Jimmy Nugent
Stunt Coordinator
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2000
- Messages
- 219
Wait... I've had an epiphany- Limp Bizkit is bigger than the Beatles. BRING ON THE SUPERMODELS!!!!
Rubber Soul through Abbey Road, excluding the White Album, comprise the prime Beatles output...
Well, I certainly can't agree about excluding the white album.
Certainly, as we all know, the Beatles didn't work together as much of a unit on that album, but they still managed to make some incredibly innovative music.
The white album is absolutely essential listening if you are into the Beatles' later music.
The innovating for the Beatles came much later in their career, and with the assistance of various psychedelics into their lives. Unfortunately at this point, they were followers
So what were they? Innovators or followers? You can't be both right?
The Beatles essentially invented the "Flanger", an effect that exploded onto the Rock scene and is still in heavy use today.
They also pioneered "direct injection" of the bass into the mixing board rather than attempting to use a mic to capture the bass frequencies. They were the first to use it, and today you be hard pressed to find one band out of 50 that doesn't use "direct inject" when recording a bass.
The Beatles also pioneered the concept of "close-miking", a recording technique that is probably more popular today than it has even been. Geoff Emerick along with the band were the first to utilize this concept and bring it to the masses, even going so far as to close-mike the Orchestra that was brought in for "A Day In The Life", something that had never been done before.
The Beatles also pioneered the use of guitar distortion on a pop/rock record. Ken Townsend, one of the engineers at Abbey Road worked with John Lennon to create one of the first distortion devices ever used in popular music.
Today, if any guitarist wants to distort his sound, he can walk into a music store and buy one of a thousand distortion pedals. Back in the 60's, "fuzz boxes" were not so common or readily available. On a number of occasions (such as the "Think for Yourself" session of November 8th, 1965), Townsend had been called upon to build a distortion device from scratch. For the recording of "Revolution," however, the Beatles tried something different--a trick that few studio owners would ever allow, then or now.
"John wanted that sound," recalls Phil McDonald, the tape operator for the session. "A really distorted sound. The guitars were put through the recording console, which was technically not the thing to do. It completely overloaded the channel and produced the fuzz sound. Fortunately the technical people didn't find out. They didn't approve of 'abuse of equipment.' "
The Beatles also pioneered -- along with George Martin -- the use of time coding tapes. In this way any number of multitrack recorders can by linked together and any number of tracks can be utilized at the discretion of the producer. Back in the '60s, the synchronization of tape machines was far from reality. Nonetheless, the Beatles and George Martin managed to make inroads into unexplored territory.
The ability to pitch-shift two different recordings to make a final master is trivial with today's digital effects processors, but then it was unheard of. Yet, that's exactly what The Beatles and George Martin did with the 2 very different takes of "Strawberry Fields Forever" that were pitch-shifted and spliced to create the final master.
The Beatles, along with George Martin, were in the unique and enviable position of being able to get whatever they wanted in the studio. Many of these innovations, which were jury-rigged on the spur of the moment by geniuses like Townsend, Emrick, and The Beatles, have become standard gear in almost all recording studios throughout the world. No other recording artists have ever had this kind of influence and impact upon the entertainment industry. We would do well to remember this the next time we casually put on Revolver or Sgt. Pepper or the "White Album" for a spin.
Once again Mike, you are so far off the mark it's laughable.
I've already mentioned in the mega-Beatle thread a book you can pick up...if you want to.
Gee Thanks Mike...I don't where I'd be without you. Oh look! there it is on my bookshelf with 80 others! and Look! there's over 200 hours of studio and unreleased work! WOW! Guess I'd better get cracking eh? :rolleyes
I appreciate the personal nature of Music and musical choices that people have...
Now that's funny!
That's okay, however, because I am going to my grave saying that I prefer their output from (1962-1966) more than any other.
Jeff, perhaps you and I should start our own little club! I certainly like the 1967-70 material, but as I implied earlier, I'm fonder of the first few years output. There's a greater fire and hunger to the earlier work; it's tighter and less bogged down with indulgence. Experimentation and innovation don't automatically make something GOOD. Of course, despite the claims of SOME - especially one who makes me SNORE - their early work was quite fresh and forward-looking as well. I never have understood why so many disregard the early years - it seems to have become hip to dismiss virtually perfect pop songs like "She Loves You" or "I Want to Hold Your Hand", but that doesn't make them less terrific...
I am going to my grave saying that I prefer their output from (1962-1966) more than any other. Why? I have no idea. Perhaps you could tell me
In fact I will tell you.
Because it's damn good music that's why.
My preference is easy...1962-1970
That's if you don't count all the solo work either.
It seems we're only discussing the Beatles here...how about other groups...the Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan, seem not to
have the same...what is the word, maniacal effect on Music Lovers ?????
I'm sure they do, but since you haven't compared them to 'N Sync and Aaron Carter, respectively, yet, the thread hasn't had to go that way...