G. Harrison's "Only A Northern Song": did the other Beatles really sabotage it (random psych noise)?

I would like to see the list if you do have it.

At the moment I am confused, because Zeki has been pointing out that Ken's comments don't seem to be accurate either. Could Ken have been referring to another draft of the book?

 

Page numbers match up. If you look at the back and forth that you linked to. First there were charges by Ken Scott, then a rebuttal by Emerick, then escalated by Ken Scott. In the "escalated; portion, Scott says it isn't a draft.

I wouldn't look for his 100 list. Based on the Nine Featured, I've already poked holes in 3 of the 9. The others? I don't know as I don't have the documentation to check.

 

Absolutely. Another anecdote: my son is a musician. One EP was recorded almost entirely at home, driving us crazy as we had to listen to overdub over overdub on some backing vocals. One of his songs came on while on "shuffle" and my wife made the comment about the backing vocals, how this had driven us crazy while it was being recorded. Only she was wrong. The song we were listening to had been recorded in a studio in Boston. She just had the songs mixed up.

So! Should I be compiling a list?

 

Why the snarky attitude? I'll definitely look for the list simply to stop the back and forth bickering. There IS a list with over 100 errors, mistakes, errors of omission and falsehoods. Some are minor, some VERY major. I'm also thinking there may have been a revised edition of the book that 'fixed' some of the most glaring errors. As mentioned, Ken and I corresponded for quite some time, ONE of the issues concerned Geoff's book. At no time did he express anger with Geoff personally, but he did hold his co-writer, Howard Massey, responsible for much of the issues at hand. NONE of the errors concerned condoms either and he never mentioned to me that it was a draft version....in fact, I'm quite sure all the "mistakes" had relevant page listings. Did you read the 1979 interview that I mentioned? In that interview Geoff admitted he couldn't recall many session details... yet 25 years later he not only seemed to recall them, he even transcribed word-by-word conversations. It rings hollow. And no one is saying Geoff is a bad guy, but mistakes are mistakes and it's not a crime to point them out on an open forum. Ron

 

I don't know who sabotaged this song and how they did it but it's one of my favorite songs by The Beatles and I like it for what it is. The arrangement is awesome, "random noises" aren't random at all, they make the song more atmospheric and out-of-this-world.

 

Yes, I love it also.

When I bought the Yellow Submarine soundtrack album when it was originally released I couldn't believe that three (IMO) classic tracks got sort of fobbed off onto the soundtrack album.

"Hey Bulldog", " Only A Northern Song" and "It's All Too Much" are all favorites of mine. ( "All Together Now", cute but ...)
They were like my own personal little secret treasures, because Joe Public had no idea about these songs , and maybe still don't.


So it's fun to listen to the original mono " Only a Northern Song" , the version on the Anthology and I really like the stereo version on the Songtrack album.

 

Snarky attitude? I don't know what you're talking about. I happen to have one Beatles book and, by pure coincidence, it is Emerick's. I happened to open it and check on the list of nine, very helpfully page numbered by Ken Scott. So easy to find.
I'm not going to go over it again but...you can see there were things stated by Ken Scott that were misleading or erroneous. Unless you disagree with that summation?

I have no idea where you're going with this crime thought. It might not be a crime (and I haven't come close to suggesting that), but spreading around false, unsubstantiated or petty criticisms isn't too....what's the word? Nice?

 

I could not agree more. Emerick's disdain for George was just embarrassing. Almost as embarrassing as his "Bromance" with Paul.

It was pretty cringeworthy.....

 

Your reply to Ben about not needing to look at the list appears snarky to me. You're basing your posts on nine things Ken mentioned, not the entire list. Then you sugar-coat the major mistakes. Blackbird was NOT recorded outdoors during a summer's eve. NO recording of birds, ANY birds, took place for that session either. In fact, the blackbirds were recorded by EMI engineer, Stuart Etham in 1965 and were in the tape library labeled Volume 7: Birds Of Feather. Don't you think this is a serious mistake? Blackbird was recorded in Studio 2 with effects added from EMI's tape library and not outdoors. Geoff made it sound as if it was a magical summer evening recording outside with birds singing accompaniment. And what's this about finches and sparrows? Eltham says in Lewisohn's book, The Beatles Recording Sessions, published years before Emerick's, that they were blackbirds he taped in his own backyard.

Regarding Norwegian Wood. Geoff wasn't at the session. Obviously HE wasn't the first engineer, classical OR pop at EMI, to record the sitar. Norwegian Wood: George Martin, producer; Norman Smith, engineer; Ken Scott second engineer/tape op.

The 100+ list is pretty eye-opening. Some real doozies and yea, some very minor quibbles too. Considering you don't have any other Beatles books I won't bore you with facts stated in Lewisohn's books (often with accompanying EMI paperwork) than conflict with Emerick's. It would serve you well to check out other sources before placing so much faith in Geoff. Ron

 

For crying out loud, I don't have blind faith in Emerick. And I certainly wasn't snarky to Ben, one of my favorite Forum members.

I have said that I heard there were "issues" with Emerick's book on numerous occasions on this forum. I just accepted that. When it came up this time, as I have now have had to say repeatedly, I happened to open to the page cited. Ken Scott complains of the lack of attention to detail. I have noted where this is applicable to his List.

Emerick says that the Blackbird recording was primarily a sound effects album. I quoted the passage earlier. I didn't think Scott made that clear. (And I don't feel like rehashing the rest of it.)

Hey, I appreciate learning stuff here...from you, from Ben, Arnie and a whole slew of others. My inner Beatle is being unbound...or something. Just shoot me if I start referring to McCartney as Sir Paul or Macca.

 

I hope that we can get to the bottom of this once and for all, but either way, it doesn't mean that Emerick is a bad person, even if the book did contain many errors, it just means that his book is not to be relied upon, at least without other sources being cited as well.

I am sorry if anything that I said caused any arguments, and I hope that we can all peacefully resolve this issue.

 

ridiculous notion! it would have done nobody any good to do so...plus, I can't imagine any of the Beatles being that devious musically.

 

Great raucous track!

Would have made a great b-side to Hey Bulldog.

 

For some reason I can't copy and paste from my digital copy of Geoff's book. He goes WAY further than saying Blackbird mostly contained sound effects from the library. He invents a conversation where Paul asks to records outdoors, AT NIGHT, and Geoff hooks up up a long cable so he can sit on a stool outside, with finches and sparrows singing along to Paul McCartney on a warm summer's eve. It's entirely made up. How do we know? Because the session details were already known years earlier from Mark Lewisohn. Recorded in Studio 2 with George Martin and Emerick, while John was busy in Studio 3 with Chris Thomas compiling sound effects for Revolution 9. It was the "raiding" of the effects library by Thomas that caused them to use the sound effects tape of singing blackbirds for Paul's tune. A mono mix was made this evening. Later when the song was mixed into stereo a different section from that effects tape was used. The entire story about being outdoors was fabricated... simple as that. A casual re-reading of the book last night and I noticed many glaring errors and fabricated stories. That's all I'm saying. Ron

PS Quick example: He fabricates a story involving A Hard Day's Night. Saying George was struggling so much with his solo (he did indeed struggle on his first few attempts) that there was discussion for Paul to play the solo. Just nonsense. At this point Paul had NEVER even played guitar on a Beatles track, never mind a solo. He said back then Paul was a very good guitarist and always eager to upstart his younger band mate... yet he had never played guitar on a single record at this time. Just made up nonsense.

 

You use the terms "invents" and "fabricates a story" as if it was some deliberate, calculated action. I simply don't see it that way. It's a memoir.

Most of what I'm responding to, from Ken Scott's letters to that publication, is Scott's "attention to detail" criticism. (And, as I'm looking at my single, solitary Beatle book at this very moment, p. 239!, Emerick writes that "Paul remarked to me that he wanted the track to sound as if he was singing it outdoors." So Paul doesn't "ask" to sing it outdoors. All I'm suggesting is that even something like that appears to be something that would make Ken Scott's list.

The more I think about it...I can't figure out why a former colleague would publish a list of errors in the first place. I read that back and forth: Ken Scott's letter, then Geoff Emerick's response (including the notation of the various projects, post-Beatles, that's he's worked on with individual Beatles), and then the, to me, relentless attack by Ken Scott. Very strange. That crack that Emerick hadn't worked with anyone but Paul, post-Beatles, seems a really low blow. Nothing to do with the book, but just mean.

Well, I believe in a harmonious forum..so I will put away my well thumbed book and go back to commenting on the merits of Ringo in the RRHOF.

 

Geoff Emerick worked with Elvis Costello on two albums, Imperial Bedroom and All this Useless Beauty, both good albums.

 

Agreed on all points. Scott's alarm and vituperation over what are mostly small, and frequently debatable, factual errors is really strange. I don't get it. Emerick, in his response, comes across as far more reasonable.

 

I love this track and think it's better than the boring and tedious It's All Too Much.

 

I think "It's All Too Much"...

 

I just tried listening to "Within You Without You" but fell asleep before it was over. Thankfully, the next song I had lined up was "Only A Northern Song" and so I woke back up to this rollicking thumping number. ;-)

 

I suspect Zeki is looking at a corrected 2nd edition. Ron, could you possibly verify whether the quote Zeki gives above occurs in the version of the book you have?

The verbiage of the quote, to me, smells of an attempt to save face while making it less egregiously fallacious.

 

I can't speak for Ron, but from memory...my edition of the book has the "Blackbird" story much more like Ron's version than Zeki's version , so I also assume some of the howlers in the first edition were modified for later editions.

 

It wasn't sabotaged by anyone. The problem is in the song writing itself - it's not a good song musically or lyrically - and slightly dirge like. Probably should have stayed unreleased. It was a throw-away to the YS soundtrack.

 

My take on it is : it certainly wasn't purposely sabotaged by anyone, but realizing it was a pretty slight song to begin with John and Paul (and maybe even George) may have felt more free to add the goofy trumpet and sound effects, etc., than if the song had real potential.

John thought "Hey Bulldog" wasn't anything special so I can imagine when he and Paul first heard "Only A Northern Song" from George they sort of shifted in their chairs and said...well...alright then.

I know George Martin said about as much in his making of Sgt. Pepper book. I haven't looked at it in years but my memory is he thought the song was inferior and he was the one to tell George the song wouldn't make the album. Martin was relieved when George brought in "Within You, Without You" because he knew that song had much more potential than "Only A Northern Song."

I love the track as polished up ( or sillied up) by the Fabs, but I can understand that it's not much if a song. But, so what ? "Why Don't We Do it In the Road?" sucks as a song but it's a great fun track. I suppose if George had brought it in, it wouldn't have gotten recorded, or if it had been recorded it would have remained buried until an Anthology release.

 

My trusty copy is published by Gotham Books (Penguin Group). First trade paperback printing, February 2007. Foreword by Elvis Costello.

As stated earlier, page numbers match up with Ken Scott's list.