Do you regard "Real Love" and "Free as a Bird" as real Beatles songs?

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Psychsound, Mar 12, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sherrill50

    sherrill50 Well-adapted Melomaniac

    Location:
    Mukilteo, WA
    Real Beatles songs? Maybe. Canonical? No.
     
    Zeki likes this.
  2. brainwashed

    brainwashed Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Boston, MA
    If John was alive, why on earth would they want to record two old demos of his? The answer is, they wouldn't. And in 1980, a Beatles reunion was NOT the last thing on his mind. In fact, John entertained the the idea many times. He was also planning a tour in the early 1981 that would have included some famous Beatles hits and one can only guess what would have happened. He also mentioned, specifically, about getting together with the others to finish off Neil Aspinall's, The Long And Winding Road film (later morphed into Anthology). And don't forget, Paul's 1979 contract with Columbia allowed him to record with "The Beatles" and any product would be released by Capitol.

    Both songs are "real" Beatles songs. Vocals and piano by John Lennon; vocals, bass, piano, acoustic guitar, percussion by Paul McCartney; vocals, lead guitar, acoustic guitar, ukelele and percussion by George Harrison; and backing vocals, drums, percussion by Ringo Starr.
     
  3. bob60

    bob60 Forum Resident

    Location:
    London UK
    You are absolutely right I would say.
    If these two songs had reached no 1 in the charts and were/had been hugely acclaimed as fantastic singles, no fan would be questioning if they were real Beatles songs.
    I know that the release of these singles was of course a huge event to fans of the band, but to music fans in general the whole thing was a bit of a damp squib and soon forgotten.
    I would bet that privately everyone involved wished they had never done it and just let things be, but that is just speculation on my part.
     
  4. AFOS

    AFOS Forum Resident

    Location:
    Brisbane,Australia
    Well said - fine additions to the greatest catalog in pop music. The videos and songs were remixed for 1+. They are Beatles and canon.
     
    Lewisboogie likes this.
  5. HfxBob

    HfxBob Forum Resident

    The fact that all 4 Beatles appear on the song is hardly the clinching argument you're making it to be. Thanks to technology anyone with some expertise can create just about anything they want out of archival material.
     
  6. brainwashed

    brainwashed Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Boston, MA
    But that IS my point. It wasn't just anyone creating something from archival material. It was the surviving members of the The Beatles doing so, with not only full support from John's widow, but she providing the tapes for them to use. Like it or not, Yoko is John's executor and she does, literally, speak for him now, as she in 1994. The project worked because it involved all four group members. If Ringo and Paul were to do this again, I'd be VERY reluctant to call it a "Beatles" record. And yes, I well know that all four weren't on every recording, but to release an augmented demo without ANY appearance from George would cause great pause for me. Not because the recording itself would be adversely affected by his absence, but I would have great difficulty calling it a "Beatles" record under that circumstance. My guess is that Olivia and Dhani would think similarly and any such release would not have their blessing. Meaning, they would veto the release unless it was called "John Lennon with Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr", or some such attribute. Ron
     
    Lewisboogie and marklamb like this.
  7. brainwashed

    brainwashed Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Taking my above post another step or two. If Now & Then is ever finished by Paul and includes guitar work and vocals from George, I'd be perfectly fine calling it a"Beatles" record. I would NOT be in favor of "flying in" an unrelated Harrison guitar part on some future augmented demo though. That's taking things a bit too far, IMO. Ron
     
    marklamb likes this.
  8. major_works

    major_works This is my Custom Title

    Location:
    Ramsey, NJ, USA
    When the Anthology happened and these tracks came out, I recall feeling ambivalence. I wasn't crazy about either song, for one thing. They're just OK songs and not lost jewels. I didn't think of them as "real" Beatles tracks then but more as gimmicks. It was great that P, G, and R had worked together but I didn't see it as a "reunion." I've never developed any kind of attachment to them; they carry no emotional resonance for me. Someone used the word "necrophilia" upthread and, yeah, there's a little of that in it, sadly. I know they were going for "reunion" but I think I'd have been more excited if Paul and George had written new stuff.

    All of that said, I guess they're addendum to the catalog but certainly not "canonical."
     
    limoges and Rojo like this.
  9. Rojo

    Rojo Forum Resident

    I think the two songs are technically "Beatles" records, I have no problem with that.

    But the fact that the project was sanctioned by Yoko Ono does not add any legitimacy to it. She was not part of the Beatles even if she is legally entitled to be Lennon's executioner. Her support, of course, was legally crucial. But otherwise her opinion does not add or detract any legitimacy if we think of the Beatles as a band and not a corporation.
     
    delmonaco likes this.
  10. vonwegen

    vonwegen Forum Resident

    Exactly, and it's one of the last chances to hear how great George's guitar playing was. Those licks--gorgeous!
     
  11. originalsnuffy

    originalsnuffy Socially distant and unstuck in time

    Location:
    Tralfalmadore
    They have that 1967 period Beatles feel; albeit with an ELO vibe. If they aren't Canon they are good fakes and that is good enough for me.
     
    Lewisboogie likes this.
  12. Bern

    Bern JC4Me

    Location:
    Allegan, Michigan
    I always looked at both of these singles as a missed opportunity. If indeed something was nixed from the main Anthology sets due to length (...24 minute Helter Skelter, Carnival of Light..etc.), this would have been a perfect opportunity to get it out there. Instead 22 years later they sit with no one hearing them.

    Bern
     
    Chuckee likes this.
  13. MikeVielhaber

    MikeVielhaber Forum Resident

    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    Executioner? Yikes.
     
    Willowman likes this.
  14. hayden10538

    hayden10538 Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Essex, England
    :biglaugh:
     
  15. DCW

    DCW been a-boogeyin' since I ditched the stroller.

    Yes.
     
  16. OnTheRoad

    OnTheRoad Not of this world

    Only real Beatle music is this.....

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Lewisboogie and jammincrowe like this.
  17. johnny moondog 909

    johnny moondog 909 Beatles-Lennon & Classic rock fan

    George Harrison "almost" certainly appears on the 3rd reunion song. It & the other 2 are Beatles tracks. Some may not like it, but it's hardly even debatable. Thanks Ron for going through the facts of the situation. Yoko gave her blessing to at least those 4 songs. His widow, & the 3 surviving Beatles who worked on it. & Geoff Emerick.

    That story about Geo Martin's hearing is bogus. Harrison shut him out, in his mid 60s at the time, Martin could have certainly at least scored one of them. Jeff Lynne may have been better than Martin at that point, trying to record to that old demo. His production on Grow old with me, a couple years later is awful. He didn't clean, edit, sympathetically overdub GOWM, like the Beatles & Lynne did the others. But he still could have scored one of the 3-4 songs, especially with the band.

    I'm not saying Martin's hearing wasn't damaged by 1995, but he could have still worked with them, maybe not mix, but certainly he could write a good Beatles score
     
  18. HfxBob

    HfxBob Forum Resident

    Sure it's debatable, because of the unique circumstances under which these tracks were recorded, and because many of us have different perspectives and different judgment criteria. This thread makes one thing obvious - there is a clear split in opinion.
     
    johnny moondog 909 likes this.
  19. Rojo

    Rojo Forum Resident

    Freudian slip I guess. Executor maybe?
     
  20. Culpa

    Culpa Forum Resident

    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    If "The Beatles" say they're "real Beatles songs", then of course they are.

    And I hear "The Who" will be playing in Las Vegas. :)
     
    Lewisboogie likes this.
  21. johnny moondog 909

    johnny moondog 909 Beatles-Lennon & Classic rock fan


    No it's not. I own copies of both songs, it says The Beatles in real big lettering right on the front. I've listened to both songs numerous times, Paul's playing bass, Ringo's drumming, George is paying guitar & ukelele, & singing stacks of background vocals with Paul. Lennon is singing lead !!

    It sounds just like them ! It is them, they even had Geoff Emerick engineering. By any definition it is them. They said so, & here's the big one. They are the Beatles.

    I understand the opposing views, circumstances etc. But the fact is, regardless of people dissenting in their own minds. It is in fact the Beatles.

    There are other questions people can debate, is it any good, were they poor choices for singles. Should they have done at least 1 new song not encumbered by a 4th generation mono cassette that was 20 years old. Or a million other things. But there's no debate about whether it's the Beatles. There's film of them recording them.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2017
    bob60 and Lewisboogie like this.
  22. jammincrowe

    jammincrowe Forum Resident

    Location:
    Leicester, MA, USA
    need to pull my copy out : )
     
  23. MarkTheShark

    MarkTheShark Senior Member

    True enough, but how many times did John say over the years that everyone must understand that John and Yoko are "Johnandyoko," one person.

    Yet, in interviews, he spoke of the song "Woman" from Double Fantasy as "the Beatle track," because it reminded him of the kind of songs he wrote for the Beatles. Prior to 1980, who ever would have expected Lennon to book a band of A-list New York session musicians and record such a deliberately commercial album? And who knows what he would have done next?
     
    BDC and Lewisboogie like this.
  24. readr

    readr Forum Resident

    Didn't we just do this one?

    I said, last time, that it says "The Beatles" on the single, so it's a Beatles song.....doesn't matter what I think.....the remaining Beatles called it a Beatles song, so, case closed.
     
    MarkTheShark and Lewisboogie like this.
  25. HfxBob

    HfxBob Forum Resident

    I guarantee there's no film of John singing with the other Beatles on those songs.

    Of course the surviving Beatles wanted us to think of these as new Beatles songs. Calling these new Beatles songs was a big selling point for Anthology. I don't have any problem with them doing it. But I'm allowed to make up my own mind whether these qualify as authentic Beatles songs or not.
     
    BeatleJay and Tristero like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine