The discussion going on between yourself and Stuart Raybould was interesting..... For me, in life, nuance and paradox are two key players. So many people seem unable to grasp these two concepts....so in a discussion about fusion, both the point you make in this video and Stuart's point are equally valid, equally correct. For me there is no conflict between the points that there were many disparate strands that went into the evolution and creation of jazz fusion and that the Beatles opened a door so wide and important that they were arguably the most important influence on the genre's creation. This doesn't mean that the Beatles created jazz fusion ~ they didn't. But without their huge cultural and musical impact, the notion that jazzers could tango with rock simply didn't exist and neither would British jazzers have found their way into a musical sphere that was not jazz. Like much of real life, it's nuanced and paradoxical. But no less true. At the same time, the Beatles' openness and experimentation opened doors and minds for tons of others on both sides of the Atlantic to come through and much of what came through bled into the atmosphere that began to create jazz fusion.
A lot of channels recently have been making the case that the greatest influence on a ton of composers and musicians is JS Bach, and I'd be interested in your take on that Andy. But I'd agree that the Beatles were probably THE major influence on popular music that was happening when jazz fusion emerged. For example, it's easy to go The Beatles -> Jimi Hendrix -> Miles/McLaughlin/Corea, etc. Even though jazz musicians like Dave Brubeck, Stan Getz, and Duke Ellington had already been covering Beatles songs since they first appeared on Ed Sullivan. But I think it took until '66-'67 when the gloves came off in terms of acceptance of experimentation and cross-pollenization for the genre to really explode.
The Beatles were allegedly listening to Albert Ayler free jazz among other things during the recording of Sgt. Pepper. There was also a bit of interest in free jazz in the late 60's because Charlie Watts liked them, leading to releases of the People Band and AMM on major labels. I just wish the Beatles had promoted it some more. They could have helped some interesting artists gain a larger audience! Zappa mentioned Cecil Taylor and Wes Montgomery on his first album and perhaps exposed his audience to those artists.
Really glad you mentioned Dylan’s influence, Andy. You should do a vid on him. He was as important to me as Miles, Debussy, etc., when I first started getting deep into music. Great stuff, as always. Cheers.
The unique aspect of the Beatles beginning about 1965 was that they had almost total control over their music. They has the power to over rule the managing powers to be to allow their imagination to flow freely and had the talent and mechanism to put it out there with George Martin helping guide them and he had the insight to support them rather than control them. .I was inspired with my buds to form a garage band. We were all self taught and we played 1-4-5 chords. We looked as Beatles play books and we called the chords "Beatle chords". I have always said that the most important Beatles music was the 1962 thru 1965 Beatles because with out that popular music they would not have had the commercial power to get the freedom to do what they did later.
Yes this makes a really strong case. I didn't see that one coming, but I agree the Beatles really did influence everyone. They were my first favorite band, so it's easy for me to get on board with that anyway.
Larry Coryell said more than once when asked what his early influences were he was listening to Miles Davis and The Beatles in equal measure. It's obvious he was listening to blues and classical intensely as well, and it was only a natural progression that all styles meld in Coryell's improvisations and composing. The Gary Burton Quartet , with Coryell, recorded Bob Dylan's "I Want You" and was released on their 1968 Live album.
I believe we still do not know the impact the Beatles had n music, society and culture. It’s amazing to hear my in-laws reaction when I mention them. They see them only as the cuddly mop tops from England.
The Beatles were a huge influence for the brazilian jazz pop fusion album Clube da esquina 1971 by Milton Nascimento and Lo Borges an essential album for Pat Metheny
Andy-good review the and agree that Dylan expanding music and Sinatra using new technology to create the complete themed album. However another driver was The Beach Boys Pet Songs (Brian Wilson) as The Beatles marked them closely and SgtPepers was their reaction - they drove each other during these years
Exactly, jazz was fusing with progressive rock music, because it had gained in sophistication due to The Beatles. Looking forward to the Ringo episode.
Every good musician I know love the Beatles and the reason they give for it is their songs. Their songs are distinct from everything before and although the format has been copied to the max it is still distinct from all that came after. Why? That naivety of coming to know a beautiful chord and freely using it to create a song without any reference to music structure theory. Of course other people did this, but for some reason, their taste was just good for the ears of most of us. It is this good result that has blown away the minds of so many good musicians that were trained in all those rules of music structure. Someone mentioned the Brazilian album Clube da Esquina, that’s exactly what they did on that album and it had a huge influence on people like Pat Metheny, and groups like Yes and Police among others.
To me, The Beatles are their own genre because nobody can pin down their style at all. So we’ll listen to music after them and say “that sounds a bit beatlesy”
What I love about this channel is that Andy comes up with some topics, that on the surface at least, appear quite controversial, such as this one. But, he does a phenomenal job of breaking down his argument. I don’t always agree with him (e.g. Steely Dan’s Aja is an absolute masterpiece), but then again, I don’t agree with things I’ve said a couple years ago. :).
Exactly...I need something to get my teeth into as I improvise my videos. It may not all be totally right but it's the thought experiment I like as it reveals another way of thing about stuff.
Perfect analysis Andy. Thank you for this. The Beatles are a cultural phenomenon that we still haven't fully understood. One aspect I would expand on is the revolutionary management genius of Brian Epstein. The success of the Beatles allowed Brian to invest the profits in many different music ventures and bands outside of the ridged corporate music industry of the time. Whilst the Beatles were tied to record contracts with EMI, Brian created NEMS and many of his employees, such as Andrew Oldham, Robert Stigwood, Kit Lambert went on to manage bands of their own, The Rolling Stones, Cream, The Who. All were financed by loans from Epstein. Hendrix debut in London was at the Savile Theatre, owned, surprise surprise, by Brian Epstein! Hendrix record label was Track records, set up by Chris Stamp and Kit Lambert! We can go on and on! All the band's you mentioned as a major influence on Jazz Fusion would not exist without the Beatles and Beatles money. This allowed all these bands the freedom from commercial constraint of hit records to pursue their own unique musical visions and push the boundaries that led inevitably to and influenced Jazz Fusion and beyond! I hope this long and winding ramble (see what I did there!?!) Gives another dimension, outside of the actual music, to the excellent subject matter you have discussed... and yes Ringo is an amazing drummer! All the very best buddy and 'See you on the next video'.
This is an excellent point that I must admit was not aware of. But the thing I have realised doing these videos is the importance of commercial success. This is ultimately the driver of innovation and the underlying history of music.
@@ganazby My pleasure, sir! Thank you taking the time to read it. As an interesting aside Brian Epstein had major plans for the future of rock management in 1967. Epstein was on the verge of creating a business revolution. He was going to create a management company with Stigwood, Oldham, Lambert and Chas Chandler that would represent all the best of 60s rock bands. Imagine a company that had The Rolling Stones, Cream, Jimi Hendrix, The Who as it's clients! It would have been a powerhouse of musical and cultural significance and would have destroyed the music industry and the domination of the major labels as we knew it! I get the chills thinking about the potential!... then he Epstein's himself (Pardon the poor pun) in very suspicious circumstances. I hope this gives a little bit of insight into what could have been. All the best.
Excellent!!! Well done Andy...I wanted to play guitar as soon as soon as I saw the Beatles on Sunday Night At The Palladium on TV....massive influence. I also believe Pepper and Pet Sounds are the first two truly prog albums....impossible to separate artistically because Brian was following The Beatles and they in turn where following Brian Wilson!!!! Utterly fascinating period in music..... Looking forward to your analysis of Ringo....I love his playing...his drum sound alone on those records is gorgeous....always felt the swing in his playing....I hate it when people diss his drumming!! Love Mr Starkey!!!
I think Blonde on Blonde is the key album...which influences Freak Out by Zappa, then that hits the mainstream with Revolver, Then you get the US response with Pet Sounds, then Beatles ratchet it up with Sgt Pepper. How much these albums were influencing each other is hard to say, but these are the key players I think in the development of progressive music and the concept album.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer That's true....I guess we could go even further back...as you said, the concept album really started with Francis Albert...recently read a wonderful book on Frank and The Art of Recording.....
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer Did Blonde on Blonde influence Freak Out, they sound worlds apart, plus were they not released at the same time. I don't think Freak Out was released months afterwards, some of it was recorded either earlier or at the same time. Zappa wasn't aware of that album and Dylan wasn't aware of Freak Out. Just two artists doing something at the same time, it happens.
@@stuartraybould6433 Dylan is listed as an influence on the album. And Zappa has said elsewhere that when he heard that album it inspired him to make a double album with the breadth of material.So Zappa knew Highway 61 (which has the 11 minute Desolation Row) and becomes aware of Dylan's intention to release a double album. They come out at the same time, both doubles, both with a side long track, and Zappa names Dylan on album. Years later Dylan turns up at Zappa's house asking him to produce Infidels stating 'you are the only guy who understands my music' (paraphrasing) Of course, Zappa only got signed because of the British Blues Boom (The A+R turned up to the gig, heard a blues guitar solo and signed them) I think Zappa and Dylan were actually really influential on the Beatles at that time, and both those albums influence Sgt Pepper. The whole point of my TH-cam is to show the interconnectedness of music, and show these less obvious connections. I have worked in the industry and talked to many musicians about this. Influence happens in many ways, not just the direct thing of someone sounding like another artist.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer I agree with you, you've just said Dylan and Zappa influenced The Beatles, your words. That's all I've been trying to say, others influenced The Beatles as much as they influenced others. It wasn't just The Beatles 🙆♂️
Some agree, some don't. I think comes down to how much you like the Beatles. I love them and wanted them on my channel. I'm glad it's pleased a few of my subscribers too.
Interesting video...to say the least. ;-) This vid reminds me of a college course I had in the '70s...except you crammed a Semester worth of info into 20 minutes. Well done!
Great video! It would be nice to listen to a compilation of fusion artists covering Beatles' songs. I wonder if John McLaughlin and Chick Corea have ever did that... Thank you for the video. :-)
Umh, I think this is a stretch. The Beatles were a lead that others followed, no doubt. Mainly because they composed their own songs, taking work away from house songwriting. Biggest influence on jazz fusion though, I don't see that. Miles Davis and Coltrane changed jazz long before The Beatles even got going. Musicians like Jack Bruce and Ginger Baker played jazz but wanted to do something different, that led to Cream of course. Other jazz musicians wanted to explore, some like Cream brought improvisations to rock, others brought rock to jazz. There is absolutely no sign of The Beatles on In a Silent Way. Frank Zappa recorded his first few albums before The Beatles started to experiment, he influenced them more than they ever did him. Although I slightly prefer The Beatles to The Rolling Stones, The Stones first few albums are far more out there compared to what The Beatles were doing at the time, although The Beatles would go much further later on. The Beatles themselves were influenced by other bands like The Moody Blues and Pink Floyd. Floyd and Soft Machine hadn't got a record contract but The Beatles were going to see them live, no way that didn't influence them but they could record things and get them released first. Classically trained musicians went on to play jazz, Neil Ardley is a prime example. Ardley's albums are definitely fusion but coming more from the jazz side with classical influences but at the same time it rocks. Classical composer Karlheinz Stockhausen although mostly an influence on electronic music, also influenced composers like Philip Glass and Reich and jazz musicians were also listening to this kind of stuff. Not just the German bands in the early 70s like Can, Neu and Klaus Schulze and Tangerine Dream. I don't deny The Beatles were influential, very but I don't see it in fusion. Personally, I think fusion came from many different people around the same time over a very short period, a moment in time that will never be repeated. A great deal of change happened between the early 60s and the early 80s. A great deal of styles emerged, it was a time of great change not just in styles but in recording technology and instrument technologies. All those things combined, with a freedom to explore. Miles, Coltrane, Ian Carr, Neil Ardley and many others found themselves exploring this music around the same time. Who influenced who is harder to pin down and I don't think one person or group is responsible. It was a build up of different factors. Your argument is a reasonable one especially for progressive rock but for jazz fusion, I just can't see it. I have to add, after a comment about The Beatles success created the money to allow others to, do what they wanted! Most fusion artists recorded for other labels, their 'money' never came from those sources. So that theory doesn't hold up either.
It's hard to answer this as I have attempted over twenty minutes to do this in the video. Rock n Roll was dying in the early sixties as the music scene went back to the usual MOR. When the Beatles emerged it created a huge scene in London. Musicians like Graham Bond, Brian Auger, Georgie Fame etc were blending all these influences but it was in the end just a different take on rhthm and blues, and it would have just died there if The Beatles had not come along. Now for fusion to happen it needs to fuse with something that is not fusion. It's not a fusion of jazz with rock n roll and it is not a fusion with pop music. That is why Ella and Wes performing Beatles songs is not fusion. Fusion is the mix of jazz with the progressive elements emerging in the sixties. The two big influences on the development of these progressive elements is Dylan and The Beatles. The two influences on The Beatles beyond R&B would be British Music Hall and Dylan. But when you talk to people around that time, Dylan's actual influence does not really kick in til 1965. But the success of The Beatles allowed the focus to be put on that British scene whic is half of the place where fusion started. In the States where the other half started we are talking about Gary Burton, Larry Coryell, Jeremy Steig and Steve Marcus, and all these have stated that they were hugely influenced by The Beatles. This is why, when you read Stuart Nicholson's History of Jazz Fusion, the first chapter is about The Beatles, and the scene created around that phenomenon.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer I understand what you're saying and I agree to a degree. My argument is that other influences were going on at the same time and those other influences are every bit as important if not more so. It was a great period for music with influences coming from all over the place. What I'm trying to say, probably no very well, is that you can't pin it down to one person or one group of people. It was a build up of different things over a relatively short time. The Beatles although influential, get a lot more credit than they should. There was an awful lot going on during that period at the same time and many others helped to create some wonderfully different forms of music. Miles Davis is known for having listened and liked Sly and the Family Stone and said their groove had an influence on him, I don't recall him saying the same about The Beatles, I might be wrong? Fans of The Beatles always make big claims about how they influenced things and no doubt they did but there were others around, not just them. George Martin was a big influence on The Beatles, in fact without him they might never have experimented. The Moody Blues were recording Days of Future Past in the studios next door to The Beatles, there is no way that didn't influence The Beatles. The Beatles weren't daft, they listened to what was going on around them and my argument is that, they just managed to make and release records first. They were also influenced by others. It's a logical conclusion. They just get the credit because its on record first. In reality that would not have been what was happening. It was an amalgamation of different influences not just one. As with most things, it's never down to just one moment, well rarely anyway. It's like a lot of things, just because it's written in a book does not necessarily make it a fact. This is a theory and like many theories, it might be right, it might be wrong. Theories are just that, theories. Everyone can have one, educated or not. Mine is from experience of that time, not just read in a book and like a lot of teaching theory, sometimes you don't need a theory to tell you what's obvious. It's just my view of things. A theory, it might be right, it might be wrong but like Mr Petty in his teaching books, I'm confident enough to believe what I'm saying either way.
@@stuartraybould6433 Yes, it is an amalgamation of influences, for example Hendrix's influence is absolutely huge. I know and have worked with a number of musicians working in the London scene in the early sixties. I'm fascinated by that time and have picked their brains a bit over the years. As I said in the video, all these forms have their roots there to a great extent. As these forms emerged jazz was mixing with them from day one. There was no idea to mix jazz with rock. Rock music developed because of innovations coming in from jazz. The whole thing was in flux. My father in law was touring in the early sixties with a band that had Georgie Fame on keys (who would a few years later employ John McLaughlin) and Big Jim Sullivan (who was JM's best mate at the time as they were session buddies) and my mother in law was best friends with Duffy Power, who was managed by the same guy that managed my father in law (Larry Parnes) Duffy had a band that consisted of JM, Ginger Baker and Jack Bruce. This really is the point where fusion first developed. The Beatles came to my father in law's gigs and asked him to sing for him (he turned them down) As soon as The Beatles broke you see a huge change happen to what is going on in that scene. Here, in 1963 is JM, Duffy, Ginger and Jack breaking out....th-cam.com/video/Quy9Xpjet2/w-d-xo.html A jazz musicians playing rock music, back in 1963!!! And of course it's a Beatles song. The influence of this band on that scene is all encompassing. Sly Stone was DJ before he formed The Family Stone, and he was famous for playing The Beatles and The Stones alongside soul artists. Sly and the Family Stone are simply an amalgamation of those styles with The Beatles playing a huge influence. This is because no band in history had anywhere near the same cultural impact of The Beatles. Over in the US the guy who is most important in the development of fusion was arguably Gary Burton. Check his autobiography out. Steve Marcus introduced him to The Beatles in 1964, he then went out and bought every Beatles album and his compostional style changed dramatically, and he brought in a Beatles influenced guitarist; Larry Coryell. And I'll finish with a quote from Larry Coryell about the development of fusion over in the US, refering to his band The Free Spirits...'The Free Spirits was more of a ‘band’ thing. We were trying to get into the marketplace that was occupied by groups like The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan, frankly, those were the paradigms in The Free Spirits. At that time, successful efforts in pop music came from many different sources. Sometimes they came from folk music, other times they came from straight blues, other times they came from R&B, and still other times they came from imitations to The Beatles like English music hall type of compositions. So we just thought if we could do something good, doing it the way we know, maybe we could throw our hat in the ring and be successful like the Beatles'
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer So, this is a strange one. We seem to be in agreement and yet, not. There is absolutely no doubt that The Beatles had a big cultural influence, we agree. You also say other artists had an influence. The Beatles had their albums out first and therefore, artists played their songs. I'll try a different example. Peter Gabriel wanted a particular drum sound for Intruder on PG3, Phil Collins plays the drums on that track and came up with the drum pattern but it was Gabriel who asked him to play without cymbals. The idea was Gabriel's. Now, Phil Collins uses the same idea with a different pattern on In the air tonight, it's a big hit. Phil Collins is from then on famous for those drums. The original idea however, wasn't his. Just because The Beatles released albums and they sold in large numbers, that's why they get so much credit. Harrison gets so much credit for bringing sitar into the rock world but was he actually the first or just the first to do it on a record that sold in numbers. Jazz fusion is so different from anything The Beatles did I fail to see their influence. The same musicians may have played their songs, they may say they influenced them, that doesn't mean that their playing was incorporated into what became fusion. I just don't hear it anywhere. That's me, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. If you're going to say this, you might as well go back to Bach and Mozart who influenced everyone if they know it or not. It's just a stretch too far, in my opinion but as I say to my wife 'what the hell do I know, I know nothing about anything'.
hmmm interesting. Would there be an argument that via The Beatles; INDIAN music would also be an influence on Prog and Fusion?Unusual time signatures are commonplace in Indian music, but prior to the Beatles introducing Indian culture into the mainstream.... I cannot think of any really unusual time signatures in Rock (54 doesn't count....that's not really that unusual)
The whole nature of fusion is the fact you are fusing jazz with something that is not jazz. In terms of jazz fusion the biggest single non jazz influence us ultimately derived from The Beatles
No Beatles...no Gary Burton...which means early jazz fusion looks much different. Then the influence on McLaughlin and Tony Willaims is huge. There are many influences on Jazz Fusion developing, the biggest single influence I would say is The Beatles...
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer Jazz is about improving. The Beatles were terrible improvisers. Just because someone sparks someone’s interest in playing music doesn’t mean they influenced the kind of music they eventually play. Rod Argent and Brian Auger would be better examples.
@@Dex619 All jazz is about improvising. Fusion is the fusion of rock and jazz. The British R+B bands like Graham bond, Bluesbreakers, Brian Auger etc is where fusion starts. But the sound of fusion...listen to Tomorrow Never Knows or Norwegian Wood...It's those modal structures that were the key. Then listen to the Gary Burton compositions. Those progressions arent jazz progressions, they come from The Beatles. then think of the back beat, that comes from Ringo. I could go on, but I said all this in the video...
but where is a proof for this statement? Where is this jazzfusionband, where are tracks you can hear beatlesesque influences? The Beatles are influenced more than influencer. Waiting for your Ringo analysis. Ringo Starr? This guy who was the drummer of around 200 Beatles songs?
In the UK The Beatles changed the music scene that John McLaughlin was working with, forcing jazz musicians to collaborate with pop and blues musicians. In the UK fusion begins with Graham Bond, Brian Auger etc all working with JM. JM has discussed the influence of The Beatles on hm many a time. Here is a vid where he discusses this: th-cam.com/video/GcM0lmeM6zo/w-d-xo.html In the US the innovators were Gary Burton, Steve Marcus, Jeremy Steig, Steve Marcus, all who have discussed the huge influence of the Beatles, and have described how The Beatles fundamentally changed the shape of jazz composition. And they changed theway bands were marketed and developed. No Beatles....no fusion.
Totally disagree. They one of the most overrated bands ever. If they created anything or any fusion it wasn't because originality. They appropriated most of American music. Specifically jazz and blues. If they influenced anybody was because they popularity and commercial power . Good day!
The discussion going on between yourself and Stuart Raybould was interesting.....
For me, in life, nuance and paradox are two key players. So many people seem unable to grasp these two concepts....so in a discussion about fusion, both the point you make in this video and Stuart's point are equally valid, equally correct.
For me there is no conflict between the points that there were many disparate strands that went into the evolution and creation of jazz fusion and that the Beatles opened a door so wide and important that they were arguably the most important influence on the genre's creation.
This doesn't mean that the Beatles created jazz fusion ~ they didn't. But without their huge cultural and musical impact, the notion that jazzers could tango with rock simply didn't exist and neither would British jazzers have found their way into a musical sphere that was not jazz.
Like much of real life, it's nuanced and paradoxical. But no less true.
At the same time, the Beatles' openness and experimentation opened doors and minds for tons of others on both sides of the Atlantic to come through and much of what came through bled into the atmosphere that began to create jazz fusion.
I really can`t say if Tony Williams was into Ringo specifically but he adored The Beatles.
A lot of channels recently have been making the case that the greatest influence on a ton of composers and musicians is JS Bach, and I'd be interested in your take on that Andy. But I'd agree that the Beatles were probably THE major influence on popular music that was happening when jazz fusion emerged. For example, it's easy to go The Beatles -> Jimi Hendrix -> Miles/McLaughlin/Corea, etc. Even though jazz musicians like Dave Brubeck, Stan Getz, and Duke Ellington had already been covering Beatles songs since they first appeared on Ed Sullivan. But I think it took until '66-'67 when the gloves came off in terms of acceptance of experimentation and cross-pollenization for the genre to really explode.
The Beatles were allegedly listening to Albert Ayler free jazz among other things during the recording of Sgt. Pepper.
There was also a bit of interest in free jazz in the late 60's because Charlie Watts liked them, leading to releases of the People Band and AMM on major labels.
I just wish the Beatles had promoted it some more. They could have helped some interesting artists gain a larger audience! Zappa mentioned Cecil Taylor and Wes Montgomery on his first album and perhaps exposed his audience to those artists.
Really glad you mentioned Dylan’s influence, Andy. You should do a vid on him. He was as important to me as Miles, Debussy, etc., when I first started getting deep into music. Great stuff, as always. Cheers.
Dylan really is the Louis Armstrong of Rock music.
The unique aspect of the Beatles beginning about 1965 was that they had almost total control over their music. They has the power to over rule the managing powers to be to allow their imagination to flow freely and had the talent and mechanism to put it out there with George Martin helping guide them and he had the insight to support them rather than control them. .I was inspired with my buds to form a garage band. We were all self taught and we played 1-4-5 chords. We looked as Beatles play books and we called the chords "Beatle chords". I have always said that the most important Beatles music was the 1962 thru 1965 Beatles because with out that popular music they would not have had the commercial power to get the freedom to do what they did later.
Yes this makes a really strong case. I didn't see that one coming, but I agree the Beatles really did influence everyone. They were my first favorite band, so it's easy for me to get on board with that anyway.
Larry Coryell said more than once when asked what his early influences were he was listening to Miles Davis and The Beatles in equal measure. It's obvious he was listening to blues and classical intensely as well, and it was only a natural progression that all styles meld in Coryell's improvisations and composing. The Gary Burton Quartet , with Coryell, recorded Bob Dylan's "I Want You" and was released on their 1968 Live album.
I believe we still do not know the impact the Beatles had n music, society and culture. It’s amazing to hear my in-laws reaction when I mention them. They see them only as the cuddly mop tops from England.
The Beatles were a huge influence for the brazilian jazz pop fusion album Clube da esquina 1971 by Milton Nascimento and Lo Borges an essential album for Pat Metheny
Par Metheny has mentioned many times his love for The Beatles and the effect it had on fusion pioneers like Gary Burton and Steve Swallow
That album is amazing... very jazzy and very beatly
I would go as far as to say that the Beatles' "Revolver" could be classified as the first progressive rock album.
Andy-good review the and agree that Dylan expanding music and Sinatra using new technology to create the complete themed album. However another driver was The Beach Boys Pet Songs (Brian Wilson) as The Beatles marked them closely and SgtPepers was their reaction - they drove each other during these years
I agree... and add Zappa in there too. All wildly different but all very important in establishing the album as the artform
To all those who don't get Ringo: Life has many twists and turns, including music and SONGS. Get on that. A drummer who plays songs.
Exactly, jazz was fusing with progressive rock music, because it had gained in sophistication due to The Beatles. Looking forward to the Ringo episode.
Glad you got it Philip
If you can play The Beatles, you can play anything - Ozzy's favorite band
Every good musician I know love the Beatles and the reason they give for it is their songs. Their songs are distinct from everything before and although the format has been copied to the max it is still distinct from all that came after. Why? That naivety of coming to know a beautiful chord and freely using it to create a song without any reference to music structure theory. Of course other people did this, but for some reason, their taste was just good for the ears of most of us. It is this good result that has blown away the minds of so many good musicians that were trained in all those rules of music structure. Someone mentioned the Brazilian album Clube da Esquina, that’s exactly what they did on that album and it had a huge influence on people like Pat Metheny, and groups like Yes and Police among others.
To me, The Beatles are their own genre because nobody can pin down their style at all.
So we’ll listen to music after them and say “that sounds a bit beatlesy”
I wrote a terrific song called They Kept on Swingin'. If you steal that your head will fall off.
I've made the pro-Ringo argument many times on various TH-cam channels. You're absolutely right -- some people just don't get it.
You will enjoy my video, and hopefully everytime that stupid argument crops up you can point them to my video!
What I love about this channel is that Andy comes up with some topics, that on the surface at least, appear quite controversial, such as this one. But, he does a phenomenal job of breaking down his argument. I don’t always agree with him (e.g. Steely Dan’s Aja is an absolute masterpiece), but then again, I don’t agree with things I’ve said a couple years ago. :).
Exactly...I need something to get my teeth into as I improvise my videos. It may not all be totally right but it's the thought experiment I like as it reveals another way of thing about stuff.
Perfect analysis Andy. Thank you for this. The Beatles are a cultural phenomenon that we still haven't fully understood. One aspect I would expand on is the revolutionary management genius of Brian Epstein. The success of the Beatles allowed Brian to invest the profits in many different music ventures and bands outside of the ridged corporate music industry of the time. Whilst the Beatles were tied to record contracts with EMI, Brian created NEMS and many of his employees, such as Andrew Oldham, Robert Stigwood, Kit Lambert went on to manage bands of their own, The Rolling Stones, Cream, The Who. All were financed by loans from Epstein. Hendrix debut in London was at the Savile Theatre, owned, surprise surprise, by Brian Epstein! Hendrix record label was Track records, set up by Chris Stamp and Kit Lambert! We can go on and on! All the band's you mentioned as a major influence on Jazz Fusion would not exist without the Beatles and Beatles money. This allowed all these bands the freedom from commercial constraint of hit records to pursue their own unique musical visions and push the boundaries that led inevitably to and influenced Jazz Fusion and beyond! I hope this long and winding ramble (see what I did there!?!) Gives another dimension, outside of the actual music, to the excellent subject matter you have discussed... and yes Ringo is an amazing drummer! All the very best buddy and 'See you on the next video'.
Great points. Thanks.
This is an excellent point that I must admit was not aware of. But the thing I have realised doing these videos is the importance of commercial success. This is ultimately the driver of innovation and the underlying history of music.
@@ganazby My pleasure, sir! Thank you taking the time to read it. As an interesting aside Brian Epstein had major plans for the future of rock management in 1967. Epstein was on the verge of creating a business revolution. He was going to create a management company with Stigwood, Oldham, Lambert and Chas Chandler that would represent all the best of 60s rock bands. Imagine a company that had The Rolling Stones, Cream, Jimi Hendrix, The Who as it's clients! It would have been a powerhouse of musical and cultural significance and would have destroyed the music industry and the domination of the major labels as we knew it! I get the chills thinking about the potential!... then he Epstein's himself (Pardon the poor pun) in very suspicious circumstances. I hope this gives a little bit of insight into what could have been. All the best.
A great follow-up would be to do a deep dive on Herbie Hancock’s album New Standard from the late 90s.
I have to say johnny winter and with Rick derringer..got me.going
George brought the diminished 5 to popular and fusion and jazz and country and rock and ambient... Single-handedly. Think Blue Jay Way.
Excellent!!! Well done Andy...I wanted to play guitar as soon as soon as I saw the Beatles on Sunday Night At The Palladium on TV....massive influence.
I also believe Pepper and Pet Sounds are the first two truly prog albums....impossible to separate artistically because Brian was following The Beatles and they in turn where following Brian Wilson!!!! Utterly fascinating period in music.....
Looking forward to your analysis of Ringo....I love his playing...his drum sound alone on those records is gorgeous....always felt the swing in his playing....I hate it when people diss his drumming!! Love Mr Starkey!!!
I think Blonde on Blonde is the key album...which influences Freak Out by Zappa, then that hits the mainstream with Revolver, Then you get the US response with Pet Sounds, then Beatles ratchet it up with Sgt Pepper. How much these albums were influencing each other is hard to say, but these are the key players I think in the development of progressive music and the concept album.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer That's true....I guess we could go even further back...as you said, the concept album really started with Francis Albert...recently read a wonderful book on Frank and The Art of Recording.....
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer Did Blonde on Blonde influence Freak Out, they sound worlds apart, plus were they not released at the same time. I don't think Freak Out was released months afterwards, some of it was recorded either earlier or at the same time. Zappa wasn't aware of that album and Dylan wasn't aware of Freak Out. Just two artists doing something at the same time, it happens.
@@stuartraybould6433 Dylan is listed as an influence on the album. And Zappa has said elsewhere that when he heard that album it inspired him to make a double album with the breadth of material.So Zappa knew Highway 61 (which has the 11 minute Desolation Row) and becomes aware of Dylan's intention to release a double album. They come out at the same time, both doubles, both with a side long track, and Zappa names Dylan on album. Years later Dylan turns up at Zappa's house asking him to produce Infidels stating 'you are the only guy who understands my music' (paraphrasing) Of course, Zappa only got signed because of the British Blues Boom (The A+R turned up to the gig, heard a blues guitar solo and signed them) I think Zappa and Dylan were actually really influential on the Beatles at that time, and both those albums influence Sgt Pepper. The whole point of my TH-cam is to show the interconnectedness of music, and show these less obvious connections. I have worked in the industry and talked to many musicians about this. Influence happens in many ways, not just the direct thing of someone sounding like another artist.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer I agree with you, you've just said Dylan and Zappa influenced The Beatles, your words. That's all I've been trying to say, others influenced The Beatles as much as they influenced others. It wasn't just The Beatles 🙆♂️
Finally , your the first youtuber to say this .
Some agree, some don't. I think comes down to how much you like the Beatles. I love them and wanted them on my channel. I'm glad it's pleased a few of my subscribers too.
Very interesting video and ideas
Glad you liked it
Interesting video...to say the least. ;-)
This vid reminds me of a college course I had in the '70s...except you crammed a Semester worth of info into 20 minutes. Well done!
Ha Ha...yes, sorry about that!
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer I only meant you really packed a lot into just 20 minutes.
Andy: you might bounce this thesis on some of the innovators of the idiom. Bill COBHAM, Lenny White, Chester Thompson and Lenny White come to mind.
I already have. There is a generation of musicians who started playing because they saw the Beatles. I have had the conversations...
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer : OK, good. This adds weight to your thesis.
@@Riddim4 I hope so....
Great video! It would be nice to listen to a compilation of fusion artists covering Beatles' songs. I wonder if John McLaughlin and Chick Corea have ever did that...
Thank you for the video. :-)
JM played Beatles songs with Duffy Power and I think on the 'Experiments with Pops' album with Gordon Beck.
Michelle, Girl, While my guitar, Because, ... and, and. The Beatles derived a lot from Jazz music so Why Not vice versa ...
I tried 2-5-1. I went back to one. Then constipated nine. Jazz!
Umh, I think this is a stretch. The Beatles were a lead that others followed, no doubt. Mainly because they composed their own songs, taking work away from house songwriting. Biggest influence on jazz fusion though, I don't see that.
Miles Davis and Coltrane changed jazz long before The Beatles even got going.
Musicians like Jack Bruce and Ginger Baker played jazz but wanted to do something different, that led to Cream of course. Other jazz musicians wanted to explore, some like Cream brought improvisations to rock, others brought rock to jazz. There is absolutely no sign of The Beatles on In a Silent Way.
Frank Zappa recorded his first few albums before The Beatles started to experiment, he influenced them more than they ever did him.
Although I slightly prefer The Beatles to The Rolling Stones, The Stones first few albums are far more out there compared to what The Beatles were doing at the time, although The Beatles would go much further later on. The Beatles themselves were influenced by other bands like The Moody Blues and Pink Floyd. Floyd and Soft Machine hadn't got a record contract but The Beatles were going to see them live, no way that didn't influence them but they could record things and get them released first.
Classically trained musicians went on to play jazz, Neil Ardley is a prime example. Ardley's albums are definitely fusion but coming more from the jazz side with classical influences but at the same time it rocks.
Classical composer Karlheinz Stockhausen although mostly an influence on electronic music, also influenced composers like Philip Glass and Reich and jazz musicians were also listening to this kind of stuff. Not just the German bands in the early 70s like Can, Neu and Klaus Schulze and Tangerine Dream.
I don't deny The Beatles were influential, very but I don't see it in fusion.
Personally, I think fusion came from many different people around the same time over a very short period, a moment in time that will never be repeated. A great deal of change happened between the early 60s and the early 80s. A great deal of styles emerged, it was a time of great change not just in styles but in recording technology and instrument technologies. All those things combined, with a freedom to explore.
Miles, Coltrane, Ian Carr, Neil Ardley and many others found themselves exploring this music around the same time. Who influenced who is harder to pin down and I don't think one person or group is responsible. It was a build up of different factors.
Your argument is a reasonable one especially for progressive rock but for jazz fusion, I just can't see it.
I have to add, after a comment about The Beatles success created the money to allow others to, do what they wanted!
Most fusion artists recorded for other labels, their 'money' never came from those sources. So that theory doesn't hold up either.
It's hard to answer this as I have attempted over twenty minutes to do this in the video. Rock n Roll was dying in the early sixties as the music scene went back to the usual MOR. When the Beatles emerged it created a huge scene in London. Musicians like Graham Bond, Brian Auger, Georgie Fame etc were blending all these influences but it was in the end just a different take on rhthm and blues, and it would have just died there if The Beatles had not come along. Now for fusion to happen it needs to fuse with something that is not fusion. It's not a fusion of jazz with rock n roll and it is not a fusion with pop music. That is why Ella and Wes performing Beatles songs is not fusion. Fusion is the mix of jazz with the progressive elements emerging in the sixties. The two big influences on the development of these progressive elements is Dylan and The Beatles. The two influences on The Beatles beyond R&B would be British Music Hall and Dylan. But when you talk to people around that time, Dylan's actual influence does not really kick in til 1965. But the success of The Beatles allowed the focus to be put on that British scene whic is half of the place where fusion started. In the States where the other half started we are talking about Gary Burton, Larry Coryell, Jeremy Steig and Steve Marcus, and all these have stated that they were hugely influenced by The Beatles. This is why, when you read Stuart Nicholson's History of Jazz Fusion, the first chapter is about The Beatles, and the scene created around that phenomenon.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer I want to revisit Nicholson's JAZZ-ROCK: A HISTORY. Thank you for the reminder.
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer I understand what you're saying and I agree to a degree. My argument is that other influences were going on at the same time and those other influences are every bit as important if not more so.
It was a great period for music with influences coming from all over the place. What I'm trying to say, probably no very well, is that you can't pin it down to one person or one group of people. It was a build up of different things over a relatively short time.
The Beatles although influential, get a lot more credit than they should. There was an awful lot going on during that period at the same time and many others helped to create some wonderfully different forms of music. Miles Davis is known for having listened and liked Sly and the Family Stone and said their groove had an influence on him, I don't recall him saying the same about The Beatles, I might be wrong?
Fans of The Beatles always make big claims about how they influenced things and no doubt they did but there were others around, not just them. George Martin was a big influence on The Beatles, in fact without him they might never have experimented. The Moody Blues were recording Days of Future Past in the studios next door to The Beatles, there is no way that didn't influence The Beatles. The Beatles weren't daft, they listened to what was going on around them and my argument is that, they just managed to make and release records first. They were also influenced by others. It's a logical conclusion. They just get the credit because its on record first. In reality that would not have been what was happening.
It was an amalgamation of different influences not just one. As with most things, it's never down to just one moment, well rarely anyway.
It's like a lot of things, just because it's written in a book does not necessarily make it a fact. This is a theory and like many theories, it might be right, it might be wrong. Theories are just that, theories. Everyone can have one, educated or not. Mine is from experience of that time, not just read in a book and like a lot of teaching theory, sometimes you don't need a theory to tell you what's obvious. It's just my view of things. A theory, it might be right, it might be wrong but like Mr Petty in his teaching books, I'm confident enough to believe what I'm saying either way.
@@stuartraybould6433 Yes, it is an amalgamation of influences, for example Hendrix's influence is absolutely huge. I know and have worked with a number of musicians working in the London scene in the early sixties. I'm fascinated by that time and have picked their brains a bit over the years.
As I said in the video, all these forms have their roots there to a great extent. As these forms emerged jazz was mixing with them from day one. There was no idea to mix jazz with rock. Rock music developed because of innovations coming in from jazz. The whole thing was in flux. My father in law was touring in the early sixties with a band that had Georgie Fame on keys (who would a few years later employ John McLaughlin) and Big Jim Sullivan (who was JM's best mate at the time as they were session buddies) and my mother in law was best friends with Duffy Power, who was managed by the same guy that managed my father in law (Larry Parnes) Duffy had a band that consisted of JM, Ginger Baker and Jack Bruce. This really is the point where fusion first developed. The Beatles came to my father in law's gigs and asked him to sing for him (he turned them down) As soon as The Beatles broke you see a huge change happen to what is going on in that scene. Here, in 1963 is JM, Duffy, Ginger and Jack breaking out....th-cam.com/video/Quy9Xpjet2/w-d-xo.html
A jazz musicians playing rock music, back in 1963!!! And of course it's a Beatles song. The influence of this band on that scene is all encompassing. Sly Stone was DJ before he formed The Family Stone, and he was famous for playing The Beatles and The Stones alongside soul artists. Sly and the Family Stone are simply an amalgamation of those styles with The Beatles playing a huge influence. This is because no band in history had anywhere near the same cultural impact of The Beatles.
Over in the US the guy who is most important in the development of fusion was arguably Gary Burton. Check his autobiography out. Steve Marcus introduced him to The Beatles in 1964, he then went out and bought every Beatles album and his compostional style changed dramatically, and he brought in a Beatles influenced guitarist; Larry Coryell. And I'll finish with a quote from Larry Coryell about the development of fusion over in the US, refering to his band The Free Spirits...'The Free Spirits was more of a ‘band’ thing. We were trying to get into the marketplace that was occupied by groups like The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan, frankly, those were the paradigms in The Free Spirits. At that time, successful efforts in pop music came from many different sources. Sometimes they came from folk music, other times they came from straight blues, other times they came from R&B, and still other times they came from imitations to The Beatles like English music hall type of compositions. So we just thought if we could do something good, doing it the way we know, maybe we could throw our hat in the ring and be successful like the Beatles'
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer So, this is a strange one. We seem to be in agreement and yet, not. There is absolutely no doubt that The Beatles had a big cultural influence, we agree. You also say other artists had an influence.
The Beatles had their albums out first and therefore, artists played their songs.
I'll try a different example. Peter Gabriel wanted a particular drum sound for Intruder on PG3, Phil Collins plays the drums on that track and came up with the drum pattern but it was Gabriel who asked him to play without cymbals. The idea was Gabriel's. Now, Phil Collins uses the same idea with a different pattern on In the air tonight, it's a big hit. Phil Collins is from then on famous for those drums. The original idea however, wasn't his.
Just because The Beatles released albums and they sold in large numbers, that's why they get so much credit. Harrison gets so much credit for bringing sitar into the rock world but was he actually the first or just the first to do it on a record that sold in numbers.
Jazz fusion is so different from anything The Beatles did I fail to see their influence. The same musicians may have played their songs, they may say they influenced them, that doesn't mean that their playing was incorporated into what became fusion.
I just don't hear it anywhere. That's me, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
If you're going to say this, you might as well go back to Bach and Mozart who influenced everyone if they know it or not. It's just a stretch too far, in my opinion but as I say to my wife 'what the hell do I know, I know nothing about anything'.
RINGOOOO YES
You will like my next video Dylan
hmmm interesting. Would there be an argument that via The Beatles; INDIAN music would also be an influence on Prog and Fusion?Unusual time signatures are commonplace in Indian music, but prior to the Beatles introducing Indian culture into the mainstream.... I cannot think of any really unusual time signatures in Rock (54 doesn't count....that's not really that unusual)
the Beatles never played any jazz as far as I know. Maybe a couple of tracks went a bit jazzy.
The whole nature of fusion is the fact you are fusing jazz with something that is not jazz. In terms of jazz fusion the biggest single non jazz influence us ultimately derived from The Beatles
That really is a stretch.
No Beatles...no Gary Burton...which means early jazz fusion looks much different. Then the influence on McLaughlin and Tony Willaims is huge. There are many influences on Jazz Fusion developing, the biggest single influence I would say is The Beatles...
@@AndyEdwardsDrummer Jazz is about improving. The Beatles were terrible improvisers. Just because someone sparks someone’s interest in playing music doesn’t mean they influenced the kind of music they eventually play. Rod Argent and Brian Auger would be better examples.
@@Dex619 All jazz is about improvising. Fusion is the fusion of rock and jazz. The British R+B bands like Graham bond, Bluesbreakers, Brian Auger etc is where fusion starts. But the sound of fusion...listen to Tomorrow Never Knows or Norwegian Wood...It's those modal structures that were the key. Then listen to the Gary Burton compositions. Those progressions arent jazz progressions, they come from The Beatles. then think of the back beat, that comes from Ringo. I could go on, but I said all this in the video...
You are not wrong an awful lot, sir, you should be a teacher.
but where is a proof for this statement?
Where is this jazzfusionband, where are tracks you can hear beatlesesque influences?
The Beatles are influenced more than influencer.
Waiting for your Ringo analysis.
Ringo Starr? This guy who was the drummer of around 200 Beatles songs?
In the UK The Beatles changed the music scene that John McLaughlin was working with, forcing jazz musicians to collaborate with pop and blues musicians. In the UK fusion begins with Graham Bond, Brian Auger etc all working with JM. JM has discussed the influence of The Beatles on hm many a time. Here is a vid where he discusses this: th-cam.com/video/GcM0lmeM6zo/w-d-xo.html
In the US the innovators were Gary Burton, Steve Marcus, Jeremy Steig, Steve Marcus, all who have discussed the huge influence of the Beatles, and have described how The Beatles fundamentally changed the shape of jazz composition. And they changed theway bands were marketed and developed. No Beatles....no fusion.
Totally disagree.
They one of the most overrated bands ever.
If they created anything or any fusion it wasn't because originality. They appropriated most of American music. Specifically jazz and blues.
If they influenced anybody was because they popularity and commercial power .
Good day!