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

Well, for just one position, Free As A Bird doesn't appear on the 1 album, if this happen, do you think that know this track would be a Beatles track?

 

Bizarrely, yes

 

What is all this 'we'? I certainly don't hold The Beatles to any higher standard than any other band and this reunion was a very different affair to most 'reunions'. This work while obviously much later is The Beatles.

 

Which will be in another couple of weeks probably...

 

"Yesterday" has just one member.

 

No more than I Am The Greatest

 

This is the Hoffman forum. We do everything "umpteen" times.

 

Interesting curiosities, nice marketing gimmick, but certainly not Beatles.

 

And producer George Martin. The other thing at the time was Paul was still just a Beatle and not a solo artist. Ironically, they could have released it as a Paul single but everyone would have said it sounded like a Beatles track.

 

A fair few Beatles songs were 'written' before Ringo joined but they are still Beatles records. A lot of posthumous records have been released where the artist had no editorial control (Jimi Hendrix, Elvis Presley, Buddy Holly and even as mentioned previously George Harrison) so I think it is probably the lesser of two evils. Yes, John would have done them differently but I think what Paul said at the time is pretty close to what John would have agreed with: "Let's just pretend John has slipped out for a while and asked us to finish the song." There are quite a few instances of that happening within the Beatles catalogue. They let George Martin add music and edit/mix tracks and were not always all present on all recordings. We could also say is the original Let It Be album a Beatles record since some of Paul's songs were added to by Phil Spector without Paul's OK. I know he has moaned about this and even had a go at amending history, but even he would not delete the original as it is what everyone grew up with. We all looked forward to the Anthology and new singles and it is now part of the band's history. We may have differing opinions about the tracks but they stand within the the band's discography and always will going forward. No-one tried to hide the method by which they were produced.

I think they are fine and were perhaps the best way to pay tribute to a missing member of the band when compiling the Anthology.

 

I accept that they were released under the Beatles name but do not view them as genuine Beatles tracks. They were Lennon demos--not particularly good sounding demos either, though I like the underlying songs well enough--posthumously embellished by the others. As others have noted, he did not write them with the band in mind and had no input over their final arrangements as he normally would have. The makeshift method of their construction doesn't sound natural to me. I don't blame them for having a go at it, but I don't view them as part of "the official canon".

 

No.

 

Yes, these two songs are by the Beatles.

 

NO! I regard them as Traveling Wilburys songs. Jeff Lynn's production is horrible. That ****ing snare sound!! Just awful. Why was he chosen to produce? He wrecked so many records around that time--Tom Petty, Roy Orbison

 

Yes I consider it the Beatles.

 

Agreed, A dreadful snare sound

 

I seem to recall George H insisted on it.

 

How did he get that sound? It's like a terrible drum machine

 

I guess so but I always forget about them...after all these years I'm still amazed how terrible they are and how they couldn't of done any better. Surely there were better unfinished songs of John's to work on?

 

I dunno, I'm sure someone here will have an answer

 

I don't know but it goes all the way back to his ELO days.

 

I wish FAAB had been a hidden track at the end of Anthology 3. That's where it belongs. And I wish it hadn't been hyped to the nines, and I wish they'd just said "Well, we did this, and it's no big deal, but it turned out quite nice, and we thought you'd like to hear it." Because its reception, and its place in the Beatles' canon, would be quite different.

....but wishing all that for The First New Beatles Song In 25 Years!!! isn't realistic, really......

Don't know where that would leave Real Love. Not a better track, but IMHO a better single......

 

Is "Unforgettable" by Natalie Cole a real Nat King Cole song?

 

I agree, but as I said up thread - I'm glad they did them, they represent closure

 

I think I know I mean a 'Yes' but it's all wrong, that is I think I disagree.

That is, no, no more than I consider Natalie Cole's "Unforgettable" a duet with her dad.

However, they were a nice treat anyway, and as close as we could have gotten to a true reunion. And to be honest, I don't know if I would have considered them "real Beatles songs" even if Lennon were alive and recorded it with them in '94-95, 25 years after the breakup. It's the old saying, "you can't go home again." The Beatles were as much about the time and place as it was about those 4 individuals. As much as we would have liked it to go on forever, I think it ended when it should have (more or less). In the end, they were struggling to keep it together artificially. I'm glad we don't have a whole number of decades' worth of Beatles recordings that overstayed their welcome to the point of irrelevance.