Abbey Road 50th contents, outtakes and sound quality thread .. only

Join the club my man!
beave

 

Unless you want to hear the album that is the subject of this thread.

 

Is that Ken?? Well, that certainly answers that question. Always thought it was Chris.

 

Except Lewisohn says specifically that the afternoon session was for George's (second and unreleased) solo demo and group rehearsals. Since this session was only 2.5 hours this scenario seems likely. The evening session was nearly 8 hours, if it was dedicated solely to record Something it would be surprising. Especially with eight of the ten takes being false starts; just two complete backing tracks. I'd love to know (and see) what documentation has been found for Howlett to make these new claims in the Abbey Road book. Ron

 

Not generally the way I prefer to hear it tho. Some of the mono stuff is great but overall it's stereo all the way.

 

Except the sentence makes no sense UNLESS Lewisohn's listing (taken from the studio logs) of the afternoon session lasting only 2.5 hours was in error. The Beatles could not have recorded a solo demo, rehearsed and recorded Old Brown Shoe in its entirety (save the overdubs two days later) in less than 3 hours. And then take nearly eight hours to record but two complete takes of the basic tracks for Something. In other words, Lewisohn's time frame of a 2:30-5:00pm afternoon session was in error, or Howlett made a mistake by saying "following an afternoon spent recording Old Brown Shoe. Ron

 

I certainly don't disagree with you. I just find it fascinating that he would say that's the way The Beatles wanted us to hear their music.

 

Wow....just reading one of the most respected books on The Beatles. Revolution In The Head by Ian Macdonald.
No mention of that. Quite clearly states that Paul played bass.

Never know what to believe when it comes to The Beatles.

 

Wow....just reading one of the most respected books on The Beatles. Revolution In The Head by Ian Macdonald.
No mention of that. Quite clearly states that Paul played bass.

Never know what to believe when it comes to The Beatles.

 

it's a little ironic that 'the long one' actually shows how the official new remix could have made it all sound different whilst not taking away the 'feel' of Abbey Road'.

I fully understand all the reasons for the remix, from marketing, streaming and new generation ears, but 'Abbey Road' has always been about a feel, some kind of valvey, slightly murky, bassy yet sparkling cymbal sound that captured the actual studio itself. I think it shares that sound with 'Dark side Of The Moon', and it's no coincidence they were two of the most successful 'rock' albums of all time.

The new remix sounds digital, clean and somehow loses the power of McCartney's bass playing. It's a shame.

 

Lewisohn is the first to admit that his books had lots of errors. He has recently said that he is now embarrassed by them, and hopes to rectify things somewhat in his new books. While his old info is still handy when there's nothing newer to go on, I don't think we can trust his earlier books as much as we once thought.

 

Why drag Steve Hoffman into this? His opinion is no more valid than your's or mine. "Oh, Steve says it stinks so it can't be any good". It's an opinion based on his own preferences and particular tastes. My mate from next door doesn't like it but that doesn't mean anything either! Dislike the remix if you want but don't use Steve's opinion to justify it.

 

I get that yo, relax, I was jus saying ...

 

I sent Giles two tweets this morning. If he responds I'll post them here. Basically I asked if they had new documentation regarding the Old Brown Shoe/Something session and how they determined who plays what. Was it via newly found detailed production notes or by listening to the entire session tape. Ron

 

Pure guesswork, but the overdubs for OBS may have gone into the evening session.

As for the 'second solo demo' from the afternoon, I don't think the book mentions it. To be honest, I can't see a reason for another demo needing to be recorded. Maybe Paul just practiced his drumming along to George's original demo?

 

And it really paid off!

 

He has admitted to errors, but much of that was due to not actually listening to as many of the session tapes as we were led to believe. To make an error regarding session dates and times would be much less likely since he did have the session notes and official EMI logs at his disposal. Ron

PS Lewisohn lists Phil McDonald as the engineer on the afternoon demo session for Old Brown Shoe and Jeff Jarratt on the evening session. He must have used official EMI logs to notate this. Howlett doesn't mention specifics and there's no official EMI log or session posted to verify what he says.

 

Unless George gave copies of his Birthday Demo session to the others, how would they remember Old Brown Shoe from nearly four months earlier? Makes perfect sense he'd do a second demo. He did the same for While My Guitar Gently Weeps too. The solo demo was done after the band rehearsed the song on 25 July 1968. And of course he did an acoustic demo on the Esher Tapes session too. Maybe it was George's way of showing the others he had a song ready to record. Ron

 

Is it just me that finds the whole ‘who played what on which tracks’ a complete minefield?

e.g. Reading the highly acclaimed Revolution In The Head book by Ian Macdonald, it clearly states that McCartney played bass on Oh Darling. Something we now know is wrong. I was led to believe that this was a definitive book on who played what on all the tracks. I guess the same goes for Beatles Sessions?

So what, if any, are the most factually correct books?

 

Just listened Old Brown Shoe several times. This drums could be played by Paul, that's for sure.

 

Do not trust Revolution In The Head. A lot of it is the author's own opinion.

 

McDonald had no access to the tapes or EMI logs. He guessed on who played what (just like us), or used other sources that preceded his work. Lewisohn had full access to the EMI session logs and his errors were more to do with his editorial comments. I doubt he'd made mistakes on session dates and times. However, he did make errors on who played what by not listening to all the session tapes (time constraints) and guessing, again, like we all have done over the years. Ron

 

To my ears that fill seems just a little sloppy and lacks Ringo's precise "strike". I think the intro fill is the biggest sonic clue that it's Paul and not Ringo, if the notes are really in question.

 

Plenty of mistakes in that book.