Was Pete Best really that bad of a drummer?

Why? When has Pete ever demonstrated a quick wit that would've fit with the tone of those press conferences?

 

No one has suggested that Lennon's intention was "to honor Pete." Lennon borrowed the medals simply because he thought they looked cool. According to Pete, Lennon had always liked them. Lennon called Mona because she was the one who owned the medals, not Pete.

Why would Pete lie about this? The story doesn't make him look good, which is typically the reason someone might make such a false claim. What does he gain from lying? Also, it strikes me this would be a fairly easy lie to disprove... if the medals didn't come from the Best family, it shouldn't be too difficult for someone like Lewisohn to find out where they did come from. Why would Best tell a lie that would be extremely humiliating to himself and his family if it is exposed?

For that matter, if he was lying, why wouldn't he claim that he'd spoken directly to Lennon? If he's lying anyway, why not make up a better lie, like saying Lennon apologized for firing him and said he was an awesome drummer?

 

Apart from a couple of slamming, catchy ditties, they made lousy music (compared to The Beatles, Stones, Hollies, Animals,..) as far as I was/am concerned. That is why they didn't last long.
I agree though that great musicianship is not necessary for selling a lot of records but it contributes to the long lasting artistic worth of a band.

 

He was, but he was also a rank amateur too, the Beatles came to realise he made so terrible deals for them but they also recognised that without him they made not have made it, and even towards the end they still actually liked him, however had he not died the writing was probably on the wall from the moment he tried to palm them off onto to Stigwood. As for Dick James I suspect even if he didn't, Lennon did get wise to him in the end, there is some interesting film from Apple in 68 with them all around a table and clearly both John & Paul are getting very frustrated. Not surprisingly not that long after Northern Songs was sold under their noses to ATV thus getting around any more conversations like that.

 

Yes and i predicted this would open an old discussion wound, without wanting to rehash a previous argument I remain sceptical of this but that's just my view and I have no hard evidence to the contrary, however my sceptical view on this does should NOT be taken to mean an automatic assumption that PB is lying.

 

Not sure why I'm going to repeat what I posted a couple of hundred posts ago, but here goes: Roag Best's book has contemporary photos of the medals that confirm that they're indeed the ones on the cover. If you have a more likely version of the story - that none of the primary sources have offered up - maybe you could offer it up here. As for Lennon never mentioning it in interviews, there's a truckload of topics he never spoke about but that doesn't mean that they don't exist/didn't happen/etc (Stu Sutcliffe being one example).

Then there's this, which seems to suggest that you believe that a biographer had to actually have been alive at the time of the events he's (or she's) writing about. Now I know you can't believe that...

 

I looked at the picture from the book (page 40) on Amazon. It's them, all right.

 

For the life of me, I can't understand the significance of the furor surrounding Medal-gate. What a strange thread. . .

 

It's a nice book to have, btw. Worth getting if you can find one cheap (ish).

 

What is your evidence that Klein was interested in signing the Beatles in 1962?

 

For me, it's not a matter of how the song catalog could be better, it's a matter of the fact that no other artist has one that is better.

 

Yes, I remember getting the cassette The Beatle That Time Forgot at the age of 8 in 1991 and liking it quite a bit. In high school I was able to find the Beyond the Beatles CD, which had all of those songs plus several more. After YouTube was created, I was able to get Pete Best's All Star material as well. By that time, I was an adult.

 

? I'm completely lost in the weeds here.

 

No, Pete Best spoke out against psychedelia. His feeling was the Beatles music took a sharp decline around "All You Need Is Love," something I happen to agree with him. Among the cannon EMI LPs it would be either Please Please Me or With the Beatles.

 

Even Pete Best critic Ian MacDonald was impressed with Pete Best's drumming on Some Other Guy.

 

Maybe he heard another attempt because, I'm sorry to say, it was pretty amateurish.

 

The only audio recordings of Stuart Sutcliffe were recorded before he went to Hamburg. The bass playing is terrible. It's possible he improved considerably in Hamburg, but this seems unlikely to me because his heart wasn't in it, and also he was probably tone deaf.

 

He didn't say that he was. He said Klein was a better negotiator than Epstein.
Another controversy created by the man in green.

 

These comments are premised on "managers were lining up to sign the Beatles in 1961" which is clearly inaccurate. You just don't seem to want to accept facts and it's really ridiculous.

 

Facts? Are you still opining that the released version of Ask Me Why is from the June session with Pete? And that the released version of Please Please Me is actually from the 11 September with Andy White? Ron

 

All You Need Is Love " Beatles last single with Brian Epstein as manager.Which came out a month after Sgt Pepper. But, I don't agree with 'sharp decline'.

 

Pretty sure I've seen that Best interview where he opines Pepper to be his preferred Moptops Platter. Wonder if Mona got a free copy for her contribution?

 

I thought I read that as well.
Maybe he changed his mind.

 

I wonder if there was a preference with Beatles fans over Sgt Pepper's content, tunes/image per se at the time. I have a older cousin who stopped buying Beatles records after Revolver. Preferring their pop rock n roll sing a' long guitar strums over their psychedelic ' out there stuff. Perhaps Pete Best's also opinion.