If Paul played bass on I'm The Greatest, would it be a Beatles track?*

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by DK Pete, Mar 8, 2018.

  1. DK Pete

    DK Pete Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Levittown. NY
    ...would it be a "Beatles track"? I'm of the very firm belief that they all decided to intentionally keep Paul off the recording of this song to keep the fans salivating; the excuse was used that he couldn't be on it because he wasn't allowed in the country. True though that may be, the tape could have easily been mailed to Paul who could have overdubbed his bass part and sent it back (which is what was basically done with his and Linda's vocals on Six O'clock and his "kazoo" contribution for You're Sixteen). So if this had been done, would this be a Beatle song? Furthermore, would it be any more or less of a Beatle song than Real Love or FAAB?
  2. Avenging Robot

    Avenging Robot Forum Resident

    ...if he did, it would illustrate the meaning of anticlimactic perfectly.
  3. DK Pete

    DK Pete Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Levittown. NY
    That, my friend, is quite an interesting answer..and a whole other discussion thread, truth be told. Great answer.
  4. Elliottmarx

    Elliottmarx Always in the mood for Burt Bacharach

    Los Angeles
    No, I'm the Greatest would not be a Beatles song if Paul had played bass on it. There are several actual Beatles songs that have only one Beatle on it (Blackbird for example.) Then there are dozen others that only have two or three Beatles on them. It isn't only the personnel that makes a Beatles song - it is also the purpose, spirit and intention of the song. Sending a tape to another country just to get a particular performance (The Inner Light withstanding) is not something that I imagine the Beatles would have done. With that said, I would love for Paul to have recorded the song - but more than that I would prefer it if John, George and Ringo had deigned to perform on one of Paul's compositions; not that the song would necessarily be better, but because it would have been a more vivid white flag.
    anthontherun, delmonaco, Rojo and 4 others like this.
  5. andrewskyDE

    andrewskyDE Island Owner

    Zack Island
    It would be a Ringo solo song with all the other three Fabs collaborating.
    Brian Kelly, supermd, AidanB and 12 others like this.
  6. Chemguy

    Chemguy Forum Resident

    With the amount of non-collaboration on the last few Beatles albums, I’d say it already qualifies!
  7. dirtymac

    dirtymac Forum Resident

    Exile, MN
    No, but moreseo than "Free As A Bird" and "Real Love" which, for some reason, a lot of people think are Beatles songs even though the band had been broken up for 25 years and Lennon was dead.
    groundharp likes this.
  8. SixOClockBoos

    SixOClockBoos The Man On The Flaming Pie

    It would be a Ringo Starr song because it was released under Ringo's name. Yeah there are songs without the full personnel of Beatles like "She Said, She Said", but it was released under the Beatles moniker and hence, it's a Beatles song. "Yesterday" has just Paul on it, but it wasn't a Paul McCartney solo track, it was a Beatles song under the Beatles name, so "I'm The Greatest" would be a Ringo Starr song since if Paul did send in basswork tapes for the song, it still be released as a Ringo song.

    daveidmarx, wavethatflag and Seltarb like this.
  9. the pope ondine

    the pope ondine Forum Resident

  10. BDC

    BDC Forum Resident

  11. Baq

    Baq Forum Resident

    They became Beatles songs.
    Rockinrob and nasa09 like this.
  12. the pope ondine

    the pope ondine Forum Resident

    groundharp, docwebb and dirtymac like this.
  13. O Don Piano

    O Don Piano Forum Resident

    You don't Beatles threads, stay out of 'em!
    AidanB, Zeki, nasa09 and 2 others like this.
  14. Dr. Mudd

    Dr. Mudd Forum Resident

    No, it wouldn’t.
  15. MaccaBeatles

    MaccaBeatles Forum Resident

    The difference between something like the Free As A Bird / Real Love singles and I'm The Greatest is that the latter track was intended to be a released as a solo Ringo track regardless of who was playing on it. Plus it's kind of unfair to say The two 90s tracks can't be viewed as proper Beatles songs. The chance to know what kind of music a reunited Beatles would have created was taken away from us in December 1980. :shake:
  16. ohnothimagen

    ohnothimagen I don't suffer fools or trolls gladly...

    I think a better question would be, why didn't Ringo have Paul re-do Klaus Voormann's original bass part when he went to England to work on "Six O'Clock" with Paul?
  17. AFOS

    AFOS Forum Resident

    Yeah if Paul played bass it would be a quasi Beatles song. No matter who it's credited to - a rose by any other name... It could have been released as a Beatles single with Ringo on vocals.
    Chemguy likes this.
  18. Paul Gase

    Paul Gase Everything is cheaper than it looks.

    Maybe because that would be a totally douche-y move? Klaus plays fine, and had already been a regular contributor to Ringo's music. And a life long friend.
  19. Hillel abramov

    Hillel abramov Forum resident

    Tel Aviv
    It would be a Beatles song, yes!
    As mentioned above many "proper " Beatles songs had only 1, 2, or 3 Beatles participating. That fact that the official artist is Ringo doesn't mean that I'm not "allowed" to think or enjoy it as a band creation. BTW I still regarsd it as a Beatles title being it as it is. The same goes, of course to Real love and Free as a bird.
  20. ohnothimagen

    ohnothimagen I don't suffer fools or trolls gladly...

    Something tells me that if Ringo had Paul redo Klaus's bass part, Voormann wouldn't have had a problem with it, especially if Ringo said something like, "I want all the boys playing on this one." Now, if Paul had just gone and redone the bass without Ringo or Klaus' blessing, that definitely would have been a douchey thing to do.
  21. john lennonist

    john lennonist There ONCE was a NOTE, PURE and EASY...

    I actually just read something about this the other day (can't recall where).

    Paul was at first very resistant to submitting a song for the album.

    But Ringo persisted and finally, after the songs with John and George had been recorded, Ringo mentioned that and Paul relented.

    Paul was not exactly in the good graces of any of the other three at this point -- note the lyrics in Ringo's "Early 1970" (and I remember hearing at the time that Ringo's "Back Off Boogaloo" was a shot at Paul).

  22. rod sphere

    rod sphere Forum Resident

    San Jose, CA, USA
    actually, by '73, they were talking more and things weren't as bad as '72 and '71 and '70..
  23. intv7

    intv7 Forum Resident

    Boston, MA, USA
    Yeah, it's so weird that people would think that, for some reason.

  24. Rne

    Rne Sufferin' succotash!

    Everything after Paul's death is not by The Beatles, people, wake up! :D
    john lennonist likes this.
  25. Haristar

    Haristar Apollo C. Vermouth

    Southampton, UK
    It would be a Beatles song if it was called the Beatles.

    Of course the argument goes "well if songs where one Beatle is playing on it is called the Beatles, how come *insert solo song with two or more Beatles* isn't a Beatles song".

    If it's not called the Beatles it's not the Beatles.

Share This Page