• While I understand and partially agree about the strengths of their later albums, I am still very much in awe of their music pre-Rubber Soul. There is amazing energy in She Loves You, I Want to Hold Your Hand. There is raw rock & roll in Bad Boy, I'm Down. There is sweet and infectious melody in All My Loving, Eight Days a Week. There are wondrous harmonies in This Boy, If I Fell. And there is just plain awesomeness in Can't Buy Me Love, Ticket to Ride.

  • There is some great pre Rubber Soul stuff although also some rubbish. I have all of their stuff, at least the mainstream releases. But they were a tremendous band . The Red and Blue albums are the greatest complications ever. Each song slightly progressing form the previous. From love me do to the Long and Winding Road. They changed everything in music. The most amazing thing about The Beatles is that they did it all in 7 years! Yes they had several years gigging / working I know but their releases / recordings that changed it all took 7 years . 1962 to 69. 13 albums plus numerous others other stuff. 5 films. They stopped gigging in 66 so as they split in very early ,70 that was just their last 3 years, just over. A blink of eye for touring breaks these days. I can't imagine any band ever getting even close to what they did .

  • Also great rock & roll in She's A Woman, Kansas City, Twist & Shout, Money (even though the last three of those are covers).

    The Beatles did great covers in the early years. John's vocals on Money, Dizzy Miss Lizzy, and Leave My Kitten Alone are particularly ferocious. Paul's no slouch on Long Tall Sally.

    There is some great pre Rubber Soul stuff although also some rubbish. I have all of their stuff, at least the mainstream releases. But they were a tremendous band . The Red and Blue albums are the greatest complications ever. Each song slightly progressing form the previous. From love me do to the Long and Winding Road. They changed everything in music. The most amazing thing about The Beatles is that they did it all in 7 years! Yes they had several years gigging / working I know but their releases / recordings that changed it all took 7 years . 1962 to 69. 13 albums plus numerous others other stuff. 5 films. They stopped gigging in 66 so as they split in very early ,70 that was just their last 3 years, just over. A blink of eye for touring breaks these days. I can't imagine any band ever getting even close to what they did .

    There was some album filler that is forgettable, but the overall level of quality was still pretty high on the earlier albums. I agree about how incredible their output was for only 7 years.

  • I've got the worst cold I've had for years. Usually they just graze lightly against me but this one has climbed into my head and is currently repeatedly punching the inside of my face and shitting down my throat. I'd forgotten colds could be as unpleasant as this.


    But why am I saying this in the Beatles thread? Because* I'm slumped on the couch, feet up, heater on, relaxing listening to Disc 4 of the above compilation. And already feeling better!


    *(as I write, Because is playing)

    Abandon all reason

  • There are many interviews in which John indicated a preference for gutsy, straightforward rock 'n' roll, and yet he is also responsible for musically intricate songs like Because, which has some of The Beatles' most interesting harmony parts.

  • There are many interviews in which John indicated a preference for gutsy, straightforward rock 'n' roll, and yet he is also responsible for musically intricate songs like Because, which has some of The Beatles' most interesting harmony parts.

    Yes the harmonies on Because are luscious.


    Also look at how complex Warm Gun is. Multiple sections, an array of time signatures and vocals spanning pretty much his entire range.


    He could be very self-contradictory, as with his attitude towards art - dismissing 'avant-garde' as "just French for bullshit" yet in thrall to Ono's abstractism and almost desperately wanting to prove himself as artistically pioneering. But I think good things can spring from inner contradictions.

    Abandon all reason

  • Some of you may already know this. John once said that he only ever wrote two "true" songs - "Help" and "Strawberry Fields Forever." Both were based on his own life and were very personal to him.


    From a songwriter website - “Help" was born from John’s pain. According to John, the song was born from his feeling depressed and uncomfortable with his weight. Paul McCartney noted how “Help!” deals with those feelings in an indirect way.

    In addition, Paul recalled John was “always looking for help” because of his tumultuous life. First, John had to deal with an absent father and deaths in his family. Later in life, he dealt with being a member of the Fab Four, which was totally overwhelming.


    Though the lyrics to "Strawberry Fields Forever" are oblique, they reflects John’s life. The song was named after a real place, a Salvation Army children’s home called Strawberry Field. When John was a child, he would play there. The song “Strawberry Fields Forever” was designed as a nostalgic reminiscence of John’s childhood experiences at Strawberry Field.

    In addition, John felt the lyric “Nothing is real” (ironically) reflected reality. “As the Hindus or Buddhists say, it’s an illusion. … We all see it, but the agreed-upon illusion is what we live in. And the hardest thing is facing yourself.”




  • Did he not feel that way about In My Life as well? Or Yer Blues?


    One of the reasons John & Paul bonded so strongly was because they both lost their mothers when they were young. (Hence Mother Mary in Let It Be).

  • Did he not feel that way about In My Life as well? Or Yer Blues?


    One of the reasons John & Paul bonded so strongly was because they both lost their mothers when they were young. (Hence Mother Mary in Let It Be).

    Also, I thought Julia was a very personal song for him.

  • Also, I thought Julia was a very personal song for him.

    Yes, it was.


    It's interesting to compare John's 'personal' songs with Paul's which seemed mainly to be about his relationship with Jane Asher & then Linda. I much prefer songs like You Won't See Me to Julia, but that's just me.

  • Yes, it was.


    It's interesting to compare John's 'personal' songs with Paul's which seemed mainly to be about his relationship with Jane Asher & then Linda. I much prefer songs like You Won't See Me to Julia, but that's just me.

    You Won't See Me is just so darn catchy. Julia isn't one of my favourites - I appreciate John was expressing himself, but I find the song a little monotonous.