Perfect for the Beatles and enormously underrated because he never played anything more than what the song required, and came along at a time when the great guitar gods began prowling the earth, and he simply wasn't inclined to engage them in 30-minute wank-o-rama guitar solo cutting contests. Paul McCartney and Geoff Emerick fell in love with Hendrix and dissed George because he wasn't Hendrix, not realizing that the freaking Beatles didn't NEED Hendrix. The end of this is probably the closest George came to showing out on guitar in a live setting:
You are talking about a guy who has memorable parts on classic songs...a guy who had magnificent recorded tone. What has your friend done?
Now I’m starting to understand the Beatle thread hate that is shared among a few around here. My last two have gone horrendously wrong. A little heated debate and snide remarks are fine and fun, but could you atleast read the damned text before having a go at someone? There’s a difference between being passionate and being a fanboy. Many of you are falling on the latter to the point that you’re somehow misreading the original post for being an anti-George thread. This only goes for a few of you but it’s worth saying. Arguments are enjoyable as long as there’s some actual discussion involved, otherwise it’s just pointless bickering.
that didnt happen for awhile. Certainly not in 1964 or 5 and Harrison was already well established by then. However, to your point, when the serious head cutting guitar god stuff started happening, Harrison took no part in that.
I didnt think you were trolling or posting anti-George. to me it sounded like you had a friend who has an unfortunate opinion, and you came here looking for other opinions. thats what I got out of it. and that you need better friends.
Guitar solos can be many things. They can be aggressive or tender. They can be primal or they can be thoughtful. But first and foremost they have to serve the song. George pretty much gave his songs exactly what they required.
I didn't know how to word my post to hone it in to the point, say '66 or so, when people got past the teeny bopper stage and realized "Hey, rock and roll might actually have some roots and stick around for a while" and people actually started getting off on guitar solos. I think that's the point I was talking about.
I wasnt arguing with your post at all, I didnt mean it to come across that way. I disagreed with the possible suggested timeline of when Harrison came on the scene and when the rise of the guitar gods and their 30 minute solos of destruction... Harrison came earlier, nobody was doing that until a few years later. But I do agree that even when that started, arguably 65 or 66 with Hendrix, Cream, et all, maybe lump Beck, Page and the Yardbirds in there... Harrison didnt join in. Not his thing.
I am a guitarist (been playing guitar for more than 30 years), and I came to the conclusion that George may be one of the greatest guitarists ever. If not that, then maybe one of the most versatile guitarists ever recorded (I'm referring to his work in the Beatles only). I started messing with the guitar as a kid because I wanted to learn how to play like Carlos Santana. Then I graduated to the point of wanting to learn how to play like John McLaughlin. All along I used to think that blues, rock and pop guitarists are lower grade, two-bit instrumentalists who are incapable of playing any challenging music. How terribly mistaken I was! Today, I can play like John McLaughlin, but I cannot play like George Harrison, even if my life depended on it. Just trying to play George's intro lick to "Octopuss's Garden" demonstrates to me how guitar chops are not about speed or having exotic and intricate chords and scales under your fingertips. There is way more to guitar chops -- perfect timing, nuances, phrasing, vibrato, textures, etc. George was the master of all those less 'flashy' aspects of guitar playing.
agree to all. I think most people who slam Harrison have never played guitar in a real studio session recording either. Probably never in a real working band... but note I said MOST.
It makes no difference how technically "good" any of the Beatles were with their instruments. They were a record breaking, innovative, artistic, intelligent, savvy, generation influencing musical BAND. You want to see good technical guitar players? Walk in most clubs or go to a wedding. They are a dime a dozen. It means nothing. It's all about the art.
This was none of the Beatles. It was a pre-programmed sample Spanish guitar bit played off the mellotron.
In my opinion, the Beatles continue to offer joy and fascination to listeners because they offer a glimpse of what humanity can achieve by putting aside the selfish ego-driven needs and contributing everything to a common goal for a group (such as a band, or society as a whole). Without the Beatles, Paul McCartney almost certainly would have been a successful performer on his own. John Lennon would almost certainly have become an artist of writer of some sort. And George and Ringo were simply not interested in anything but being in a band. None of them on their own would have achieved anything close to what they achieved as the Beatles. Individually, none of them were perfect, but by being committed to the team, they were able to work to the best of their abilities. And it required being humble, sometimes deferring to a not-so-humble bandmate, in service of the goal. It's one of the reasons LSD tore the group apart as it expanded their horizons, because it re-centered their minds in their own consciousness and took their focus off the group. For all hassle John and George gave Paul for dragging his feet taking LSD, in so many ways, Paul's taking of LSD marked the beginning of the end of the band. He was already confident, and reaching the height of his talent, but LSD gave him the impetus to start following his muse rather than the group's muse, and he was musically proficient enough to do it all himself if he had to. He didn't realize he needed the others until it was too late. By late 1966, John was already struggling, and with Paul effectively absent from his creative life, he sought refuge in Yoko. Anyway, George was a great guitarist, but more than that, he was a group player. When Paul comes up with the Taxman solo, you let Paul do the solo because it's dynamite. But even after the turbulent white album sessions, George came to the Get Back sessions full of enthusiasm for The Band and he hoped the Beatles could 'get back' to that egalitarian dynamic, much like Paul wanted the group to 'get back' to basics. (Only Paul couldn't seem to get off the piano, and then they wouldn't return the favor by giving his songs a chance. No wonder he was so fed up.) But that same glue that George gave to the Beatles surfaced again, many years later, with his only other group, the Traveling Wilburys. I think it's no coincidence that the final studio statements of George's life show that he was able to glue together major stars with big egos and give it a sense of vibrant fun. So was George a flash soloist? No. Was he absolutely central in inspiring millions and millions of people to pick up the guitar and try to make a difference in the world? Absolutely. And there's no better illustration of greatness on your instrument than that.
I have always been curious about the 'Till there was you' solo. I have always suspected someone taught him this, or he picked it up from somewhere else. I'm as much a Beatles fanatic and George Harrison fan as anyone, but nowhere else in his cannon do you see a solo like this, composed so perfectly in a style he never really played in much, with a dexterity you just don't see from him in his other songs. The closest I can think of is the 'All my loving' solo , but that's still rooted in the Chet Atkins/Rockabilly style he grew up on. Anybody have any info or how he crafted this? Would LOVE to be proved wrong
If you want to suggest he cribbed that solo from someone else, the onus should be on you to show who had played that solo first. You are just asserting you don't think he was good enough to have come up with it, based on no evidence, and asking folks to prove its originality. Almost all his solos worked perfectly with the style of the song, they just did few songs in that style (Taste of Honey and And I Love Her came closest).
Somebody a long time ago told me that Harrison nicked it from another guitar player. I dont recall who. Even if he didnt compose it, he played the hell out of that thing on that clip. No easy trick, certainly not by 1964 standards.
Ok, sorry and would agree you on that, it's just a "feeling" I have, but I don't think its based on nothing. I just don't see playing like this anywhere else in his career. Is there another jazzy or bossa nova type outing with this kind of flair in his history of playing? I admit I don't know every solo song of his, so could be missing something.
Who did the Mellotron people sample? Is that a Segovia lick or someone else from a record or just an employee at Mellotron or did they hire a session player like Tommy Tedesco?
I think he was just an average guitar player. His best work in guitar is, like others mentioned, in the final albums -- "Abbey Road" and "Let it Be" in particular IMO.
I read the first 5-10 posts & started to fry like bacon & had to reply. First off the early Beatles were a clubband, jam band & cover band. Harrison was all of about 16 when he started getting paid for recording. All of 18-19 when he played his first solo on a hit record. Harrison didn't like to practice necessarily when he got older, so sometimes was rusty in need of some warm up & rehearsal so what. As a young man Harrison learned guitar, sitar, uke, bailaka, played piano & keyboards, could play drums but usually didin't, sang harmony & lead,, & by 26 had written Something, Here Comes The Sun & While My Guitar Gently Weeps. Different musicians have different skill sets, session players, band players, soloists, whatever it might be. The Beatles are remembered for being a songwriting & recording band with great vocals. They were about good songs & very interesting records. Harrison certainly did that did his part. Try picking up a guitar & teach yourself all those open tunings & stack 4-5 slide guitar parts together like Give Me Love or You're Love Is Forever & get back to me, after you accquire the skill to stack those parts like a little symphony of harmony & doubled tripled slide parts all recorded tight like one fluid guitar part. And his chords, somebody said he was bad at chords ? His naughty chords, just listen to his guitar over Lennon's on Dear Prudence, or his motifs on And I Love Her. He's certainly the most accomplished Beatle on guitar. Sure McCartney then & now is great at ripping one take solos like Taxman or House Of Wax, McCartney is a melodic player, melodic guy. So was Harrison. If you want a power player, go listen to Jimmy Page or Hendrix or Steve Vai or a jazz virtuoso like Al Dimeola, there's no shortage of great players or Eddie Van Halen fans. Harrison did melodic things, gave songs what they needed. McCartney was quicker in the 60s as Geoff Emerick is so fond of telling people. But again, stack 4 slide parts in harmony together with open tunings, sounding like one tight part on tape. No he wasn't a power player. But he was unselfish & thought of things that made it better. He thought Norwegian Wood needed something, so he found the notes & plucked out the line on a cheap department store sitar. Not a guutar-sitar a coral, but a real gazillion stringed sitar that has to be tuned in that pre-tuner digital age. He was all of 22. All of 20 when he plucked out the motif on a gut string for And I Love Her. I'm in awe of all 4 Beatles for their great musical tastes & instincts & talent... Harrison was the Beatles Brian Jones, much like McCartney as an all around musician, Harrison could play anything with strings on it, & if he found an interesting texture where it would enhance the song, he just might. I don't want some guy blowing up my ears, showing me how fast he can riff or play power guitar. I've heard Hendrix & Jimmy Page, give me the guy who's listening & wants to strengthen the record by adding the right color or texture. As purely a session man or power player or soloist, sure many guys had better chops & strengths in certain areas, but he was a great player, the parts he came up with. Sure sometimes he studied the part at home for a few days to come up with the right bit so what. On the other hand he helped cut The Beatles first album in ONE DAY at age 20 ?
The Youtube channel mattiboo does some great breakdowns of the Beatles guitar playing. This video on Please Please Me really shows off that George was often doing a blend of rhythm and lead...and then to think early on they're doing it on these big ol' Gibsons? Mad lads indeed. (special bonus: this video illustrates nicely the jam up at the end of the stereo version of PPM where an overdub seems to have gone wrong; you can hear the out of sync on the ending of the Beatles recording playing in the background)
