The Beatles EMI Audition 6th June 1962 at Abbey Road with George Martin - Part 1
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- The Beatles EMI Audition on 6th June 1962 was a landmark moment in Beatles history. It brought them together with George Martin, Parlophone A&R man, but it also signalled the beginning of the end for Pete Best in The Beatles.
In Part 2 of his analysis examining Beatles history, David Bedford examines what happened on that historic day, when John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Pete Best entered EMI Studios, but it wasn't as easy as they had hoped.
Ron Richards put The Beatles through their paces and, once George Martin had joined them, everything changed, especially for Pete Best.
But what was the reason that Pete Best's career was about to come to a conclusion and why?
Don't miss Part 2 with interviews with Ken Townsend, Norman Smith and George Martin
I had though Pete was already gone & Ringo was replaced by a session drummer. Guess I got the condensed version.
😊😊
You have it correct. The studio documents prove it. June 4 - Pete. Sept 4, Ringo. Sept 11 - Andy White. 'nuff said. @@robertakerman3570
I found this tonight by accident. I enjoyed it! I am a First Generation Beatles Fan from the 60's. Thanks for posting!
A pleasure, and welcome to the channel. Have fun!
And we all know from the lads that Ringo sat in for Pete in Hamburg and the threesome KNEW from the visceral feel and pulse Ringo's drumming how good it sounded and felt. So hiring Ringo was a no brainer. Paul, George, and John knew each other for years and hired Pete as a hired gun in the 11th hour so they could play in Germany. How attached and loyal they were to Pete, well, I leave this perspective to historians. But they loved Ringo. We know the rest of the story.
They met Ringo in Hamburg in 1960, and saw him out on the road in Liverpool, but he didn't sit in with them until once at the end of December 1961 - when Pete asked him to sit in for him - and 3 times in early 62.
Yes, Pete joined at the 11th hour, but the four Beatles - once Stuart had left - were untouchable in Liverpool and Hamburg. George became friendly with Ringo in early 62, and once George Martin had made these comments to Brian, they had to make a business decision for their future.
Ringo wasn't the first drummer to be asked to replace Pete. That was Bobby Graham. They then asked Ritchie Galvin. Both said no. They then asked Ringo who said yes, then a couple of days later Brian asked Johnny Hutchinson. He said no, and Ringo said yes.
George says he was responsible for convincing John and Paul to agree to Ringo joining. It did work. It wouldn't have worked the same way with any other drummer. He was the perfect drummer for the Beatles.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Hi David. Pete says he only called out twice. This was corroborated in another documentary I watched which stated that Ringo sat in for Pete on two dates, the first in December of '61; and the second in March of '62. The March gig was a Lunch-Dinner doubleheader (I believe at The Cavern), where the band had several hours off in between the two "gigs", and they hung out and ate/drank during that break. One of the dates was due to illness, and the other was due to a minor court appearance requirement Pete had to attend. So, I have two questions for you. Are you counting the March doubleheader as "two gigs" that Ringo filled in for Pete? And if so, what is the other early '62 gig you're referring to?
Massive Beatles fan even before I found out their EMI audition was on the day I was born - 6th June 1962, thanks for the research Dave
So was I!
@@kevvarney9226 Happy birthday!!
Happy birthday
Great insight into some of the subtleties of the situation which many commentators overlook. Dave has empathy for all the participants, and this allows him to understand not just what happened, but why. Presented cogently, realistically and dramatically - again, not qualities all Beatles biographers possess. Classy.
Thank you so much. I am a historian and I follow the evidence, which isn't always easy with the Beatles! I try to be objective too, so thank you for your kind comments.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool As a historian, may I ask what your impression is of the book, "How they Became the Beatles" by Pawlowski?
I met Pete at a record store back in 1982 in El Cajon, CA. He was promoting some Silver Beatles records and signing autographs.
A nice man and loves talking with fans.
Blue Meanie!
This is another great video David and some fascinating facts that I would never have known. Well done.
Thank you. I'm glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for commenting too, the feedback is important.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool It would be amazing if there was recordings of that EMI audition with Pete like the Decca Tapes which made it to vinyl.
I have heard " Love Me Do " with Pete but I don't think I've heard other tracks which was agreed they were going to try like " PS I love you " , " Besame Mucho " and others.
@@KC-wi4gh "Besame Mucho" with Pete from this day at EMI is also on Anthology 1, and he sounds totally solid on it. Had that been the song they were going to use for their first single, Martin would not have requested a session drummer. It was only because Pete struggled with the sudden arrangement change on, "Love Me Do", that Martin gave him the quick hook and said he'd use a session pro uncredited on the record. Martin didn't want to waste time or money, and using session musicians was no big deal at all to him, it happened all the time. But the fair thing to do, given he ambushed the boys with the new arrangement that day, would've been to let them go home so that Pete, and Paul with the vocals he struggled on, could practice the new arrangement. Furthermore, I suspect the particular take Martin provided to the Anthology project of, "Love Me Do", under the pretense it was the only take still in existence, is not in fact the only one he found. And that other takes showed Pete doing much better. Still perhaps not up to Martin's fussy standards, okay. But much better than what he did "find". Umm, don't hold your breath for any more being released.
And similarly, Paul McCartney outbid everyone at auction years back for recordings of The Beatles with Pete on drums playing live at The Cavern Club. He's never released them. I suspect Pete sounded great, and Paul doesn't want anyone to hear that. I forget his name, but a member of a rival band back then said, *"You've never heard The Beatles if you didn't see them at The Cavern with Pete Best."*
Fantastic as always. Keep up the incredible work!
Thank you
Great presentation. Glad I caught this, thank you!
Thank you
Of all the “stories” I’ve heard (including John’s) this is the one that makes the most sense.
Thank you. I try to examine and present the evidence objectively, so I am glad you enjoyed it.
You have to give George Martin a LOT of credit for recognizing the potential of a band that was just barely beginning to hit its stride.
Absolutely right. He saw that something and the potential. Great man.
@@johnburns4017 Actually, one VERY impressive thing George Martin did was tell them to speed up "Please Please Me", which was originally done at just a very laid back, ballad sort of tempo. They played it for him and he told them to rework it - make it much faster - which they did, thus creating a real rock'n'roll classic and, importantly for the Beatles - a HIT. :)
@@BogartSlap
Martin wanted fast temp pop songs that sold at the time. That was probably upmost in his mind.
@johnburns4017 As George Martin has admitted, it was their personalities that impressed him more than their music yet. Love Me Do wasn't a great song, but was catchy. What he did with Please Please Me made the song, so he had good instincts.
Ken Townsend does not paint it that way. Martin had near zero experience of pop/rocks bands. Probably did not know a good one from bad one. This unknown band turns up with a drummer not good enough for studio work, then turns up again with another drummer not good enough for studio work. Despite, Martin allowed them to record their own compositions on the first recording. Andy White the session drummer on _Love Me Do_ and other songs, said that was unheard of in those day.
The first release, one of their own compositions, was bland to say the least. Group and producer were not impressive for sure.
Thank god they picked Ringo, otherwise we wouldn't have all those amazing beats, the most underrated drummer in history
He was and is a phenomenal drummer!
Agreed. Let's be honest. You only have listen to the Decca audition to know Pete Best was not a good drummer. When Ringo first played with The Beatles didn't Paul say something like "this was when we realised what had been missing."
@kingstumble Paul said that many years later, but what else would you expect him to say? Unfortunately, Paul is one of the most unreliable Beatles eyewitnesses and has rewritten Beatles history many times over the years.
What is it at Decca that you don't like?
And if we were to judge the Beatles on the Decca audition, you'd never let Paul sing again and replace George as lead guitarist! John's vocals are shocking, but George is the best singer on the day.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool As a gigging bass player for many years I know a bit about drumming and drummers. Most songs are in 4/4 time which requires the drummer in a rock band to play a regular four to the bar with a heavily accented two and four( or on the two and three if it's in 3/4 time.) Pete either didn't or couldn't do that. It was as if he was accompanying a piano player at a local pub.
@kingstumble That is strange because the one thing the other Beatles said was that he could play a 4 beats to the bar nonstop and very well too.
I am a guitarist/ bass player/ keyboard player (but not a drummer) and played with many drummers over the last 40 or more years, and you know very quickly when someone can't keep time. Musicians of the quality of John, Paul, and George would not take 2 years, would they? They would have soon gotten rid and had many opportunities to do so. But they never did. That tells me that he was a really good, reliable drummer.
In the next video, I will show a clip from Paul saying that Pete was a really good drummer. He said that more than once too.
As a drummer i know the upset when you leave a band. But you carry on and you find another band and you make music.
That's what he did and had a brief career making records.
Yes that's right
Uh, Ok, however, living with the fact that that band went on to be the most famous band in History! I might have lost a few nights sleep! 😖
Brilliant, thanks. Born in 1963 I lived through most of it but didn't know!
Glad you enjoyed it.
It wasn’t just about Pete’s abilities to play drums. According to John, Paul and George it was his personality which did not fit into the group. Still I think Ringo was also the better choice as a drummer anyway if you listen to his ability to translate the ideas of his bandmates. The Beatles became more colorful with him musically and in terms of charisma of the band.
I think that once George Martin had made those comments to Brian, relayed to John, Paul and George, they had to decide if they should replace him. That's when those other factors came into it, like did he fit in etc.
Looking back, I agree that bringing Ringo in was the perfect way to progress to the next stage, when his versatility and experience helped him contribute significantly to the Beatles sound, as well as with his personality too.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Another item possibly was the obvious interference of Mona Best who didn't notice that her acting (probably involuntarily) wasn't particularly helpful for Pete's standing within the band as the others grew tired of it.
@@Achime03 I think that is how the 3 Beatles persuaded Brian to go along with it. He was opposed to the change and had to be convinced to proceed. I reckon this is how they did. Would have helped Brian for sure.
Look at the results of the changes. The biggest, the best (no pun intended), the most influential musical group ever.
@davidtuer5825 In hindsight, you're absolutely right, and you can not argue with the decision based upon what we know.
However, none of that was known to John, Paul, or George when they made the decision.
The joys of hindsight! It all worked out perfectly.
According to Lewisohn and other accounts, Lennon, McCartney and Harrison had been looking to get rid of Pete for some time. They had already been told by both Bert Kampfert and Decca that Pete wasn't adequate as a drummer. I know it's odd that they kept him on for so long, but his exit had to do with more than just George Martin.
Unfortunately, a lot of that is hearsay and revisionism. Kaempfert didn't have a problem apart from the fact that he didn't ever use dominant drums on records. So he asked Pete only to play his snare and cymbals. Listen to Pete on My Bonnie. His drumming, timing, speed of drum rolls is superb. There is no evidence to say that they wanted to get rid of Pete before this day.
I'm afraid Mark Lewisohn’s aim was to say it was always going to be Ringo and they were always going to replace Pete. But there is no evidence for that, apart from comments years later. I also found something no one else did, which was that John, Paul, George and Pete signed a legal partnership agreement at the end of 1961. Not the actions of a group who wanted rid of their drummer.
The only evidence that exists is that after June 6th, 1962, the decision was taken to start looking for a replacement drummer and only once they had received the contract at the end of July did they start that process.
Why keep repeating this nonsense, you have the real story here. Record producers didn't care about musicianship, they just used session muso's to sell an image. Look up "The Wrecking Crew"
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Superb? 🤨
@ChrisR Yes according to drummers I interviewed. Not many drummers can do that kind of drum roll at that speed consistently. One of George Martin's criticisms of Ringo was that he couldn't do a good drum roll. Didn't stop Ringo being a great drummer.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool as a life long drummer i can’t find anything of merit to say about Best. He wasn’t a keeper!everyone thought the same.playing in a smelly noisey club is miles from working in studio.The drummer must be flawless. If he had had any talent, he would have parlayed his fame for at least a couple of years, and made some serious money of it but even with that going for him, he was a flop. No shame in that he still cashed out 30 or 40 years later.
Love the Layers of the Onion you are able to peel back on the Pete Best Saga. He seems like a genuinely interesting dude, have you ever had him on your channel for an interview?
Pete is a great guy who I interviewed years ago for my first book. He liked what I did so much he wrote the foreword to it. He is a really nice guy and we have some great interviews with him to share sometime.
My favorites from this audition were: 3 Cool Cats, September in the Rain, and Take Good Care of my Baby!🎶🎶
Good choices! They are good, aren't they?
Great video......thanks.
Thanks for watching!
Thank you so much for taking the time to make and post this excellent behind the scenes story what really happened at EMI *Beatles* audition.
A pleasure Larry, glad you enjoyed it
Really interesting. Excellently researched
Thanks Keith
Lovely article David, wishing you the best.....Mojo
Thanks Phil, gope you're keeping well?
*Drummers at EMI:*
*6 June 1962:* Pete Best.
*4 Sept 1962:* Ringo Starr.
*11 Sept 1962:* Andy White.
_On my first visit in September [4 Sept] we just ran through some tracks for George Martin. We even did "Please Please Me". I remember that, because while we were recording it I was playing the bass drum with a maraca in one hand and a tambourine in the other. I think it's because of that that George Martin used Andy White, the_ *_"professional",_* _when we went down a week later [11 Sept] to record "Love Me Do"._
- Ringo Star
_"George [Martin]_ *_got his way_* _and Ringo didn't drum on the first single [11 Sept]. He only played tambourine."_
_"Ringo, at that point, was not that steady on time"._
- Paul McCartney
Engineer Geoff Emerick in his book on page 46 stated that George Martin, Norman Smith and *Paul McCartney* were all dissatisfied with Ringo's timekeeping on 4 Sept. McCartney *got his way* as well.
Ringo's poor performance on 4 Sept led to sessions drummer Andy White being brought in for the _'Love Me Do'_ 11 Sept session.
_"I didn't rate Ringo very highly. He couldn't do a roll - and still can't - though he's improved a lot since. Andy was the kind of drummer I needed. Ringo was only used to ballrooms. It was obviously best to use someone with experience"._
- George Martin
_[Ringo] lacked drive._
- Ron Richards
_"He [Ringo] didn't have quite enough push"_
- Engineer Norman Smith
Ringo was impressed with _professional_ Andy White, buying a Ludwig drum set, the make White used.
Thanks for this. Paul also said that at that time Ringo wasn't that steady on time but he became so good at it soon after. I think Ringo's story is a little unbelievable and used as an excuse because George Martin didn't use him.
The irony is that, in the UK, Ringo's version from 4th September was released by mistake instead of Andy White's version from 11th September.
So even though Ringo claimed he didn't drum on the first single, by mistake, he did! That master was destroyed to stop it from happening again.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool
The Andy White version of _Love Me Do_ was the better of the two. His has the tambourine played by Ringo and the superior Ludwig drums. Pete's version was hampered by his battered appalling drum kit. By mistake the Andy and Ringo versions were released all over the place. Different version on singles and LPs, in many different countries.
Which master was destroyed?
@johnburns4017 I agree with you. Andy's version is brighter, slightly faster, and crisper. Ringo's tambourine definitely lifts it, too.
Ringo's was the single released in the UK, but when the album was released in 63, it was White's version, and all subsequent releases were too. The master of Ringo's version was destroyed in late 63 to avoid the same mistake happening again.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool
The only remaining recordings of Ringo's version are on vinyl tat were sold at shops.
@johnburns4017 yes, and when they did a 50th anniversary reissue of Love Me Do they released Ringo's version again by mistake (though I reckon it was a private joke), recalled them and reissued Andy White's!
Sixty-one years ago today...
What history! Life changing events.
The nuance of the word "if". Life changing.
Exactly - just one small word.
4:38 just a note to those who might be tempted to spot GLAD ALL OVER and assume it's the DC 5 song- It's actually a Carl Perkin's song but DID inspire the DC song they wrote because they simply liked the title!
Excellent spot!
Ron Richards sure did have a thing for drums, The Hollies had the best drum sound in 63/64 outside of the DC5 thanks to him. Not to mention more bass on Ron Richards Hollies recordings.
He was a great producer.
Ringos drum sound was every bit as good as the Hollies ( which was undoubtedly good )
“ Andy White didn’t do anything that I couldn’t do “ - Ringo Starr , Beatles anthology 1994 .
I assume you’re friends with Pete ? You keep defending him . By using my ears , I can tell clearly that Ringo is a far superior player 💁♂️
@stuartshire He could, because Andy White was spot on with his timing and feel for the song. Not complicated, but regular and that is what George Martin needed. Ringo's timing fluctuated, as all live drummers did. But he learned quickly and his timing became very dependable.
Excellent research and reporting, thank you for posting this. - Dan, in Texas
Thanks Dan
It wasn''t an audition, they'd already been signed. Mark Lewisohn lays out the sequence of events in quite a bit of detail in Tune In, a must read for anyone who really wants to understand the early lives and careers of the Beatles.
As for why they recorded "Love Me Do," they HAD to record an original song -- Martin was under orders to record at least one Beatles original so that Ardmore & Beechwood (the publishing company associated with EMI) could get the publishing rights for Lennon & McCartney, and that's why the Beatles were fobbed off on Martin (who, though he was completely won over by the band later on, didn't start out enthusiastic).
And lots of people had questioned Pete Best's role in the group -- Bert Kaempfert took away most of his kit when he recorded Tony Sheridan and the Beatles recording "My Bonnie," and Decca had also slammed Pete's performance in the New Year's Day audition. And there'd been a rift between Pete and the Beatles well before then -- "you were never raelly one of us, soft head."
Thanks for your comments and contributing to the debate.
A few points to raise in response.
Unfortunately, Mark Lewisohn was mistaken in Tune In, which I have and have studied. I also know Mark too, and I mean no disrespect. I trained in contract law and English law years ago, and I knew that he was mistaken. His evidence was a form used sometimes when groups were under contract. But there is nothing else to support the notion. In many interviews, all of the people who were there have confirmed it was an Artist Test, known as an audition. George Martin, Ron Richards, Ken Townsend, Norman Smith, Brian Epstein, John, Paul, George, and Pete too. All considered it to be an audition.
I can understand anyone who is not legally trained to have misinterpreted what was found, and Mark can not be blamed for misunderstanding what happened because of some of the words used.
George Martin sent Brian a draft contract (unsigned) which Brian signed on behalf of the Beatles. A contract only signed by 1 party is not valid yet. It only becomes legal when the other party signs.
Ironically, the evidence to prove when this was done is in one of Mark's earlier books, the excellent Complete Beatles Chronicles. In there, he reproduced various letters that EMI issued around this time. This shows that George Martin didn't send off the contract to be signed until around 18th June. He could not sign it.
This means that the contract only became valid then, some 2 weeks after the audition. I had this checked with a top lawyer in Liverpool to confirm my thoughts. So it was definitely only an audition.
Ardmore and Beechwood wanted George Martin to record an original song, because they wanted to publish it and make money from that. They liked some of the demos from the Decca Audition. George Martin liked the harmonica on Love Me Do but nothing else stood out.
Also, the Beatles were not fobbed off onto George Martin. That was mischief making from a disgruntled man!
He wanted them to record How Do You Do It by Mitch Murray and it was only in September that George Martin relented and let them release Love Me Do, with Andy White the session drummer.
As to your other points, Mark was painting a very negative view of Pete Best, which also isn't completely accurate. Bert Kaempfert didn't remove Best's drums because he was incompetent, it was because Pete was a rock n roll drummer. Listen to Kaempferts recordings and he never uses a heavy drum sound. He produced easy listening music known as schlager music, which had very light drums on the songs. He asked Pete to only play his snare and cymbals. And his drumming is excellent. That is also why they recorded a version of My Bonnie, an old Scottish folk song that kids learned in school. He wad no rock n roll man.
As for Decca, Lewisohn found some obscure guy nobody had heard of before who was happy to slate Best's drumming. What he avoided was quoting the producer, Mike Smith, the most important person at the audition, who had no problem with Best's drumming. He had problems with Paul's vocals and George's lead guitar work!
I will be doing a video on getting rid of Pete with all the evidence.
As a historian, I gather all the evidence and present it. If you want the full story, then it is in my book, Finding the Fourth Beatle. All the evidence is there.
Hope that all makes sense? Happy to answer any more questions.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool David, I saw the worksheet (or whatever it's called) for the lads Decca audition, and it listed all the Decca staffers working the session. Missing from that list was, Mark Savage. Strong evidence that he wasn't even there.
I wonder if you would have had so many views if the title had read 'The Beatles EMI Audition 6th June 1962 at Abbey Road with George Martin (ps this clip does not contain any sounds at all from The Beatles EMI Audition 6th June 1962 at Abbey Road with George Martin).
Sorry is this isn't what you were expecting. There are only 2 songs from the audition, so this is an analysis of this important day.
Great video Dave interesting story , good job John had learn to play the gob iron 😁😁👍👍🎸😎🎸BB 14
Can't beat a good gob iron mate!! And John had Arthur Pendleton to thank for teaching him how to play it. 👍👍
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Pendletons ice cream ? 😁😁
@@beeetleboy518 Ha ha! If only. 😂
What a story, indeed! Thanks for these new [to me] details and insights. I am your latest subscriber!
A pleasure, so glad you enjoyed it and thank you for subscribing too. Lots of content for you to enjoy!
I’m also your latest Subscriber. 🤠
Interesting Dave, thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it
Well told Sir!
Thank you
I've read in Lewisohn's book that back in Germany, the local producers also had problems with Pete Best, specifically concerning studio work.
Unfortunately, there is a very strong bias against Best in Tune In and some myths perpetuated.
The Beatles had a solid rock n roll sound that they had developed over there, but Bert Kaempfert preferred light entertainment, known as schlager music. That is why he picked an old Scottish folk song to record.
So Kaempfert asked Pete to not play his rock n roll beat, and to only use his snare and hi-hat. That was the sound Kaempfert always used.
But when you listen to what they recorded, Best's drumming is excellent.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Thanks for the clarification!
Lewisohn is a professional writer and therefore writes about " facts " that are biased to what the Beatles fans want to read and thus certain episodes in the timeline that do not show the Beatles in a good light are twisted or entirely erased..Trust me there are scores of them!
Lewisohn has an Anti-Pete Best Agenda.
I would love to hear that version of 'Will you love me tomorrow' sang by Lennon. That's one of the greatest songs ever written, and John was probably the greatest RnR singer at the time. Though the world didn't know it yet.
It was also the most important day in my life; it was the day I was born!
Oh wow, happy birthday! What a day to have your birthday on. 🎂
I was born that day too!
@@rickboardman6 Brilliant!!!
This was fascinating pal.
I still feel Ringo was “a great drummer” and the right choice ultimately. It’s one of the great unknowns of what would have been had Pete stayed on. The timing of his dismissal was so unfair. No one in retrospect however can say it wasn’t a great decision to bring Starr in.
Have you seen the documentary (I think his name was Joe Flannery) we’re he talks about Mona Best being “too intrusive into the Beatles affairs” and this rubbed the others up the wrong way? Maybe there was a personality clash too? After all he did join the band almost on a whim as they needed a drummer for the Hamburg journey. I think it was an amalgamation of things that resulted in his parting the greatest band to ever live. The straw that broke the camels back was George’s Martins comments. They were in the precipice of something and they were always “cut throat” when they needed to be.
An honesty of context is needed here too. “No one” could have foreseen what they became. It’s only in hindsight that we are having this conversation.
I’m glad Pete Best was rightfully remunerated with the anthology and those priceless memories can never be erased from time. Someone should make a movie about this man though. So crucial a part to the Beatles story and legacy as anybody.
🙏❤️🎸.x
Well said and I agree that nobody knew what they would become and looking back, the timing does make it extra cruel on Pete. Ringo was the perfect choice.
Unfortunately, with Joe Flannery, he was a highly unreliable eyewitness and exaggerated a lot of his contributions to the story sadly.
There was an element of Monas involved causing some discomfort to Brian, but Brian really didn't want to replace Pete, but had to concede to John Paul and George as their manager.
I will be looking at every suggestion put forward for Pete's "dismissal" in another video.
Thanks for contributing to the discussion it is much appreciated.
Ringo Starr at the time of being asked to join the Beatles was the best rock & roll drummer in Liverpool at the time and was playing in the top band in Liverpool. He had already played with the Beatles a few times in Hamburg (when Best missed gigs) so the rest of the Beatles already knew how great they'd sound with Ringo on drums. I believe they had planned this for a long time.
@@frankdiscussion2069 And that's why he was number 4 on their short list ....
Right, Ringo was a genius! I’m amazed everytime I hear a Beatles tune how he actually manages to make the song better. Not too much just right!
Absolutely. He knew the right rhythm for the right song.
Also, Ringo's 1st contract wasn't an equal partner thing and he felt for a LONG time as if he was on trial. When he had to duck out for tonsillitis at the height of Mania and Jimmy Nicol filled in he was desperately afraid they would "pull a Pete" on him....implying that the knew business is business. He also knew once they hit America and he became the most popular Beatle that J & P were not too thrilled as they were "been there done that" with Pete. They had played second fiddle in fan's eyes to Pete in Liverpool - Ringo knew that dynamic. ☮
What are your sources for this comment?
@@Cosmo-Kramer A LOT of sources. I can't split the points up to specific sources but they include G Martin himself; HUNDREDS of books including the great Revolution In The Head by Ian MacDonald, all the Lewisohn and Babiuk books but more importantly I worked at Capitol in the 80s and as a Beatle geek I amassed a crapload of all the contracts (copies of course) going back to first try outs at EMI - why? Because all those points were part of contract re-negotiations. It's common knowledge Brian was a fu*k up - he was doing things with EMI and technically the Beatles weren't even signed at one point!! The Jimmy Nicol story alone when you read books is EYE OPENING about not only Jimmy's experience but how the Beatles and Brian dealt with stuff - pretty brutal which explains why Ringo ALWAYS carries that "andy white" chip on his shoulder. Ringo probably got word of the John and Jimmy pub crawling in the Netherlands literally crawling on the ground wasted at daybreak - all suppressed by the Press as this was height of Beatlemania - but John and Jimmy apparently got along pretty well and Ringo didn't want to let that happen hence the "pull a Pete" quip and him getting his ass to Australia to finish the tour....The most poignant scene being Ringo rejoined with Ringo AND Jimmy on the same balcony overlooking thousands of fans - you can see that on YT - and see in real time Jimmy getting the elbow. Brian woke his ass up at like 5AM when everybody was asleep and gave him a watch for thanks and put him on a jet before he could even SAY GOODBYE to the guys that he spent 13 unbelievable days with. Weird. Pete being most popular etc is easy - I have reprints of the Liverpool Mersey Beat and NME newspapers. When EMI signed the Beatles it was Pete's picture in the paper, not John or Paul's - enuff said. 🎸
@@cuda426hemi Gotcha, thanks for breaking much of that down. Let me get your understanding on a couple of things, if I may.
1) Who's on drums on the original October, 1962 single UK release of, "Love Me Do", and when was the track recorded?
2) Who's on drums on, "Love Me Do", on the 1963 release of the album, Please Please Me, and when was that version of, "Love Me Do", recorded?
@@Cosmo-Kramer common knowledge that if you hear a tambourine it's Andy White on drums. If you don't it's Ringo, except for Pete on the first version which is on Anthology. in UK it was Ringo on the 45, in USA it was Andy on Tollie label. Since I lived all this in real time I don't have to research much. The more interesting thing is who plays drums on the first Please Please Me...I say Andy White. 🎸
@@cuda426hemi Why is that an interesting question? Is not Ringo's tambourine clearly heard on the first, Please Please Me?
My only observation here is: would they have dropped George if his playing had raised concerns? I don't think they would have, which confirms what I think we all know, and that is they didn't consider Pete an equal partner. Great vid as usual.
George's guitar playing at Decca was very average! But the Beatles were always John, Paul, and George as they had been together since the end of 1957! It took Ringo 12 months to break into their triumvirate and it was really Ed Sullivan and going to America that saw him fully settled in as an equal.
I saw a comment about the Pete Beat situation from George Martin. He clearly stated that he told Lennon-McCartney that what they did in their shows was their business, but he wanted a tighter and more competent drummer for the recording sessions. Martin said Lennon and Mac had already been thinking the same thing. Trey replaced Best with Ringo.
If you watch Part 2 of the story, there is a clip of George Martin talking about what happened. He spoke to Brian about his concerns about recording with a session drummer. Brian then told John, Paul and George.
Time is weird! 18 years to the day of the Normandy invasion.
Yes. A sort of Beatles D-Day because of the change it brought.
i got a question about the date George martin went to see them at the cavern. i thought this was in mind to record them for the first album and when that decision was made Pete best had already gone love me do had already been released and he thought they were great live as you say then obviously Ringo was playing for the band. Also when George Martin say if we make a record could be construed as if this arrangement is the final arrangement then he may have been thinking Pete wasn't up for the job. This particular part of their story is very cloudy, I'm not saying your right and what Mark Lewisohn discovered is wrong, there's a point where these two versions must meet and that's the cloudy bit Lol, i do love watching your vids dave and look forward to the next, and parts of the story like this of theirs is why we talk and talk about them still as well as what they eventually did .
You are right, that was my slip up! I am doing part 2 this weekend and correct myself on that. Well spotted mate!
As for the cloudy nature of this day, everyone apart from Mark Lewisohn in Tune In has said it was an artist test/ audition. He said they were under contract. They weren't. I went to the former top solicitor in Liverpool who explained it for me, clarifying what I knew, as I studied contract law many moons ago BB ( Before Beatles!!) This was definitely an artist test/ audition, and the confirmation is in Mark's earlier book, The Beatles Chronicles, where it shows the letter from George Martin to the execs to sign their half of the contract, and then he receives it back - it was around 18th June. So they were definitely not under contract. I knew working in an office for all those years would come in handy one day!! 😂
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Thanks for the reply's David, always great to chat Beatles look forward to next part take care.
The evidence shows that Pete Best wasn't too bothered at the time, because he was immediately offered other drumming places which he turned down. Ultimately, he never became anyone's chosen drummer.
My take on this, is that he was given the job to get the Hamburg bookings and was totally fine for live sessions in noisy clubs. But the evidence also shows that if Pete played a song more than once, you got different drumming each time, and he added flourishes where they weren't needed. He could play a drum set - he just didn't really 'get' what the drums were for in a vocal three guitars and a drum kit group.
I also tend to think he wouldn't have stood there in front of Brian and not insisted he was given a reason for his sacking. Brian almost certainly told him, but his familiar whine was _'I don't know why I was sacked,'_ because it allowed him to make the _'I was cheated'_ and/or _'they were jealous'_ inferences. It's a shame he didn't just say _'Well, Ringo got the job and look what happened. He was just a better drummer than me.'_ It would probably have netted him more appearance fees. He likes to claim he didn't harbour any grudge, but he obviously did, because only he promoted the legend of being cheated and a victim of jealousy.
He also claimed John would have fought for him if he'd been there with him when he got sacked. However, it was John who made the most damning criticism of him in interview.
He's part of the history and he's an important part of it at that, albeit for maybe the wrong reasons. But he netted 7-figures out of 'Anthology' and rightly so. His own apocryphal version of the sacking story, however - and with some slight variations - remains the same.
Ringo nailed it with a 'less is more' approach and an intuitive sense of timing. Pete lost it because he saw the kit as an improvising instrument, not a metronome. Ringo never did a notable drum solo without being pushed into it briefly for Abbey Road. Pete never did a notable drum track, because he was never intent on becoming a notable drummer.
Even as far in the distance as the Let It Be sessions, we can see Ringo basically did as he was told. With Ringo, it was as much his personality as his ability. Pete was toast as soon as the negative feedback came through from the 1.1.62 Decca audition.
Playing drums, particularly in a rock band, is about keeping good time. You can add flourishes, embellishments, and what have you, but you have to keep time and support the song. If you can't do that effectively, you're kinda useless.
I've heard some of those early recordings with Pete playing the drums, no offense to those PB fans but his playing was overall anemic. On the other hand, Ringo's technique was much stronger and way more developed. Ringo knew how to kick a band, he was much more musical with his grooves, accents, and fills throughout each song. Also, Ringo's time is impeccable. It was a no brainer to replace Pete, he was the weakest link by far!
_On my first visit in September [4 Sept] we just ran through some tracks for George Martin. We even did "Please Please Me". I remember that, because while we were recording it I was playing the bass drum with a maraca in one hand and a tambourine in the other. I think it's because of that that George Martin used Andy White, the_ *_"professional",_* _when we went down a week later [11 Sept] to record "Love Me Do"._
- Ringo Starr
_"George [Martin] got his way and Ringo didn't drum on the first single [11 Sept]. He only played tambourine."_
- Paul McCartney
Engineer Geoff Emerick in his book stating that George Martin, Norman Smith and *Paul McCartney* were all dissatisfied with Ringo's timekeeping on 4 Sept, his first appearance at the studio. McCartney got his way as well.
Well Ringo was no better than Pete for sure.
@@johnburns4017 I respectfully disagree, this was a business decision - not musical. As much as I marvel at Paul's talent and love his music, he's known to not have the best memory. Also, Ringo has always stated and George Martin confirmed, Andy was used due to the studio already hiring him for the session prior to George Martin's knowledge of Pete being replaced by Ringo.
Great vid. 🎶
Thank you.
Really interesting video. But what is it with the subtitles? They're terrible! But why do you even need them if you have the proper ones as an option?
Sorry, I had a few people asking for subtitles, so tried it, but with TH-cam adding there's too, seems to be pointless. Trying to please as many as possible, especially those where English is a second language.
It's 60 years too late, but I think it would have been cool to have Paul and George both sing the "love me do" line in harmony when John went to the harmonica. As crazy as it sounds I can practically hear it in my head.
With 2 tracks to play with, they had to keep it simple for the first song. I am sure it would have come naturally to them, though.
Pete Best was literally on the cusp of fame and fortune back to driving a delivery van within days. Goodness knows how he must have felt but I think he's picked up a small sum in royalties now. Do you have a link for Part 2? I looked on your channel listings but couldn't see it.
I know, it was hard for him indeed. Here is the link to Part 2 th-cam.com/video/_c0w53rM7CI/w-d-xo.html
Thanks
I noticed "Glad All Over" on the list. That's a Dave Clark 5 song. I know the DC5 were around in 1962, but they didn't record the song until 1963. Hmm…
I noticed that and it is curious. I don't have the answer yet!
@@BrightmoonLiverpool I found the answer. Carl Perkins did a song by the same name in 1957. This is the song the list refers to. The Beatles recorded it at the BBC sessions.
I don't believe for one moment what Paul claims to have said about Pete in response to George Martin's comments. If Paul truly believed that the future of the Beatles hinged on getting a better drummer (which is what you seem to be saying), then he and the others would have required Ringo to audition in front of George Martin - and be approved by Martin - before he was allowed to become a member of the group. Nothing else would have made any sense if what Paul said is true. But a formal audition never happened. Instead, Ringo showed up on 4 September and started playing drums as if he were there to stay. George Martin has said he was appalled when he saw Ringo hitting the cymbals with the maracas. Plus, of course, he couldn't play LMD the way Martin wanted him to. Thankfully, all of this nonsense was finally brought to an end when Andy White was brought in on 11 September. Ringo was apparently the only member of the group who was upset about it.
Thanks for your comments. It was a business decision and if Bobby Graham, the first drummer they approached had said yes, it would have been fine, as he was also a session drummer. I am pretty sure that when they asked Ringo, John, Paul, and George were pretty certain that Ringo would not play on the record, though don't think they told him that. And they never asked George Martin's advice! That is strange too.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Yes, David, you're right, the Threatles knew Ringo wasn't going to play on the record. They knew that because they'd played with Ringo a couple times and knew he wasn't better than Pete. And they knew that, if anything, Pete had considerably more studio experience than Ringo. But none of that mattered, because they weren't sacking Pete over his drumming skills, they were sacking him over their petty jealousies that Pete was, and had been for 2 years, the far and away most popular Beatle with the fans, the club managers, and the press. And they thought that huge gap between their popularity and Pete's was only going to grow exponentially once studio execs got control of the band's promotions.
In addition to this video being educational, I see the headstock of a Fender bass over the narrator's right shoulder. We're on the same page. I'm playing P basses for 50 years! Best bass ever made IMHO
Thank you! Yes, a bass and a Strat too as I play both. Fantastic guitars.
Glad you enjoyed the video too! David
@@BrightmoonLiverpool The Strat is one of my two all time favorite guitars 🎸. You play the best instruments David
@@bwithrow011 I am very lucky! And I now get to play bass and acoustic guitar with The Quarrymen! How lucky am I?
@@BrightmoonLiverpool You are lucky indeed! I believe The Quarrymen later becoming The Beatles were the trail blazers. Just about every musician I know started playing because of The Beatles
Did you say that John, Paul, and George asked 4 others to be their drummer, and Ringo was the one who accepted? What 4 others? I don't think that is correct. Martin said, 'No Pete on sessions,' John, Paul, and George said let's get Ringo. Ringo said yes, and Pete was fired. Ain't no '...other four.' Tell me, what other 4?
There was a period of confusion because it looked like Ringo - who the band were interested in but not dead-set on - wouldn't be able to join due to commitments; the band knew the session-drummer thing seemed like a reality, so they asked around with an eye to hiring another drummer, Johnny Hutchison from the Big Three and Bobby Graham from Joe Brown And The Bruvvers being two of the 4 in your question - there was also the 3 days between the Wednesday and Saturday in mid-August 1962 after Pete had been fired and said he would honor their commitments but never showed up again, so they borrowed Johnny Hutchison to (reluctantly) help out. You really need to read the "Undesirable Member" chapter in Mark Lewison's "Tune In", that will tell you everything!
I can tell you even more than Tune In as I found all four and corroborated them in my book, Finding the Fourth Beatle, with a stunning discovery!
Bobby Graham was the first to be asked, and he was a great session drummer and live drummer too, but he was never going to quit London and his gig to move to Liverpool to join a band he'd never heard of who had just got a record deal. Mark Lewisohn suggests it was a temporary offer until Ringo was free, but that isn't true. It was a permanent offer to replace Pete Best. The second to be asked was a local drummer, Ritchie Galvin from Earl Preston and the TTs. A great drummer. He said no. Then Ringo was asked on a Saturday and said yes. Brian confirmed it on the Tuesday, Pete was given the bad news on the Wednesday afternoon and at first promised to play that night. He didn't.
As Johnny Hutchinson was playing with the support band, the Big Three, he was asked to sit in with The Beatles. After the gig, Hutch was offered the permanent position in the Beatles by Brian and Bob Wooler. This was the day after Ringo had accepted the role, though Peter Brown said that Ringo was hired on probation initially. Interesting eh?
at 15.48 you said it could not have worked with any one else..to me thats an after the fact statement
Absolutely right, I was making that as an observation looking back. John, Paul, and George didn't know when they hired Ringo that it would work out as well as it did.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool And I'll wager - neither did Ringo!
Interesting video, thank you. Do you think that George Martin could have had session musicians record all the instruments, not just the drums? Especially for Rubber Soul?
Once they had got into the swing of 1963 and expanding their requirements, it was more about who to add as opposed to replacing the main four. That was never in question, but they were happy to step back if the arrangement needed it eg She's Leaving Home on which none of them played.
Norman Smith who became a pop star himself in the 70s as Hurricane Smith
Yes, a very talented man and a great drummer too.
What is a skip beat? I am a drummer and I don't know this term.
It is the change in rhythm that Pete does going into the bridge "Someone to love" that seems to skip
Hmm, it all seems like a shuffle to me, and the beat in the verse and bridge are nearly identical. It seems odd that any experienced drummer would not be able to do both of them, or switch between them. Ringo is a fantastic and underrated drummer, and he was the right drummer for the band. But his genius is more about feel than technique. I think that if Pete Best couldn't make that transition in the audition, it was probably just nerves, and the producers were in a hurry and didn't want to explain to him what they wanted. As you said in the video, they were tough judges of drummers.
Also, Ringo was right for the band because he wasn't a prima donna. If you watch Get Back, you will see that he is clearly the most professional member of the group -- he always did what he needed to do. That is under-appreciated. Too many drummers try to do too much. Ringo always did just enough. I have deep respect for him, and I wish I could do a fast shuffle ride like he does!
@heathermeeker5298 You make mkre excellent points. Ron Richards was always going to use a session drummer as was proved when Ringo wasn't good enough for him either.
I agree about Ringo's style, too. He always knew the right feel and right beat for the song and just because there was silence, it didn't mean it had to be filled!
See # 2:35 This was a suggested MEDLEY, a combination of those three songs as one piece... not a "suggested melody". You need to get a hold of Gerry Marsden's autobiography to fill in some bits you are missing about those days and about Pete. Gerry was there.
Dont let it die..I bought that song by hurricane Smith.. as in norman Smith.lived near me in barnet...
He was multi-talented was old Hurricane.
The whole thing seems to be about getting that recording contract and taking George Martin's "advice". They would do what it took. Ringo wasn't even the next consideration. But as it all turned out. The right decisions were made during that time of June 6th to a signed contract later in June and the eventual recordings on September 4th.
A perfect summation, thank you. They would have done anything to get that contract and if it meant sacrificing the drummer, they would do it. Paul says it was a tough decision, but they had to do something.
David, another feather in your cap. I love your content. Even if I disagree with parts of it, you have a great way of presenting the results of your research.
Let me push back first on your inclusion of Paul's quote in the Lewisohn book, without calling into question the truthfulness behind Paul's words. It's obvious that Paul was lying, to make it sound like it was George Martin's idea to sack Pete. It makes no sense whatsoever that Martin would pull the three guitarists aside while their drummer was in the bathroom and suggest they get rid of him. While also a few minutes before or after, telling Brian that Pete would only be replaced on the record (a common practice) and no one would ever know. Good grief, Paul, no A&R man worth his salt would ever do that, particularly the first day he met the band. And particularly because it wasn't Martin's wish that Pete be sacked. Paul, you fabricated that story so you could claim it wasn't your (and Lennon's and Harrison's) idea to sack Pete, that you resisted (Ha!) the suggestion on the grounds that you couldn't betray Pete (LOLOL), but that you simply had to sack him because the contract hung in the balance. What an utter crock of schit. smh It never happened.
And if it would have happened--which it did not--Martin would've said the same exact thing to you as he said to Brian, which is EXPLICITLY that Pete could remain the drummer as far as everybody knew, do all the live performances, that this would simply be a substitution in the studio for the first record. The fact is, Martin wanted Pete to remain the band's drummer. Not just evidenced by his comments that you, David, highlighted that the 4 of them must stay together. But also because of this quote from Martin, *"Pete Best had a sullen charm, and I was surprised when I learned they'd replaced him. Pete was the best-looking Beatle, and the most marketable among them."*
So I'm putting the question directly to ya, David. Do you agree with me that Paul's claims about Martin pulling him and Lennon and Harrison aside while Pete was in the bathroom to suggest they dump Pete, doesn't pass the giggle test?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for raising this. I think Paul's quote is a variation on what happened! I also highly doubt George Martin speaking to him like that. I agree that any discussion was between George Martin and Brian. Then Brian spoke to John, Paul and George and told them that George Martin didn't think Pete was good enough to play on the record. I think Brian misunderstood Martin.
I then believe John, Paul and George saying that Pete was a great live drummer, but if the producer thought he wasn't up to the task, maybe they should change the drummer - big misunderstanding!
I believe, like you say, that it was Brian's misunderstanding of studio protocols where it was normal to use session musicians. They didn't need to change the drummer. But they did.
Agree with that? 🤔😁
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Yes and no. lol I obviously agree that Martin never pulled the Fab 3 aside and suggested sacking Pete. So I'm glad to hear you see right through that lie out of Paul's mouth as clearly as I do. But here's where we part. Martin says he made it clear to Brian that this would be an anonymous substitution in the studio only, and that there's no reason why Pete shouldn't remain The Beatles' drummer, that he was plenty good enough for live performances. That quote is on tape, you've heard, I've heard it, everyone's heard it. So then why would you think that Brian misunderstood Martin? Brian was a very sharp man. There's no evidence that Brian misunderstood Martin. Brian may not have known that it was commonplace, Martin may not have explicitly explained that it was a common practice. But Martin certainly conveyed to Brian that it was no big deal, and most importantly, that it wouldn't affect the band's lineup in any way.
In fact, David, there's evidence to the contrary--evidence that Brian fully understood Martin. Because when the Fab 3 told Brian they wanted to replace Pete with Ringo, Brian fought them on the decision. When they wouldn't listen to him, Brian enlisted the help of Cavern DJ and Beatles insider, Bob Wooler, to meet with them in an attempt to convince them into keeping Pete in the band. Now why would Brian do all that if he had--as you suggested--misunderstood Martin, and thought that Pete being replaced, *in the band,* not just the studio, was a requirement by Martin for him to consider offering the band a contract?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@Cosmo Kramer I'm not disagreeing with you as such. I don't think, even with George Martin explaining that, that they realised that they could keep Pete.
To further my theory, I think once John Paul and George heard it and decided that they might have to change the drummer, they then looked for reasons to justify it to themselves, which is when all of the nonsense myths get spouted about his haircut, not socialising, being quiet etc came from them trying to justify doing it. But if George Martin doesn't think he was good enough to play on the record, even though he was great live, then maybe they should change him. But only once the contract was guaranteed. I agree that Brian opposed it and I think that when they told him it would get rid of Mona! Still didn't convince Brian or Bob.
But we know that discussions happened, because I interviewed Brian's lawyer who confirmed that a couple of weeks after the audition, Brian asked him about how they would go about replacing Pete.
Too many words have been spent on this! Pete was signed along with the rest of the band. ... George Martin was surprised that Pete was fired. Nobody wanted to talk about it. But, the truth is simple. John Lennon turned against him ...and he was out.
@Rory Blake Thanks Rory. There is no evidence for that conclusion from the time. Unless you pick one random quote from John a decade later when he was bitter about everything.
What is your evidence?
Facinating blow by blow account Dave. Well done good to see you
Thanks Mike good to see you too.
In today's world they would have kept Pete Best just for band promotion. He would have been the favorite of the girl fans .
Exactly. Using session musicians was normal practice back then.
Who's "they"?? I hope you're not talking about Martin. He never wanted Pete to leave the group. Martin said, *"I was surprised to learn that Pete Best had been replaced. Pete had a sullen charm, and he was the best-looking and most marketable member of the band."*
If "they" refers to John, Paul & George, they sacked Pete precisely *because* he was already the most popular member of the band, and they feared that would only get worse (from their perspective) once the band got big.
@@Cosmo-Kramer Somebody told the rest of the Beatles he wasn't good enough and they might not get a contract if they decided to keep him. Who told them that?
@@Sneakycat1971 No one told them that. Who are you suggesting told them that?
The day they walked into EMI with Ringo was the day everything changed for Pete? He had already been fired? Everything changed in August when he was thrown out.
What time of the day was this audition?
I wonder if Pete had some hard- hitting heavy-footed live magic on the straight up rock 'n roll covers and we don't really know about it since Brian seemed to downplay that aspect of the band in the auditions. We can maybe hear some of it in the excitement & raw energy of "My Bonnie", even if (because?) Bert Kampfert gave up on Pete's bass drum. As great as the band's single take *With The Beatles* recording of "Long Tall Sally" is, there's something special IMO in the explosive feel of "My Bonnie" that they never quite replicated.
That said, Ringo ("best drummer in Liverpool") was clearly on a different level overall than Pete, as evidenced by the fact that aside from being 0 for 2 w/Beatle producers, Pete wasn't asked to join any other up & coming band after the firing. Brian put something together for him.
Pete did have an incredible powerful bass drum hit called the "Atom Beat," which defined the sound the Beatles created in Hamburg and Liverpool. That's why John loved that period when they were playing straight rock.
In 1962, Ringo and Pete were regarded as good as each other in Liverpool, though they had different styles. Pete's was harder hitting r n r. The best drummer in Liverpool was Johnny Hutchinson, who was offered the job of replacing Pete but turned it down.
The story of Pete being criticised by producers is mythical. Kaempfert didn't like rock n roll, but easy listening schlager music. He asked Pete to only use his snare and cymbals and did a brilliant job. His drumming is excellent on those recordings, as you have said.
Pete was also not criticised by Decca either. In fact, Mike Smith criticised Paul, whose vocals were shocking, George's guitar was not great, and John was a little ropey, too. Nobody seems to talk about that. In fact, when Pete joined his next group, Lee Curtis and the All Stars, Mike Smith at Decca produced him, and had no problems with Pete's drumming.
Hope that helps?
@@BrightmoonLiverpool if Kaempfert didn't like rock and roll, must say he had a funny choice of projects to take on!
Overall I hear Ringo in a very different league technically than Pete...I don't hear Pete as Ed Sullivan show ready. But the insane excitement generated in My Bonnie is something hard to forget, in line w/John's quote re. Hamburg days. For whatever reason they didn't quite hit those energy heights w/Ringo, even on the stellar 1st takes like "Long Tall Sally" that were so fabulous. I'm glad someone else gets that!
@@BrightmoonLiverpool P.S....Decca wasn't sweating details of drum production w/Lee Curtis and All Stars for the same reason the band was renamed "Pete Best & The All-Stars". This was during Beatlemania and the marketing of Beatle wigs, drumming subtlety was the least of their concerns.
I've been a Beatles nut since I was 12 back in 82. I'm wondering about the accuracy of some of your info. You say the Beatles were happy with Pete and it was only G.Martin who wanted rid of him, and so they had to think of which drummer to bring in, and it was Ringo who said yes. My understanding is that the boys had been dissatisfied with Pete for a while, not only as a drummer, but he didn't really fit in. He wasn't on their wavelength, and usually moped off with his girlfriend after gigs. Years later, Lennon wrote a poem calling him "Randolph" and stating "you were never one of us". Ringo used to sit in occasionally, when Pete didn't bother turning up, and the boys KNEW back then, that Ringo sent the energy through the roof and that he was the right guy. So when G.Martin told them they needed another drummer,they didn't have to look far, they straight away asked Ringo.
"Moped off", lol. Umm, yeah, your bias is clear. I also love your, "Pete didn't bother showing up to gigs". LOL In TWO YEARS, Pete missed TWO DATES! One in December of '61, and one in March of '62. Once he was ill, and once he had to appear in court. On both dates, Pete gave the band ample notice to get a replacement. As for JP&G, umm, they all missed gigs during those 2 years themselves.
A lot of that, unfortunately, is revisionism from the Beatles trying to justify what they did.
We have no evidence that John, Paul, and George wanted rid of Best. It is very easy after the event to rewrite history, and they are very good at doing that.
Years later........ that's revisionism.
There was never any occasion when "Pete didn't bother turning up". Four times when he knew he couldn't make it, Ringo sat in at the beginning at Pete's request, so it made sense to go back to him if he was available.
And they didn't straight Ringo either. They asked, in order, Bobby Graham, Ritchie Galvin, Ringo, and Johnny Hutchinson. Three said no, Ringo said yes.
They took a chance on Ringo, knowing he was good live, but probably wouldn't be on the record - though they didn't tell him that!
David
@@BrightmoonLiverpool wrote:
_"We have no evidence that John, Paul, and George wanted rid of Best"_
That is true. A fact that is overlooked. Before the June 6 Abbey Rd session there is no evidence they wanted Pete out.
Thing that really goes unsaid is that Ringo was a catalyst for their songwriting abilities. As soon as he got there they weren't writing crappy songs anymore.
They were already writing songs by then. I don't think Ringo had much affect on their songwriting, but his greatest contribution was to the arrangements of the songs and his inventive drumming and percussion.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool hello little girl and love of the loved and other similar quality songs with not much variation and nothing tricky or out of the ordinary.
@steveshattah339 oh I agree with that. I think George Martin pushed them more than anyone else. Ringo's contribution was definitely more in the arrangement, though a lot of the time he was told what to do, by either John or Paul until, after a couple of years, they trusted him more and he made an incredible percussive contribution.
I have heard few years ago a bit of tape of this audition. The drumming of Pete Best is just appaling. Even with just a cymbal and a snare, he is unable to keep time and play along the others. How he could play live with the other is a mystery to me. But one thing is sure, Ringo was a far better and seasonned drummer. In fact, at the time, he was certainly the best musician of them all. After that, Pete Best, and especially his mother, went out with all that bullshit, saying he was fired because the other were jealous of his look, blahblahblah... Sorry, the only reason he was fired is because he was not good enough. Period.
What you heard that was appalling to you was a single take of, "Love Me Do", right after George Martin changed the arrangement, and they were working through it. It was not a finished product, it was a recorded practice session of a new arrangement the band was ambushed with by Martin. Go listen to the other song which survives from the audition, "Besame Mucho". Martin didn't change anything on that number and Pete was totally solid on it. It's also on Anthology.
I would change that period to a comma. Firstly, he wasn't just using his snare and hi hat - that was in Germany in 61.
The important point I was making in the video was that Ron Richards heard enough from the run-through to select Love Me Do as one of 4 songs to commit to tape for consideration. It was almost a demo because it was a new arrangement of an old song of theirs that they hadn't perfected yet. But it was good enough for Richards and then George Martin to take notice, which is what mattered.
What other drumming of his have you listened to? And are you a drummer? Just curious.
When you say Ringo was a far better and seasoned drummer and the best musician of them all, from where are you getting your knowledge and evidence? Were you there at the time in Liverpool?
What makes you think Ringo was so good back in 1962? George Martin didn't think so, because his drumming was too irregular and he couldn't keep time very well. Paul Mccartney has also stated that too.
Do you think that if Best couldn't keep time and was so erratic that John, Paul and George would have put up with him for 2 years? They went through a lot of musicians until they got the right blend, with both John and George saying that the Beatles were at their best around the dance halls of Liverpool and Hamburg. That was with Pete Best.
I've spoken to many many musicians and fans in Liverpool who all tell me what a great drummer Pete was and that the Beatles then were a fantastic group to watch and listen to. Nobody criticised Best and they were all shocked when he was kicked out.
You say Pete was "appalling". Can you explain what you mean?
@@BrightmoonLiverpool It's very difficult to know what happened exactly in those years. I have read, as you it seems, many interviews and declarations about it, that's how i know Ringo has already established a reputation for himself during his tenure with Rory (57 to 62) before he joined the Beatles. He had even a solo spot, Starr Time... Lennon said once that they kept Pete Best in Hamburg because they have no one else. You had to be very reckless to go to Hamburg at this time, at their age. Pete was up to go abroad and probably good enough for this gig, as they were all in their formative years. But they already knew that he couldn't be the definitive drummer. They had played few times with Ringo who was, quote “a powerhouse” and each time they had come to the conclusion he probably could be the good fit. With him, the band was at another level. About the word appaling, i may have been wrong, i was meaning awful, terrible. I am french and my english is not exactly what i should have hoped for. I don't exactly remember where i heard Pete Best playing with the guys, neither the song, and just few bars. But there is one thing for sure, he was not able not only to keep a good timing, but unable to play a single note in place. With just a cymbal and a snare ! The worse piece of drumming i've ever heard. I heard Pete Best playing later, when he was about forty, or fifty, i guess. He had obviously improved, but he was just an average amateur drummer, no more. Nothing compared to Ringo who was the perfect fit for the band, the greatest in the league "less is the best". Did he really played on the final take of Love Me Do, or did George Martin hired a professional drummer ? We'll probably never know. But later, Martin showed the uttermost respect for the quote “unique drumming of Ringo”. Another issue with Pete Best was that he was not socialising with the other guys. The Fab Four had the same sense of humour, they were a close unit, on both musical and personal sides. Getting rid of him was probably a difficult thing to do, but with insight we may be sure it was the right choice. I am/was a drummer myself and in this little community, there is a saying : “you can judge a band by his drummer” or " a band can't never be better than his drummer". Sad for Pete Best, but in the end he finally got a big cheque (a 6 figures I' seem to remember) when Anthology was released.
Yeah they got extended in Hamburg by popular demand because Pete was so dreadful and couldn't play at all.
Agree with you about George Martin not having a problem with Pete. I felt that the mention of his visit to the Cavern doesn't fit with your conclusion however as he went there on December 9th, 1962. Long after Pete was gone. A minor quibble.
Yes, that was my error, and I am correcting that in the next video. Glad you enjoyed this one.
Apparently sometime in the 1990's Paul McCartney handed over a substantial amount of cash to Pete Best in recognition of the fact that he missed out on being part of Beatlemania due to being replaced by Ringo in 1962.
It was actually Apple who contacted Pete, because Pete appeared on the Anthology CDs playing on several tracks, and so he was entitled to royalties. Took a bit of persuasion from Pete to get his share, but he did get it eventually. Unfortunately, Paul won't communicate with Pete on any level and hasn't since 1962. A shame.
The truth is Pete had to be paid for his part in the Beatles Anthology in 1994 and I heard he got about 5 million..so yep he was one of the biggest losers in pop music culture but he is still part of the Beatles legacy and that can never be taken away from him… sad unfortunate story for him but life craps on you at times
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Musicians who play on a record are not entitled to royalties, only the composer gets royalties. Pete would not have been entitled to any percentage for playing drums. Just wages for the day as a session man.
This is the very first time I've seen the set list for that audition.. Do you have the set list die the decca sessions too?
Yes, and will do a full analysis of it too soon. We have the recordings from that day thankfully.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool wow I'm impressed and thank you for your reply
What's a skip beat? I've been drumming for 65 years and have no idea what that is. I never heard of it until just now.
I think it refers to what Pete played in the middle eight section of LMD. I quite like it although I can hear it didn't work on that particular take.
@@brendanwalsh108 I'd have to hear it.
It is a term used by some musicologists relating to the variation of the tempo in the middle eight that makes a change in the rhythm.
Brilliant and spot on David. a great historic insight and explanation.
Thanks Ralph
Interesting that beautiful songs like "P.S. I Love You" and "Ask Me Why" were initially deemed not up to Parlophone's lofty standards, further evidence of drum troubles obscuring talent soon to become unmistakeable. Dums *are* that crucial.
Later during the actual "Love Me Do" session(s) "P.S. I Love You" was discussed as the A-side but the title had been previously used. And yes, that was the (only) session even Ringo was benched. "Love Me Do" *is* damn difficul to drum well -- all that "air'.
I agree. They had superior songs to Love Me Do, including Hello Little Girl, too. George Martin wasn't impressed with any of them, but the harmonica on Love Me Do was what got that released. Thankfully, Ringo adapted quickly to the studio.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool
_"Like Dreamers Do"_ was the song on the Decca tape that attracted Kim Bennett and Sid Colman of EMI owned publishers Ardmore and Beechwood. They wanted the song on their books, with EMI recording the song to get it known and in their camp - it happened to be Martin appointed by Wood, Martin's boss. Other artists could record it with a different treatment and singer if it was a flop by the unknown _The Beatles._ They knew the song had legs so may be a hit with another artist.
Lewisohn says Ardmore and Beechwood got Martin's boss to instruct Martin to take _The Beatles_ on for an initial six recordings. In short it was an assignment for Martin.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool It struck me when I saw the other acts major British studios were recording at that time, people weren't exactly flooding in off the streets w/songs of that caliber. Makes me wonder a little about George Martin!
But it's very hard for a classically trained producer to hear anything behind an awkward and/or irregular drum beat.
@@johnburns4017 very interesting John, thank you! Turns out the professional song guys had the *ears* , who woulda guessed it 😉
@@stayclean777
Martin delegated the first 6 June session to Ron Richards, who wanted a sessions drummer in after the session, as was the norm at the time. Even Ken Townsend says Martin knew little of rock music. Everything he touched in that genre failed. After _The Beatles_ he never did much either.
Great presentation, and story. If I had to critique anything it would be the abrupt ending. A gentler ending would have topped off this video nicely... *: )* JMO of course.
Thank you. Didn't want to waffle on! 😂
Didn't they wind up using a session drummer anyway for their first Love me do single, as Martin didn't think Ringo was good enough either?
Yes, Andy White was used because Ringo's timing wasn't accurate enough for George Martin.
The skip beat on that version of Love Me Do
isn't what did Pete Best in. He simply wasn't
professional enough. It's very easy to hear on the Decca audition.
Actually, Pete sounds better than each of his bandmates at the Decca audition. Although, due to the circumstances, the band as a whole was not at their best.
Wasn't professional on the Decca audition? What do you mean?
If we are going to judge the Beatles on that audition, then Paul's vocals were terrible, George's guitar work shocking and John's guitar and vocals were poor. George was the best singer.
What is it about Best's drumming that you didn't like? I have had it analysed by drummers and Pete was one of the best of the four on the day.
I question the source that attributed a quote to Paul saying they told George Martin they were quite happy with Pete as their drummer and he worked well with the audiences in the clubs, that somehow George Martin planted a seed of doubt in the Beatles mind for the first time. That flies in the face of every quote any of the Beatles made regarding Pete Best. Paul has said on numerous occasions that they had become dissatisfied with his drumming and John was even more blunt, saying the rest of the band was getting better but Pete never put in the effort to improve. Also, I have never seen, heard, or read about that conversation taking place. According to George Martin he approached Brian Epstein, not the band, about Pete.
By the looks of it, and based on what the other Beatles had to say, Pete was more of a loner who never really ingratiated himself with his bandmates. He wouldn't cut his hair to match their style and from what I've read he usually went his own way after the gigs. He also lacked charisma. He may have been popular with the girls but I've seen interviews he has given over the years and he always seemed to be uncomfortable in those settings. His mother, who according to all accounts was quite domineering, did most of the talking when he gave interviews after the Beatles became famous. I've also heard she rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, including Brian Epstein by expressing her point of view on how the band should be handled. That couldn't have helped Pete's standing in the band. In the interviews he gave later he just seemed to be very reserved, to the point of being stiff. There's nothing wrong with that, but I think the band wanted someone a bit more lively, someone with a bit of pizzazz. I know there has been a lot of talk of John and Paul being jealous of Pete but I don't put much stock in that. If that was the case they would have dumped him when they returned from Hamburg.
The bottom line, as George pointed out, is Ringo was a better fit for the group. He was a better drummer, he was easy going, great with the press, and he went along with what the band wanted him to do. Maybe Pete wanted to keep his individuality. If so, he got his wish. Brian felt bad about firing him and tried to put him together with other bands but it never worked. Still, for a guy who got tossed out of a band he did okay for himself, parlaying his time with the Beatles into consulting gigs on movies, spots on documentaries, and forming bands that capitalized on his time with the group. I listen to the Decca recordings and I hear a drummer who is not as good as Ringo. John later denied saying it but it is true, Ringo may have been a good drummer but was a great Beatle. John, Paul, George and Pete? That doesn't even sound right. But that's me, and I know it's not a popular take. So be it.
Firstly, what the second part of the series which will andwer some of your questions.
But it also has George Martin clearing up who he spoke to and what he said.
As for the various excuses/ stories/ myths etc, I am going to cover every single quote any of them ever made, with sources, which will include Paul McCartney saying that Pete Best was a really good drummer. The purpose of these 2 films was to discuss what happened on 6th June primarily and how it was the beginning of the end for Pete Best.
The other Beatles haven't helped by saying so many different things over the years it has muddied the waters and made it worse for themselves!
In hindsight, we can see how great a choice Ringo was. The problem with comparisons from history is that you are trying to compare Pete Best on 1st Jan 1962 with Ringo circa 1965. That doesn't work if we are to be objective.
For me, Pete Best was, according to everyone I have spoken to who saw him back then, was a great live drummer in a rock n roll covers band.
But the Fab Four with Ringo were a pop group recording original songs. They had left most of the rock behind. Ringo was perfect for that.
I give credit to both for the roles they played.
Interestingly, Producer George Martin wasn't happy with Ringo Starr's Drumming either!
He replaced Ringo with session Drummer Andy White on a follow up session on September 11,1962 for which Ringo never forgave him. Ringo played Tambourine on "Love Me Do" and Maracas on "P.S. I Love You". Ringo did not play on "Please Please Me".
Ringo Starr played Drums on the September 4,1962 session and did a great job on "How Do You Do It" but he sounded tentative on "Love Me Do".
It was still the version of "Love Me Do" that was released as The Beatles first "A" Side Single.
For some reason, after the first pressing of the "Love Me Do" Single, the Andy White version was pressed and issued instead.
The "B" side was P.S. I Love You with Ringo Starr on Maracas and Andy White on Drums.
Absolutely right. Ringo, thankfully, got the chance to rehearse and have another go in the studio and proved himself.
Brightmoon, I suggest you slow down your speech if you want us Yanks to understand. You have a thick accent, which is OK for people with a similar accent. But I'm guessing a lot of your viewership is in America.
Thank you, this is me slowed down!! 😂 But I will take note and try and go slower - we Liverpudlians get very excited and talk too fast - it is the Irish and Welsh influences. Thanks for letting me know, I appreciate it.
Yankee go home
@@marknewbold2583 Wow what an intelligent comment. You are serving Brits well with your stunning intellect.
David,
John, Paul and George must have been demoralized when George Martin voiced his disapproval of Ringo Starr's Drumming on September 4,1962 and scheduled another session for September 11,1962 with session Drummer Andy White!
As you know, Ringo was relagated to playing Tambourine on "Love Me Do", Maracas on "P.S. I Love You and didn't appear on "Please Please Me."
Are you going to do in depth studies of the two Beatles recording sessions on September 4,1962 and September 11,1962?
Thanks and yes, I have written extensively about them, but can do that too. They are pivotal moments in Beatles history. David
Have a look at this one, an interview with Andy White th-cam.com/video/ws1QHAkaJ7w/w-d-xo.html
The Andy White 'Love Me Do' take is far superior to any other. Paul's vocal is less shaky. Ringo's tambourine bashing reinforced the beat and made the whole song 'meatier.' Pete probably wouldn't have grown in adapting to the Beatle's own amazing musical and personal evolution, from suited standard rockn'roll covers band to hippy dippy, and long haired originators within a few years . Ringo's Patterns and fills, became an important part of the composition arrangement process.
I agree about the White Love Me Do version, which is a little brighter, a touch quicker and snappier, and Ringo's tambourine does make a big difference for sure.
We will never know what Pete could have become. By 65, as the Beatles progressed, Ringo's contribution got greater and greater and was integral to the sound.
nice vid man, informative as a mother
Glad you enjoyed it
One reason for getting rid of Pete that doesn’t get much a mention but goes back to the Ken Brown incident at the Casbah when Ken Brown didn’t turn up for the gig but Mona Best was still going to pay him which John ,Paul and George weren’t happy about.Could it be that John,Paul and George weren’t happy that Pete would be paid royalties on record sales even though he wouldn’t be playing on the records?
Hi Andrew, that was one of my theories that I put forward in my 2009 book, Liddypool: Birthplace of the Beatles. Peter Brown who worked with Brian said that Ringo was taken on probation at first to see if it would work, so they could potentially split the proceeds of the record 3 ways. However, on 1st October 1962 all four signed a management contract with Brian and split record sales 4 ways, though John and Paul had a separate contract for their song publishing.
@@BrightmoonLiverpoolWhat needs to be looked into is why,seemingly behind John,Paul and George’s backs,Brian Epstein was trying to recruit a drummer other than Ringo.Some books are now stating that Ringo was only third choice to replace Pete.When Bobby Graham sometime later told George he had been approached by Epstein to be The Beatles drummer,George said he didn’t know anything about it.
@andrewhudson8966 Brian did nothing without the permission of at least John, as leader, but Paul and George too. Brian knew nothing about music or musicians. He offered the role to Bobby Graham at the end of July, who turned him down. He then approached Ritchie Galvin, who said no. He was then introduced to Ringo on Saturday night, offered him the job, and confirmed it on the following Tuesday. The following day, Pete was given the bad news. That night, Johnny Hutchinson sat in with the Beatles that night in Chester, and Brian offered him the job! He turned him down. Ringo joined the following Saturday. I have corroborated all of these offers and conversations. There was never a situation where they replaced Pete with Ringo. They chose to replace Pete and then started the search for his replacement. Four drummers were asked, Ringo said yes.
It would only have worked with Ringo! He was the perfect choice.
Didn't they do Red sails in the sunset, in Germany?
Yes, it was a regular back then.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool I have the cassette.
Is it documented anywhere at which point and why did George Martin understand for the first time (for instance, which song or songs) that Lennon and McCartney were songwriters of extraordinary talent?
I understand that he disliked their first compositions but what is the progression of his opinion that they were of special talent?
It was when they had reworked Please Please Me that he realised they had recorded a #1 and could really see the potential.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Thanks but I don't accept this answer. There have been plenty of one-hit wonders.
@mhpjii There have. I think it took them through the making of the Please Please Me album to really recognise a long term project, especially when the LP and then all singles getting to #1. By summer 63 he really knew they could last.
A very insightful video. However, Mark Lewisohn recently found a stunning letter signed by Brian Epstein to Decca records thanking them for their interest and offer to sign the Beatles, but that they have decided to accept another offer. Were you unaware of this??
That was regarding Decca's referring them to Tony Meehan who would produce records freelance, paid by the Beatles. Not Decca signing them.
@Björn Roth yes I had heard about this before about Tony Meehan's involvement as a producer for Decca Records when he left the Shadows as their drummer.
I know all about that. It has been common knowledge for many years. After Decca turned down signing them, they came up with another proposal, which would mean Brian paying Decca to produce the records for sale - almost like self-publishing. If he was desperate and George Martin had turned them down, I suppose he would have considered it as their only option left. Thanks for reminding us of this.
nice🎉😊
Thanks 😊
Good video that explains what really happened. For the beatles to say after the fact that they never liked him is kind of bs because they had 2 years to find another drummer. George didn't like him because he missed a lot of gigs. But the an average listener would not complain about his drumming. Only producers and other drummers didn't like it. They say the say the same thing about Lars Ulrich.
You make some very good points, thank you.
Pete didn't miss a lot of gigs. 4 in 2 years. George befriended Ringo in early 62.
The only producer to have questioned Pete's ability to play on a record was George Martin. Nobody else at the time questioned his ability.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, isn't it?
@@BrightmoonLiverpool I thought it was the assistant producer Robert's, who first complained about Pete's drumming. I found it interesting that one of the recording engineers, who was also a drummer, thought Pete's drumming was good. Missing 4 gigs in 2 years doesn't seem like much. I've been following the Pete Best firing fairly closely since I found out about it 5 years ago or so. It also bothers me that some band members put him down after he was gone. Like John said he was not a good drummer, and he never got any better, and they were always gonna find a new drummer. And obviously when Paul said George Martin wanted the Beatles to change drummers, that was a lie. Plus, as far as I know, not one Beatle ever uttered one word to him after his departure.
By the way, your three part series on the subject was excellent. It really cleared up all the questions I had about the whole thing. Also Pete's good looks might of made the Beatles more popular in the beginning. Ringo was the worst looking Beatle.
What "other drummers didn't like" Pete's drumming?
@@Cosmo-Kramer I've seen other TH-cam videos, where guys who said they were drummers, didn't like his drumming, but these weren't famous drummers.
Read "Tune In" by Mark Lewisohn, the best book on the subject. He tells the story where Pete had four attempts to prove himself and he failed all four times.
Back in Hamburgh, the Beatles talked about getting rid of Pete Best. I have a recording of John Lennon in Anthology 0 saying about Pete Best, "We were always going to get rid of him when we found someone better." Mark Lewisohn also writes: "With Ringo, the Beatles were remarkably better, from the beginning."
And the rest is history.
I have read the book. What you have offered me is the author's opinion on the change, which is interesting, but just an opinion of an author, so it doesn't count as he wasn't there.
John also said the Beatles were at their best playing straight rock in Liverpool and Hamburg. George said that musicially, the Beatles were at their best in Hamburg and Liverpool, where they became really tight as a band.
Best also didn't fail on four occasions, which again is just an opinion and not based in history. Bert Kaempfert didn't have fault with how Best was playing apart from the fact he was a rock n roll drummer. Kaempfert never ever used a rock drummer in his entire career. He did easy listening music, so asked Pete Best to just play his snare and hi hat. His drumming on My Bonnie is excellent.
He didn't fail at Decca either. The author doesn't quote the producer, Mike Smith, who said he preferred Best to Ringo, and recorded Best in 63.
Peter Pilbeam at the BBC recorded the Beatles in March and June 62 with Pete Best and he had no problem with his drumming.
The first and only one to raise the question was Ron Richards who was producing the June 62 audition. It was his recommendation to George Martin to use a session drummer.
It is all in my book with evidence, plus analysis of Best's drumming, by drummers. The book is called Finding the Fourth Beatle.
I also wasn't there, so I use the evidence of eyewitnesses and experts. I try not to impose my opinion, as although I've played in bands for over 40 years, I am not a drummer. But I know a good and bad drummer and trust me, it does not take you 2 years and hundreds of hours to suddenly realise your drummer can't play well!
And the comment about always going to replace him.... why didn't they? Had plenty of opportunities over 2 years. But why then did they sign a partnership agreement at the end of 1961? By the way, I am the only one to have found that lawyer and contract.
So the comment isn't backed up by evidence.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool First, you can listen to John's comment in Anthology 0. Second, they didn't have plenty of opportunities to replace him. There wasn't much much of a selection on Hamburg. Good for you to find the lawyer and contract. Why did they sign a partnership agreement in 1961? They were young and naive. John and Paul made an equally bad deal for the publishing right to their songs.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Actually it does count. Lewisohn's research is impeccable. I spent six months researching a screenplay about the Beatles from the day John and Paul met until their first appearance on Ed Sullivan. It's hard to find evidence for that time period and what one does find has a lot of contradictions. Every time Lewisohn provided the definitive and accurate information for me to construct the first eight years of the group's development.
I have heard the recordings -- he actually did fail on all four occasions.
Also, you fail to mention that it was John who brought Paul into the group. Paul who brought George into the group. And George who brought Ringo into the group. Another insight brought out in Lewisohn. I have heard Best' solo on "Love Me Do," it's a kitchen sink version. Really, really bad.
if you knew the history of "My Bonnie" you would know that they removed his bass drum and tom-toms because he was such as screw-up.
It's becoming clear that your view on Best is more opinion than anything else.
He did fail miserably at Decca. Again at Decca, they had to muffle his playing and remove some of his drums. All of this information is in "Tune In."
I'm surprised you didn't remember reading that.
I will read your book when I have the time. But Lewisohn's book is the best I have found.
Well, it doesn't take a good drummer to notice a bad one. And Pete Best was a bad drummer by all accounts.
When they returned from Hamburg, they had lots of opportunity to get another drummer but never considered it. Both John and George have made it clear that the Beatles were at their best musicially in Liverpool and Hamburg when they became a great, tight rock band.
The partnership agreement was drawn up because Brian was getting a management contract drawn up, and they were advised to get independent legal advice, which they did. So, they became the first group in Liverpool to have a legal partnership agreement in place.
Although their songwriting deal left them in trouble over song ownership, it was one of the better deals around. You have to question why, after Ardmore and Beechwood helped get them their record deal with George Martin and they promoted Love Me Do, that George Martin then suggests Dick James as publisher - though they were friends. But nobody got good songwriting deals ever in music - it still goes on today. They offer a deal, you sign it, whatever it is. Grossly unfair on the artists.
According to Mark Lewisohn, this was their first EMI recording day, not an audition. It didn't go well, but nevertheless; they had a contract on making 4 "sides".
Unfortunately he was misinformed. It was only an audition, as although Brian had signed his part of the contract, EMI hadn't signed theirs. Everybody there knew it was an audition too. The contract became valid when EMI signed their side of the contract around 18th June 1962. The evidence is in Mark's excellent Beatles Chronicles book, which shows the letters and when the contract was signed. So it was just an audition.
I also checked with the most senior solicitor in Liverpool to be sure. David.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Which begs the question, David...when did Brian, and subsequently The Threatles, know that Martin had signed the contract and the deal was official? Did Brian find out via a phone call from EMI on or shortly after the 18th of June? Or did he not find out until he received the signed contract in the mail in the latter half of July?
@Cosmo-Kramer Not until the contract arrived at the end of July making it official. That's when they started approaching other drummers.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool Okay. And did John and Paul give Brian their approval to approach Graham, Galvin and Hutch? Or was Brian acting on his own?
@@Cosmo-Kramer Brian must have had their approval. He never got involved in band matters like that without their permission.
What a fortune it was that Ringo got in.
It worked out perfectly for the Beatles. Nobody else could have done what he did.
I just happened to listen to the decca recording yesterday, and I noticed they played the song "money" a lot differently, and a lot worse in my opinion, than the version of money that later came out on the Beatles album. The whole decca recording wasn't very good. The drums seemed to be very much in the background.
It was poorly recorded, and the whole session was poor from them all. Easy to understand why they weren't signed.
I'd love to hear Beatles version of Fats Waller's "Your Feets too big"
Good stuff
Glad you enjoyed it
With all of his talk about why he wanted to bring in a session drummer, why then didn't George Martin bring one in for their first recording session on September 4th? I can imagine John, Paul, George, and Brian all glancing around the studio expecting to see a drummer since Martin had been so adamant about his intentions.
Then at the second recording session after they had likely concluded that Martin had changed his mind about it, now to their surprise they arrive at the second session and find out that Andy White will be playing drums. That must have made Ringo pretty nervous especially if he knew that Pete had been fired in part as a result of comments by George Martin.
George Martin called the Beatles down for the 4th September to see how they had got on with Love Me Do, but especially How Do You Do It which they had been working on. This was a run through, not a recording session. He was amazed when they walked through the door with Ringo. He was expecting to see Pete. They did the run through with Ringo, and he did nothing to change George Martin's mind to use a session drummer. So, the following week, for making their first record, he brought in Andy White. John, Paul and George knew that, but didn't tell Ringo! So Ringo walks in and is surprised to see Andy White setting his drums up! A shock for Ringo!
@@BrightmoonLiverpool For some reason I had assumed that September 4th was intended as a recording session, i.e. George Martin thought they would possibly get a final recording out of it, but no big deal if a second session was required. Although I can see George Martin knowing that a finalized recording was unlikely in one session considering the Beatles' inexperience in the studio, and so he probably decided to save some money by not bringing a drummer to the first session. And if they happened to pull it all together in one session including Pete's drumming then so much the better, but he probably wasn't expecting that to be likely.
Also I thought another reason for not finalizing it on the 4th was because the Beatles were still undecided about using Love Me Do over the song George Martin wanted them to do. Not so much that they were undecided but George Martin was keeping the question open by having them record both, and then have them decide when they came back the next week. I know something like that happened with Please Please Me where he told them to come back after they sped it up, but now I realize that I don't remember exactly when the final Love Me Do decision was made.
Also I think I read once that the track with Ringo on it from September 4th was the one that was used on the Love Me Do single released in the U.K. apparently due to a mixup. Then the Andy White track was used on the album and on the U.S. release of the Love Me Do single. But the fact that the U.K. release made it onto the charts would seem to somewhat vindicate Ringo, and the Beatles, as they apparently did get something usable on tape on the 4th.
@Steve Pemberton Absolutely spot on Steve. George Martin wanted to see how they had progressed over the summer with what he had asked them to do with Love Me Do and How Do You Do It. There was no point paying for a session drummer to sit around doing nothing, when they hadn't even agreed what they were going to record.
Yes, ironically that Ringo said for years that he wasn't on the first single, but, by accident, he was! You can tell the difference because the Andy White version is a little quicker and brighter, but Ringo plays the tambourine, which really helps it too.
Who were the other 3 that was asked to replace Pete.. Was Jimmy Nichols one of them?
No, they didn't know Jimmie Nicol yet. It was Bobby Graham, Ritchie Galvin and Johnny Hutchinson who were also asked and all said no.
@@BrightmoonLiverpool thanks for the info and your reply
@@petejones879 A pleasure Pete
@@BrightmoonLiverpool I have now subscribed to your channel.. I've been a Beatles fan since the early 60s.. I was a child then the first record I ever bought with my own pocket money was Hello Goodbye in 67 cost me seven shillings and sixpence.. Still have it as I have with every vinyl I've ever bought.. I have most of the beatles albums but not all.. I've got 2 copies of the Magical mystery tour Ep tho lol
And there is nothing like vinyl is there? I've got that MMT Ep too!
Thanks for subscribing too :-)
A sad day for Pete, a monumental good fortune for the rest of the world.
Well summed up.
Pete Best is still alive and kicking - what's better - fame - and burning in flames ? - or silently fading - I prefer fading
So does he. He has a good life, a lovely family and lots of friends. You can't put a proce on that.