"John is in fact the leader of the group" - Paul McCartney, 10/28/62

Don't forget his great guitar solo on Taxman. He always does more for Harrison & Lennon's songs then they do for his. Not that they wouldn't have been great without him, but he definitely takes them to another level.

 

No question, June 14 1965 was a red letter date in The Beatles' recording history. Not sure if you can actually pinpoint Paul's ascension to that specific date but he certainly earned his keep that day. Lennon still reigned on Rubber Soul but I think it's pretty safe to say Revolver was the start of McCartney's supremacy- certainly his Revolver material is considered by many to be the high point of his career.

Exactly. It was Paul's arrangement that made "Tomorrow Never Knows" as great as it was. And, as I mentioned above, there's no way that Lennon was still "top dog" on Revolver; "And Your Bird Can Sing" and "Doctor Robert" in particular are about as Lennon-by-the-numbers as you can get. Compared to "Eleanor Rigby" and "For No One", not even "I'm Only Sleeping" and "Tomorrow Never Knows" (or "Rain", for that matter) come close IMO.

 

A measuring stick that prefers rock 'n' roll over baroque pop, I would imagine. I like both genres, but overall rock 'n' roll is the music that connects with me far more, and that's why I prefer Lennon's work on Revolver in general and Doctor Robert over For No One in particular. I don't think there's anything close to a consensus that McCartney's songs on the album are "way superior" to Lennon's... and most definitely not among Lennon fans. I find McCartney's genre experimentation a nice change of pace, but only one of his songs on the album is actual rock music.

 

I think Here Comes The Suns popularity can be underestimated if you cant see the forest for The Beatles minituae. My impression is that it's among The Beatles most recognised songs world wide, most likely cos it has a universal subject matter and has an instantly accessible and appealing tune.
Before I heard Abbey Road it was the only song I was familiar with, and I was surprised to learn 'Something' was supposed to be George's standout track on the album as I'd never heard it before. The idea that it's recognisability to the general public is comparable to obtuse psychedelic obscurities like George's two Yellow Sub songs is really misinformed.

 

Hardly.
Exhibit 1a and 1b. And I Love Her.
1a OK-ish Beat group tune, 1b Excellent mood piece thanks to George's guitar lick and John's middle eight.
All four of them worked hard on every track they did together, that's why they're so great.
Paul always put a lot into recording, he wanted The Beatles to sound great.

 

There are only two genuinely game changing tracks on Revolver, Eleanor Rigby and Tomorrow Never Knows. All the others are part of The Beatles evolving approach and could have been predicted by style if not execution but those two came from nowhere, it seemed. There really had been nothing like them in popular music of the Rock era.

 

Not really, George didn't write anything worth recording for a long time. You Like Me Too Much is a bit of an embarrassment. Even at the time of the White Album he only had six songs available, four of which they did., another of which was a flop for Jackie Lomax.

 

4 are on the WA, Lomax one was Sour Milk Sea, there also was Circles, didn't George also have that Dehra Dun song? And they did record Not Guilty. And it's said that he had Art of Dying and Isn't it a Pity way back as 1966. Seems that he had more than just six songs. The question of their readiness and quality (at that time) is a different subject however.

 

Yes he had other songs including Beautiful Girl which dated back to October 1965 but only six were ready to record in 1968.

 

The Capitol version of Revolver only has TWO songs with Lennon on lead vocals. Harrison had THREE How crazy is THAT?

 

Capitol Crazy!

 

To be honest, I was actually a bit surprised when I first read those comments by Norman Smith some time ago, as I always assumed that McCartney's "producer/arranger" side started to emerge more visibly during the Revolver/Sgt. Pepper's era. Maybe this was evident since early years, when Norman Smith was still on board. Like you say, it's just our thoughts on somebody else's recollections.

 

Just one data point -- I heard NRBQ cover You Like Me Too Much last time we saw them and I was quite the opposite of embarrassed.

Fred

 

Exactly so. It's not like I'm calling Norm a liar for his remarks, I'm more surprised by them than anything else. Yes, he was at almost every session from 962 straight through 1965, but his recollections decades later aren't corroborated by anyone else who was there. You'd think George Martin would have echoed similar thoughts over the years, he never did. And he wasn't shy on praising Paul either, just never mentioned a more prominent role in the studio.

The other principle engineers, Geoff Emerick and Ken Scott were both second engineers (Tape ops) during those Norm Smith years and neither of them mentioned that Paul acted as a second producer on the floor, or was the major musical force within the band. More importantly, his fellow Beatles never made the assertions either. Now, things did change after Brian died, no question about that. You can hear it in Paul's voice in the Let It Be "chat" with a bored Lennon. He was trying to rally the troops. Anything to keep the band going. But prior to Norm leaving his position? I just don't believe it. And again, my thoughts have nothing to do with favoring one member over the other. I find NO other circumstance that corroborates Norm's recollection. There's nothing in the old Beatles Monthly magazines that even implies a bit that Paul was the musical force within the group. And they were at countless sessions over the years. Maybe Lewisohn's next volume will expound on all of this. However, I won't be surprised if it's barely mentioned either.

One final thought. Look through Lewisohn's Recording Sessions book. Almost every album and single session started with a "John" song. It's uncanny. Here's a quick look at the first song(s) worked on during their album sessions:

Please Please Me: There's A Place.
With The Beatles: Covers were recorded first, led by You Really Got A Hold On Me and Money, first original song, It Won't Be Long.
A Hard Day's Night: Can't Buy Me Love.
Beatles For Sale: Baby's In Black, I'm A Loser, Leave My Kitten Alone.
Help: Ticket To Ride.
Rubber Soul: Run For Your Life (Surprising huh? John later said the song was a last-second throwaway recorded under pressure to finish the album).
Revolver: Tomorrow Never Knows (Another surprise considering the experimental and adventurous nature of the song).
Sgt. Pepper: A bit murky since the first song recorded for the project, Strawberry Fields Forever, ended up as a single. SO we have SFF, When I'm Sixty-Four and Penny Lane recorded first. A Day In The Life was the first song recorded after those three. So Pepper is a bit different.
The White Album: Revolution #1
Abbey Road: Another odd one. First song worked on that ended up on the album, albeit in altered form, was I Want You (without the She's So Heavy refrain). John was in hospital when proper sessions began in July, so Paul, George and Ringo recorded Maxwell's Silver Hammer, Here Comes, The Sun and Golden Slumbers/Carry That Weight in his absence. Scattered sessions were held throughout April and May that predated the sessions, these songs include additional work on I Want You, Something, Octopus's Garden, Oh Darling, You Never Give Me Your Money and adding vocals to You Know My Name. Phew!
Let It Be: Again, a different animal than any other LP. First proper song recorded to multitrack was Dig A Pony on 22 January 1969.

 

Really Nik? I find You Like To Me Too Much at least on par with Another Girl or Tell Me What You See. In fact, I like it a bit more than either. And YLMTM is a far sight better than If You've Got Trouble and That Means A Lot. George didn't develop his songwriting early on, that's fairly obvious. Just one original on the first four albums. However, his two songs on Help are both good. I Need You is the better song and is actually an album and film highlight. You Like Too Much is a good, though hardly great, album track. On par, if not a notch better than, Tell Me What You See and It's Only Love from the same album. Things got even better on the next few albums. So yes, a slow start, but quality tunes, equal to anything John and Paul were writing was just around the corner. Having three songs on Revolver sort of started his backlog of material. Imagine if The Art Of Dying or Isn't It A Pity were recorded too? Wow!

Having six songs ready to go for the White Album was actually quite the bounty for George He also had another five or six songs that needed work, including See Yourself, Beautiful Girl, Circles and a few others, that could have been part of the equation. Here's a question. On another thread I posted George's demo of Isn't It A Pity recorded near the end of the Get Back sessions (25/26 January 1969). The demo is complete and wonderful. I wonder why they didn't add this to the acoustic songs recorded after the rooftop concert? It was a relatively straight-forward song. No "hard chords" for dear ol' John to learn . It's just such a quality song. Instead, George tried to resurrect Let It Down, attempted at the earlier Twickenham sessions. Do you think at this stage he was already keeping his best songs for solo release? Ah, what could have been. Ron

 

True. But I don't know, more often then not, especially in the later days, they just didn't seem to care that much. This could be a result of both John & George's declining interest in the band. I'm not saying they didn't do anything or that Paul's songs didn't need them, just that it feels & sounds like to me that he was more enthusiastic about helping out on another track that he didn't write. Could just be that he was a bit of a control freak when it came to the group & wanted to make sure he did everything in his power to make them sound great, I don't know.

 

Why would you expect George Martin to undercut his own role by saying what Norm said? And anyway, Norm was the one watching both Martin and McCartney and was in a position to make this sort of observation of how everyone worked together. Martin wasn't watching himself. Als0, why would you expect the other Beatles to praise Paul? They never went out of their way to pat each other on the back, and surely weren't going to boost Paul's ego.

Seems to me you are taking Norm's remarks far too literally. It's his impression after working with the band for six albums on every single track. Doesn't mean it was always the case. Doesn't mean the others never proposed great ideas. And it doesn't mean Paul was literally the second producer (in fact, Norm's quote was: "because Paul McCartney was around and could have done them equally well" -- note: "could have," not that he actually did. Just that the Beatles benefited in the booth and in the studio from having 2 people with strong ideas about production.) Norm was simply describing how things tended to work. And from his bird's-eye view, McCartney was the main musical force.

 

I don't mind this barroom, back and forth chat, but I think we've both had our say. I don't think other folks need to read our differing opinions every day. You take Norm's observations as fact, I don't. And yea, I would expect that after the break John or George would have had NO problem saying Paul was the major musical force in the group. Neither did. I just don't think this to be true. Did Norm feel or sense something that others didn't? Apparently so, but again, that's just his opinion, not fact. And like I said, others who were there don't seem to share this opinion. Not even Geoff Emerick who LOVES praising all things Paul. Ron

 

I take Norm's observation as a pretty sharp observation, based on his years of experience. But yes, I'm done with this back and forth. Norm Smith is not just some casual observer of those early years whose view can be so easily dismissed. He was a KEY figure. His remarks simply add depth to the picture we already have of Paul's leadership role in the studio, which started early on and grew stronger. And it also fits with this image people have of Paul being "controlling" in the studio.

John took the lead outside the studio and Paul took the lead inside the studio. I don't think that was planned. It's just how it worked out, based on their musical talents, tendencies, personalities, and band dynamics.

 

I haven't read Emerick's book(s), but I thought he did say something along those lines?

 

I found 2 quotes from Emerick about this but they seem to be from interviews (not quotes from his book, which I haven't read in several years).

That's just from a quickie Google search. But those remarks sound very similar to what Norm Smith said about Paul being the "main musical force." And again, neither Smith nor Emerick was saying this was the case every single time. And neither man was saying "Paul was the Beatles." Because that wouldn't have been true. They were simply describing the role he tended to played in the studio.

 

Not that Paul could have supplanted George Martin as producer or was THE major musical force in the group. Certainly not in the 1962-1965 era. Things obviously changed in later 1967 on through. Ron

PS I could be wrong, but I'm thinking Geoff was referring to their later era. Saying he was a good musician is obvious, but this wasn't so obvious in the early years. He only played piano sparingly pre-1966. He drummed on ONE demo. He didn't even play guitar on a Beatles session until February 1965. And that day, not only did he play guitar, he played lead on the first two tracks recorded for the Help project. So yes, Paul was a great musician, he could play more instruments well than the others, but in the specific time period of 1962-1965 this wasn't obvious at all. If it was, Paul would have played more piano, or added more guitar.

 

He probably confused it with "Wait" maybe?

 

Unlikely as he went into detail about the opening line and nicking it from Baby Let's Play House.

 

It struck me that indeed some landmark recordings have been made with a song of Lennon after a longer break: april the 6th 1966 they started working on 'Mark 1" (an early draft-title of TNN) after quiet few months and Strawberry Fields Forever some two months after their last live concerts.