Are criticisms of the Beatles as a Live Band overblown?

And not the Ron Howard 8DAW (colorized) film and (fake) soundtrack on their touring years?
Shocking, simply shocking!

 

Have no desire to view such rubbish.

 

in my view first you need to avoid comparing with other bands - all have their strengths and no doubt weaknesses too - and just look at The Beatles here not whoever else some may want to champion etc

they WERE very tight as a group and Ringo certainly gave them that backbeat and held them together which when the screaming was so OTT was quite an achievement !

John and Paul were fine onstage co-frontmen, John being witty and making wry comments, Paul being friendly and sincere sounding so they could hold an audience well in the chat between songs on the occasions the screaming died down - and in the TV and radio shows / concert performances etc

musically they could up to 1965 reproduce their recorded songs well, George answered his detractors in 1963 when in the televised Royal Command performance he reeled off the solo on 'Till There Was You' effortlessly (some unkind UK critics had doubted he had played it on the recording !)

by 1965 as their music became more complex and studio orientated obviously in those rather basic sixties days reproducing the later material live was getting tougher - they had poor amps by later standards, could often not hear themselves and remember Shea Stadium was just blasted out over the P.A. system !!

given the chaotic nature of the live shows their earlier Liverpool, UK clubs and Hamburg 'schooling' was vital and they were always very 'together' as an outfit - so credit them for that - even in the rooftop 'concert' that old strength still comes across

a curious problem for them live was how often John got HIS OWN lyrics wrong ! - he's 'word perfect' on the Rock & Roll, and backing vocals on songs for Paul, George, and Ringo....but often HIS lyrics seemed to confuse him !

he goes wrong on Ed Sullivan Show doing 'Help !' (when he only has to listen for Paul and George singing the line just ahead of him), also on ABC 'Big Night Out' in Blackpool UK in 1965 and at one of the NME Poll Winners concerts at Wembley (again on one of his own songs, I think it's on 'You Can't Do That')

even many years later Live in New York he goes wrong on 'Come Together' ! ('Sorry, I'll get it right next time...I'll have to stop writing these daft lyrics' he chirps to the audience)

John's memory slips on his own lyrics was most strange...

but overall they were a really tight band, maybe they understandably got bored during the madness of 'Beatlemania' (when often they never sang) but given their unique situation they essentially provided decent live music despite all the chaos going on around them

 

And everybody forgets, the album Please Please Me was recorded live to two track. The only overdubs are the hand claps on I Saw Her Standing There. There is your live show.

 

Live in Hamburg may be good, but that's still the Beatles working to become the Band they would really be.

Beatlemania is the band they were DESTINED TO BE! The band that would not only conquer the world, but would OWN the world!

Their hunger, excitement and drive was on fire in the studio, and especially live! Check them out live in Australia, a very good tight hot rocking live band indeed!

 

Obviously, I've never seen the Beatles live.

Always found them to be tedious on record. They might have made more sense to me if I'd caught a live performance.

 

And the piano overdub on "Misery".

There might be some more minor overdubs on a few other songs too. I'm away from my Lewisohn books.

 

O.K. but the bass, guitar, drums and singing is all live - just like they did it on stage. Same with the second album.

 

no

 

What do you mean by "tedious?"

 

They recorded the whole band live to two track in the studio on those two albums. Which track did the Beatles record the vocals, bass and drums separately? Please explain. Or were you referring to something else?

 

He's responding to the question posed by the thread title.

 

It sure sounds and looks live to me. Do you think that they are miming to a live performance recorded earlier in the day? That’s usually a very difficult task. See, Around the Beatles.

 

Actually I forgot to add the second part (it was a poor joke) It was supposed to be that's not live, that's Memorex.

 

You mean the concerts where they really didn't want to be there? Sure. By 1966, I think they just wanted it all to end. Were they a great live band? I think they were pretty darn good when they were performing through 1965. By 1966? They were going through the motions for the most part I think but, hey, that's me.

 

The Beatles were a good little rock band. They reached their peak as a live act around the time they became internationally famous. Some of the live material from 1963 is quite good but after that they weren't really terribly interested in live performance and drifted towards the end of their live career in 1966. Ron Howard's movie tells this story. It wouldn't be fair to compare them to the Stones who have been committed to and orient their existence as a band around live performance and never quit at it even though they too ceased global tours temporarily in 1966.. they still played live regularly and clearly considered this a major part of being the Rolling Stones. And of course it would be CRIMINAL to compare them to the Who .. a brilliant, focused, and rigorously dedicated live outfit. The Beatles simply did not organize themselves around live performance with any dedication.. and as most live videos will attest... usually only ONE Beatle seems to be in attendance at EVERY show.. McCartney.. the others seem to have been dragged along as if they were attending church. To be fair... the conditions they were performing under were quite ragged and it's likely this reason that McCartney spends these shows shooting out his voice... so for all those who criticize the Macca of today for warbling his songs as if he is showing up to play with a really bad cold .. HERE'S why he sounds like this... poor vocal technique and abuse of his instrument. He gave at the office and we are lucky he is still around.

No.. the Beatles were a great band. Their abilities as a band stopped growing too early in their career and after they achieved megafame the conditions under which they performed stunted their growth. Ideally... it would have been great if the Beatles hadn't been discovered until 1966.. in those three or four years they might have developed into a band as organically and sonically brilliant as the Who or some such other band. But as it was.. they got plucked out of Liverpool at just the right time to become a global pop phenomenon just before they had fully ripened. History favors the nearly prepared on the day opportunity arrives!!!!

P.S. Low blow comparing the Beatles 1966 shows in Germany to the Stones at the peak of their pop and garage singles mastery. Lennon is a 25 year old pleading old age and looks as spent and couldn't give a damn as a war weary soldier.. and yet we ROUTINELY are watching 65 and 70 year olds play 3 hour shows at the end of their lives .. their bodies weak but their spirits willing. The Beatles were full of ennui at that point and just couldn't give it anymore. But all those BS issues about not being able to hear themselves.. really?? nobody had a few weeks to devote to arranging for a touring PA system or to stop by the SAME guy they hired to provide sound reinforcement in Atlanta in 65 to arrange the design or purchase of a sound system? So Pink Floyd could do ALL of that 6 months later .. the Kinks could figure it out? John Phillips could figure it out for Monterey.. but the biggest rock and roll band on earth able to sell out stadiums couldn't do anything about sound than have a big guy carry around a couple of VOX amps? Anyway.. we've all been through this before. They couldn't be arsed .. too many greasy screaming kids.. I'm busy.. until I turn 65.. then you won't be able to get rid of me.. I'll be standing there with 3 GIGANTIC JUMBOTRON SCREENS showing me singing away!!!

 

Ah yes, I had forgotten about Paul's innovative handclaps...

 

It is true for most of songs on the first two albums with few exceptions.
IIRC, the "doo wah ooo" vocals in Do You Want To Know A Secret were overdubbed.
Little Child and I Wanna Be Your Man have all the vocals overdubbed.
Hold Me Tight has some vocal harmony overdubs during the intro and verse.

Ondra

 

I don't find much in the music that excites me. On record at least there's something lacking for me in the songwriting & performance.

I've always been perplexed by this because so many performers I like, claim the Beatles as an influence & I enjoy bands that are similar (Hollies, Byrds etc).

Saw this thread and wondered whether actually seeing them in concert would have made a difference in my understanding of the music. This has happened to me before from bands as diverse as AC/DC and Showaddywaddy. Didn't particularly like them, saw them live & gained new insight and respect.

Doesn't always work. I've seen a bunch of bands where I'm as non-plussed at the end of a show as at the start.

 

When they performed seriously: no. When they performed to screaming throngs: yes.

 

'Please Please Me' album has some studio work added to it

for a start on the original vinyl stereo LP the error at the end of 'Please Please Me' itself is present in stereo - out of time harmonica and John & Paul singing different lyrics ! (I think John went wrong - and he wrote it !)

but in mono this has been corrected by a proper edited on ending hiding any errors

Although the bulk of the first album was recorded very quickly indeed they didn't just go in and reel off a 'live' show list of songs entirely for the album

'Love Me Do' is the 'Andy White' version (with Ringo on tambourine) Ron Richards produced not the original UK single that featured Ringo on drums and made no.17 in 1962 - also 'P.S. I Love You' and 'Ask Me Why' are earlier recordings used as singles 'B' sides hence some are not in true stereo unlike the other tracks on the album

a strange noise can be heard on 'Chains' in stereo at approx 1 min 28 secs just before George sings 'please believe me when I tell you...' that is virtually 'mixed out' in the mono version

John's voice noticeably 'cracking' at the very end of 'Twist and Shout' is more noticeable in stereo but 'mixed back' in mono

while overall the vocals generally sound more 'polished up' in the mono mix where as in stereo they sound rougher as obviously a lot more tme and care was given to the mono version which then was seen as THE format of choice (and mono was how The Beatles 'thought' musically as John later said) , so it's clear that studio work was done on the songs to present them as polished and 'professional' a band as possible

the later CD versions later of both mono and stereo have the vocals more 'polished up' compared to the original sixties vinyl releases too and the error in stereo 'Please Please Me' has been latterly fixed too

 

An interesting, inciteful post no doubt, but perhaps it belongs in the mono vs. stereo thread instead of this one....


I enjoyed reading it regardless of where it popped up!

 

yes you're right ! - it's just someone above was saying they went in and more or less just did the first album 'live' or so...

Largely of course it WAS full of their live show songs, but it wasn't simply a 'live in the studio' record - studio 'work' was done on the album particularly the mono version and re 'polishing up' the vocals

I think there was very probably some 'double tracking' on the vocals (certainly from the second album, likely on the first too) - George Martin later said John became 'addicted' to having his voice 'double tracked' - possibly a hint John was a bit lacking in confidence re his voice then in the studio (crazy of course, but John could be like that it seems, a bit doubtful of himself)

just compare Lennon's assertive vocal power - on the slower songs like 'Misery', 'Anna' etc - on the first two albums to the nervous sounding 'one voiced' John on the Decca audition tape

 

Stereo harmonica is out of sync on stereo because the production was syncing stereo working part (without harmonica overdub) to the entire original mono mix because the harmonica overdub was done in mono. So it's not fault of the player. The mono version is how John actually played it, perfectly in sync.

I don't think that the mono mix is more polished. There's not much they could do with just two tracks. Chains mono features the same noise/speaking voice at 1:28, same with Twist And Shout. It's just less noticable in mono by nature of the format where both intruments/voice are coming out of "one speaker".

IIRC, the 2009 CD stereo remaster of Please Please Me (the song) features the same vocal mistake from John. No correction/editing was done to it.

Ondra

 

No..they were not a very good live band.