jettison those pressures and NOT come up with something innovative. They were reverting to their simpler roots.

True, and I believe it was Paul who pushed the idea, and the others joined in reluctantly.(Again, my memory of the event, so it might be incorrect).
And judging by the original movie, that idea didn't work out too well for them.
And I do remember John saying "in hindsight, it wasn't a good idea to separate ourselves from George Martin in doing the album".

I think the one thing they did do right, was find a way to play live again, which was brilliant..."let's play on the roof". lol

[Vic2012]

I've never seen the original film. In 1970 I'd long lost interest in the Beatles. I was listening to Mountain in 1970. It wasn't until John's death I rediscovered them. The only bits of the film I've seen are on the Anthology series. If the new film is played in theaters (we'll see how Covid is going), I'm there for sure.

[arturs]

Lewisohn is correct. I listened to all 97 hours earlier this year and, while it had its ups and downs, there was certainly a decent vibe about it, except when George quit the band for a couple of days.

Where can we hear these 97 hours of recordings? Google was not my friend on this one... I talked to a colleague here at the U of Iowa who studies conflicts in creative teams and she was dumbfounded that this existed. She didn't think there was any documentation this extensive on any creative team of this caliber, when they are in the middle of creating something later acknowledged to be of historical importance, in any setting, arts, business, science, etc. She thought there might well be material here that could yield new academic insights on creativity. Any info appreciated. thx.

[Sunlight Caller]

Well even if there is some revisionism in the presentation, that five minute snippet put a smile on my face. It’s lovely to see them in happier times for the planet, young and innocent fun with maximum creativity. I was only a kid at the time, but The Beatles meant something to all of us, even if it is only in later years their importance and brilliance was really revealed to me.

[Vic2012]

To me their brilliance was in A Hard Day's Night, the movie and the album. Favorite era. I love everything that came after but 1964 was the era I love the most.

[calyx]

To cite another example of what Mark Lewisohn came up with after listening to the entire January 1969 recordings, he came to the conclusion that the Beatles who were in favour or against doing the rooftop concert were NOT at all the ones who were usually believed to be on either side of the fence. I heard this in one of the many audio interviews on Mark's site/YT page, he was talking to fellow Beatles experts and asked them what their recollection was, and both were wrong. I can't remember who was in both camps, but this illustrates the challenge of setting the record straight, and how myths can be perpetuated over a very long period of time, even among serious experts. Always a welcome lesson in humility...

[Top Cat]

To cite another example of what Mark Lewisohn came up with after listening to the entire January 1969 recordings, he came to the conclusion that the Beatles who were in favour or against doing the rooftop concert were NOT at all the ones who were usually believed to be on either side of the fence. I heard this in one of the many audio interviews on Mark's site/YT page, he was talking to fellow Beatles experts and asked them what their recollection was, and both were wrong. I can't remember who was in both camps, but this illustrates the challenge of setting the record straight, and how myths can be perpetuated over a very long period of time, even among serious experts. Always a welcome lesson in humility...

Well the band is so legendary, it's bound to have myths, rumors, over exaggerated recollections of events, which grow with each new person sharing a story.
Here is a link to a Rolling Stone article written in 2016 about the Rooftop concert. In it, Billy Preston recalls it was John Lennon who had the idea to perform on the rooftop. But I could swear I heard Paul once said it was his idea because they could still play live but not be directly in front of an audience.
Anyway, thought ya'll might find this article interesting, I did.
https://www.rollingstone.com/feature...nt-know-58342/

[jefftiger]

Where can we hear these 97 hours of recordings? Google was not my friend on this one... I talked to a colleague here at the U of Iowa who studies conflicts in creative teams and she was dumbfounded that this existed. She didn't think there was any documentation this extensive on any creative team of this caliber, when they are in the middle of creating something later acknowledged to be of historical importance, in any setting, arts, business, science, etc. She thought there might well be material here that could yield new academic insights on creativity. Any info appreciated. thx.

It's long been available as a torrent from "Purple Chick" (whoever they are), called "Beatles AB Road". It's 14 GB in size. The "AB" in the title is sometimes spelled as "A/B".

[ronmac]

Where can we hear these 97 hours of recordings? Google was not my friend on this one... I talked to a colleague here at the U of Iowa who studies conflicts in creative teams and she was dumbfounded that this existed. She didn't think there was any documentation this extensive on any creative team of this caliber, when they are in the middle of creating something later acknowledged to be of historical importance, in any setting, arts, business, science, etc. She thought there might well be material here that could yield new academic insights on creativity. Any info appreciated. thx.

http://tela.sugarmegs.org

Click on the B and scroll down to the BEatles 1969 AB Road Nagra Session Tapes. You'll see a ink for each day.

[calyx]

For those interested, here's the podcasts page on Mark Lewisohn's page. Each of these is a joy to listen to, with various topics covered including, of course, many that have yet to be addressed in his books, since so far only Volume 1 (up to 31st Dec 1962) has appeared.

https://www.marklewisohn.net/media/

[Gruno]

That's specifically why George invited Billy.

I do hope they document George's exit fairly. After he walked, no music was played the next day, I believe. The whole day's recording was dialog. Then, before George came back, the other three and, yes, Yoko did some jamming. Really heavy crazy shit, unlike anything they had been playing. You could tell they were really just letting it go. John even makes a crack, "Okay, George, take it." At one point John suggested that they can get Clapton to replace him.





It wasn't pleasant.

Wow, can't get through that track posted. Hey, I tried. Yikes, that's painful.

[happytheman]

http://tela.sugarmegs.org

Click on the B and scroll down to the BEatles 1969 AB Road Nagra Session Tapes. You'll see a ink for each day.

BigO has been going through each session for several months now.. not sure how many of the links are still active.. http://www.bigozine2.com/
I just finished reading Peter Browns book The Love You Make (found it in a thrift store for $1). I had never read this before so there was some new stuff here and there.. or at least his take on familiar stories. He covers the Let it Be / Abbey Road era quite extensively.. I wanna say Geoff Emmerick's book was another great source of information from the Abbey Road sessions especially.

[ronmac]

Wow, can't get through that track posted. Hey, I tried. Yikes, that's painful.

I never said it was very entertaining.

[ronmac]

Peter Browns book The Love You Make (found it in a thrift store for $1)..

You overpaid. They called it "The Muck You Rake," when it came out.

[arturs]

Thanks guys for providing the links to the full nagra reels. I downloaded the whole damn thing and listened for a few hours. I was surprised this has been around for 15 years and I'm only hearing about it now. But I'm also surprised that outside of Beatles scholarship, absolutely no one in academia appears to have used this material as a basis for research (I checked Google Scholar). It would seem to me to be a no-brainer for a study of creative teams, which is a really hot topic right now.

I will send some samples of the reels to my fellow Iowa professors who have more expertise with these kinds of qualitative data than I do. They would be able to identify any pitfalls I'm not aware of. A successful academic research project would probably require a 3 year deep dive into this material, most suited for a PhD dissertation. And it would require a lot of learning about theories of creativity and team conflict.

If our faculty did indeed green-light this we could possibly be looking for a PhD student to work on this beginning 2022. Our PhD program is solid and our graduates get good full-time University teaching gigs (Purdue, Southern Methodist, Oregon State, etc.) If this sounds interesting to anyone, PM me!

[calyx]

Thanks guys for providing the links to the full nagra reels. I downloaded the whole damn thing and listened for a few hours. I was surprised this has been around for 15 years and I'm only hearing about it now. But I'm also surprised that outside of Beatles scholarship, absolutely no one in academia appears to have used this material as a basis for research (I checked Google Scholar). It would seem to me to be a no-brainer for a study of creative teams, which is a really hot topic right now.

You can be sure that Mark Lewisohn will offer a full assessment of those in the final volume of his 3-part mammoth biography of the Beatles. Trouble is, Volume 2 (1963-66) isn't expected before 2023, so Volume 3 may not turn up until the very late 2020s...

[Gruno]

You can be sure that Mark Lewisohn will offer a full assessment of those in the final volume of his 3-part mammoth biography of the Beatles. Trouble is, Volume 2 (1963-66) isn't expected before 2023, so Volume 3 may not turn up until the very late 2020s...

How much of an audience will he have left by then that will purchase such a book?

[Splicer]

How much of an audience will he have left by then that will purchase such a book?

People who love biographies of iconic people.

[calyx]

How much of an audience will he have left by then that will purchase such a book?

That's a valid point. Surely, very few of the people he has interviewed will still be around. And relatively few of those who witnessed the Beatles firsthand.

It's too bad his research and writing takes so long, being a one-man operation... He signed his deal in 2004 or thereabouts and the first volume only arrived in 2013.

But the result is truly the best book of its kind.