Sadly when Brian Epstein died they were screwed. Around Sgt peppers John was so strung out Paul had to take control which I think pissed John off but that could’ve been the end of them. Always loved Paul even though for the longest time it wasn’t cool. To me John became one of those ...I think they’re called limousine revolutionaries...something like that. Anyway with the things some bands are doing hell Paul & Ringo should do a show with Dani Harrison & Sean Lennon lol. Just kidding. Anyway I hated Allen Klein & Jann Wenner.
Perfect Joe! ‘Limousine Revolutionaries! You just helped write my next video on this subject! I’ll give ya a Shout-Out!❤❤❤ Can you even begin to guess who’ll be on my Limo-Revs list??? Hmmm…!!!! Now see whatcha started?
@@MichaelNoland-TheBottomLine Hey Michael, I dont know if I subscribed in time for a shoutout but I hope I can still make one for a final cut of a future video before october 28th 2022. Btw, could you consider a follow up video on this covering some post Beatles stuff? Ringo is one of your favourite drummers and itd be cool to see you discuss some of his early solo stuff. Especially getting to narrate Thomas the tank engine and friends and shoot Pizza Hut commercials
I always thought McCartney received rough treatment for many years. There's a Jan Wenner interview of Bob Dylan on TH-cam. He asks Dylan about what he thought of Lennon, and Dylan quickly turns it around to how astounded he is at McCartney's talent and gift for melody: "I'm just in awe of him". I bet that stuck in Wenner's craw, the prat!
@@robertgiles9124 ok this may be the dumbest reply I've heard since 3rd grade."rough treatment" is a figure of speech. it means bad reviews. so yes those albums were not good and the poor reviews were deserved, and no I never wrote a hit and neither did any of the critics. however we are here discussing the albums so yes we are allowed to critique regardless of our individual music catalogs
@@victorarena23 So Victor, who couldn't write a song and perform it to save his life, likes to spew a lot of nonsense about a genius. That's your right. So is it mine to say you're full of hot air. Get it now, cry baby? Works both ways. "I never wrote a hit and neither did any of the critics" ...what a surprise there.
I've alluded to it here earlier and someone has touched on it in this thread as well. Losing Brian Epstein was the beginning of the end. He was the only one that could keep the Beatles on an even keel. He's the one they all trusted completely and he was also their friend, a real friend (particularly John). Without him, it was only a matter of time. Also, you're absolutely correct as usual... The narrative of blaming the women was just a red herring to protect the interest of Klein, et al. Granted, Yoko had no business being in the studio and her constant presence and power over John did not help matters but the breakup was inevitable the moment Epstein was laid to rest and to put that burden on Yoko or Linda is about as unfair as it can get.
Way back before I knew better, the Yoko theory was at least somewhat believable. As for Linda, I never saw or read any evidence of her being overbearing or intrusive.
.....there was far, FAR more going on behind the scenes; Sergeant [JOHN, Ian Fleming's Bond inspiration Stephenson's successor] Pepper's begins to telegraph a LOT of SHOCKING information by BOTH its cover design and lyrics.....for another MASSIVE shock, seek out any videos related to 'Let HIM Be' on YT.....
While Epstein's death was clearly a turning point for the Beatles, as a practical matter they had already largely cut him out by the time of his death, just as they had largely taken over production responsibilities from George Martin. And truth is, they really didn't need a manager at that point, and being in their late twenties and seasoned professionals, they didn't really need someone to guide them through the industry. And they were eager to be their own men.
I think that is mostly accurate. Brian protected them from the vultures, but yet he made bad marketing deals with outsiders from Beatles Paraphanalia and such. Also part of their early song catalogue was sold because veteran publisher Dick James, who quickly secured The Beatles an appearance on the British pop show "Thank Your Lucky Stars." In February 1963, Dick James assisted the 22-year-old Lennon and the 20-year-old McCartney in forming a company called Northern Songs. Northern Songs would be 50% owned by Dick James and his partner Charles Silver, 10% owned by Brian Epstein, 20% owned by Lennon and 20% owned by McCartney. Years later, McCartney would explain that they were just too young and naive to know that this was a terrible deal. They never even read the contract. Incredibly, McCartney also admitted that neither he nor John ever actually met Charles Silver. So as faithful and protective as Brian was, he also screwed up royally...a lot...
You left out two things. John started to hate Klein and by 73 basically said that Paul was correct. Also, John did talk about making another album after Abbey Road a few weeks after the release. He also talked about working with the band a few years later but said the logistics were difficult. They had all become independent artists by this time. This was around the time he and Paul started talking again.
This talking point gets repeated a lot, but its missing context. Paul was right... about Klein but not Eastman. Paul was very wrong to try and have his father-in-law to manage Beatles' affairs. The other three were already tired of him treating them like session musicians and appearing to try and take over. Trying to jam Eastman down their throat made them even more suspicious of Paul's motivations. There are all kinds of potential conflicts of interest related to Paul's family managing John, George and Ringo's financial affairs, contracts, band decisions, writing credit issues, etc. I doubt Paul ever had bad motivations and honestly always had good intentions... but he didn't realize how John and George and Ringo were viewing his actions. That's what led to the band breaking up.
@@keithdf2001 I agree with you that Eastman would have been fine. And I don't think Paul would have ever done anything to screw over his band mates... in any way. I think he was a bit oblivious to how they really felt about their roles in his songs and maybe too young to understand the implications of conflict-of-interest in business dealings. And those two things collided at the same time to create this 3 against 1 dynamic.
Don't forget Klein bought the rights to He's So Fine and further pursued the plagiarism claim against George AFTER the court found him guilty of unintentional infringement.
The Let it Be single was great! Remember, they broke up after Abbey Road. Yoko’s presence, her involvement in the Beatles, her introducing John to heavy drugs plus, Alan Klein and his manipulation of John by playing up his understanding of Yoko and desire to promote them ; both those factors hurried John along into leaving. After that you can see where John got the insane idea that we all wanted to buy recordings of songs about him and Yoko; that we wanted to see films about their every move day to day (as if each second was historically monumental and earth shaking! Nope. We wanted The Beatles!
I agree, RAM was a masterpiece. Overall Rolling Stone Magazine, then and now, is a rag. I do believe if Yoko wanted John to carry on with the Beatles they would not have broken up at the end of 69. I’m sure they could have made two or three more album through 72 or 73. Given the outstanding solo material available during that time, the potential new album(s) would have been just as great if not better than what had proceeded any future records. Great video and topic. 👍
Rolling Stone did have some great writers on staff. In the later years they would have some good profiles of artists like Gregg Allman and Chuck Berry. But they continued to go downhill. I cancelled my subscription the day the issue with Kim Kardashian on the cover arrived
The breakup was bound to happen no matter what. It was a great life cycle for a rock and roll band. They started at #1 in the United States 🇺🇸 with, “I Want to Hold Your Hand” and ended at #1 with, “The Long and Winding Road.”
And they accomplished more during that short span (about 6 years, depending on how you calculate) than any other band in a similar period. They will never be surpassed!
@@WGBader they did it with fewer technology advances too. During their heyday, tv broadcasted in black and white, radio had a bigger presence and home video wasnt created yet
@@Thomasmemoryscentral An enabler to their phenomenal success (their talents being the main reason) was that they hit a technology window. Firstly they got to be big at a time when huge numbers of people were watching very few TV channels. Also, as they matured as artists more and more studio tech became available to help them do better and better work. So they gained more concentrated exposure to more people (of all generations) than is possible now (or ever will be again) in our multi-channel world PLUS they could make use of the very best of new tech at the moment it became available. For those two reasons and many others they were - and will remain - unique.
@@alanmusicman3385 It's amazing how people still want MORE MORE MORE from artists who gave so much. You see it all the time; people have a full meal and act like they are still hungry. Better for the Beatles to split and enter thier next incarnations in music. George sure flourished. And at least there was a bit less Yoko. John would have gotten her onto their records next.
@@robertgiles9124 Well, John was in love and besotted so he might well have done. She undoubtedly did him good in terms of his mental state, but whether she did him any favours as an artist is a different question. But the man was born before the work as an artist so I guess it's fair that the priorities were that way around.
Yeah, the average fans were fed the Yoko/Linda stuff, while the 3 stooges made money off of the Beatles’ breakup, just chaps my hide, brother! Get a Rope!
Interesting, I learned something about the Let It Be sessions and the political dynamics that helped break up the Beatles. When you watch the recent 3-part Get Back documentary, the Beatles had a lot of camaraderie with each other and diligently worked on each other's songs. Although the Beatles weren't living parallel lives anymore, and George being frustrated and wanting to be heard, they were friendly with one another for the most part. It took Klein, and a lesser extent, Wenner & Spector to further divide the Beatles. Fine presentation!
Honestly, how many bands stay together with same lineup as long as the Beatles did (particularly if you discount Ringo since the other 3 were together far longer)? And how many were essentially children at the start? Imagine how well they knew each other and how much they had changed from childhood to their late 20s. It's remarkable they stayed together to 1970.
I was born in '65 but my grandparents owned a tavern so I was a Beatles fan when they were still together. I remember it seemed that the critics dismissed the solo efforts because they compared them to the Beatles, not because they thought the music was bad. Like if we ignore their solo work maybe they'll get back together, but these are early memories.
Let It Be was sandwiched between the White Album cornucopia and the sublime Abby Road. The album is lackluster and uncreative ('Ride a pony'? Come on!) Get back is a nice rocker, but the title song is some damned torch song gospel, Long & Winding ('whining') Road is like Elton John's Candle in the Wind which I also hope I'll never hear again. Only Lennon's Across The Universe had the true Beatles magic. (the original, not the Spector rape). And the Let It Be album HAD NO RINGO SONG! :--))
William once again it’s all about opinions. I really like the album Let it be that doesn’t make you wrong or me wrong it’s just an opinion. If we all liked the same we would all be Justin Bieber fans.
@@chrisbennett1243 It's nice to have a reasonable difference of opinions, it's a measure of their appeal that we like them for different reasons, I'm sorry I don't normally engage as most people want to argue there's one correct answer. I think most people feel like you, why I like Let It Be so much is I listened to it as a kid and you could hear the break up in the music. It fascinated me how music reflected their lives. I didn't realize Ringo didn't have a song, I keep thinking Octopus' Garden because it's in the movie. I hate the disrespect for Ringo as well, he's so talented but he was eclipsed in being with such great musicians.
This is a superb perspective of the real reason. These 3 just wanted to capitalize on the greatest band of all time. Finally some true insight 🙌 bravo!!
I pretty much agree with your assessment of the break up of The Beatles. At the heart of it, the 3 to one division of the Beatles over Klein was the end. If they just would have stepped back and found someone they all could agree on, they could have gone on indefinitely. Yes, they definitely needed a separation to explore solo projects but their wouldn't have been any bad blood between them.
The problem in the early negotiations was that KLEIN destroyed the Eastman camp, as Lee Eastman (Linda's father) sent his son to negotiate as he didn't feel it merited his time.... big mistake... and that allowed Klein to get the toe in the door where he found loophole in the APPLE structure which only needed three of the Beatles to sign. Paul finally signed only when he knew he would be beaten anyway and tried a last gasp tactic of going along with it all.
The thing about the break up that I often think about is: Could it had been avoided? in some ways it was inevitable, there are a series of factors that led the break up, like the death of their manager Brian Epstein, The financial turmoil of Apple Records, The musical disagreements, rancour,bitterness,and distrust,drugs,egos,-and finally the Beatles had become domesticated with Wives and children. one asks: if only conciliatory opportunities had not been missed,that the differences of opinion had been resolved, that the buisness difficulties of Apple had been sormounted, where compromise could have trumped confrontation, where negotiation pacified provaction...one asks if only...
I still remember hearing “Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey” on the radio back in 1971, thinking it was a lost Beatles track. “Ram” is still my favourite McCartney album.
In 1975 I was 16 and only months after seeing the Stones, (3rd row from the tip of the 5 pointed star shaped stage) I learned how to market a band. In October both Newsweek and Time had some no-name guy on the cover in the exact same week. Sprinstien's family has nothing but New York and Jersey scumbag Lawyers. They marketed, over produced and crammed him down our ears. Brucie is a poser. Just older than Nickelback
I was born in 1962 when the Beatles broke up it made the front page of newspapers and in my Philadelphia neighborhood you could walk around and see people crying on their stoops …we thought it would last forever
Thought I saw an interview with George Martin where the label wanted him listed as producer on Let it Be and he resisted cause of Spector’s work, finally said they could list produced by George Martin and over produced by Phil Spector.
Nobody broke up The Beatles. They simply took it as far as it would go. They ran out of creative gas. Imagine living in that bubble. Nobody can. There’s only four people that know. It was a wonderful ride. Thanks, guys!
They stopped being a band and became a corporation only recording - like having a job. No self respecting rock and roller wants one of those. They should have done ''secret gigs'' like the Stones. In my opinion they would have got their impetus back. As for this album I can't believe that they didn't have the final say as to which arrangement was released.
@@phonokilleddigitalstar it’s not hard to put together couple of great Beatles albums using their solo material. Even Ringo shines with Photograph & It don’t come easy.
This was really interesting. I've often wondered about the last year and the reasons for their break and this hits on one of my 'suspicions'. Admittedly I am a huge fan of Mac but I never bought that the underlying cause was John and Mac's new relationships. I knew that it, of course, played a part, but now I further believe that 'others' kind of encouraged it and tried to keep it that way, to their benefit of course. I always suspected Kline and Specter were a part to this and now one more. I don't put this as a big nefarious conspiracy or coordinated in any way - just unfortunate. Thank you for mentioning 2 of Mac's best albums. I often make the joke that one of Paul's best solo songs was probably only a couple months away from being a Beatles song (Maybe I'm Amazed). McCartney, as brilliant as that album is, I think of it as a collection of Beatle demos for Paul to take to the 'boys'.
I admittedly grew up with the Phil Spector versions of "The Long And Winding Road" and "Across The Universe", so I am imprinted on them. But still, I think they are better for his orchestral and choral arrangements. Without them, they both sound like demos at risk of being ultimately shelved before being developed fully.
I prefer LiB Naked. The whole intention for LiB was a back to basics, keep it simple, suitable for playing live, something like their earliest stuff. Strings took it away from that intention, whether or not they improve it or not. LiB Naked almost functions as an early version of Unplugged albums from 1980s.
Michael always good to get you deep opinions on music. You are leading me back to more Beatles music, as well as viewing others commenting positively on Beatle Greatness. One great loose comment, listen 1,000 times and hear something new each time. PS not from remix but the original albums or CD.
They were responsible. I could see in the documentary that they were all ready to move on. They were getting older and their priorities changed. Remember they were together from the Hamburg days. That’s a long time.
When I first played Let it be, the album, I didn't know anything about who did what, who hated what, whatever, it was just a magical record. Starting with 'Two of us', when I saw PM in concert, the way the band played 'The long and winding Road' was exactly with the Phil Spector orchestrations. Maybe Paul didn't originally like it, but once heard. difficult to unhear it. It remains a great song, one of his all time greats, and he's written one or two! I cried when I heard it the first time, it was just so beautiful. As George sang later, All those years ago! Alan Klein was a sh*ite of the first order, he should never have been allowed anywhere near the band. The wonderful thing about the Beatles was they were of their time. They changed music in the world forever just 4 lads from Liverpool who wanted to make music rather than go to work. A band would never survive forever with 3 genius' songwriters out of 4, and I'm not putting Ringo down by saying that. He had the best back beat in town and the rest of the guys knew it.
You liking extra syrup instead of good taste means lillte. Most people prefer crap. Let it BE Naked proves what is bettter. Paul, the genius, was sitht. Spector killed songs...and people.
I always loved Long and Winding Road and Two f Us is also great. I get what you are saying here. These are wonderful songs and I can't say I disliked the original Phil Spector produced album.
@@jaceconverse6337 The song is far better without the corn syrup Killer Phil poured all over it. And too much Reverb is too much. Listen to Let it Be Naked for a while. It's getting better.
@@robertgiles9124 The strings were arranged by Richard Hewson who started with only using 6 violins Spector said he wanted 20 violins and a chorus. Hewson actually was known to Paul and worked with Mary Hopkin before this. He was paid 40 pounds for the work. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but I think the string arrangement is great though obviously overdone by Spector who insisted on a chorus and more strings then necessary . The string arrangement itself which could have been played by one violin, I think , compliments the melody exquisitely and is missing from the Let it Be Naked version. Part of the reason Spector added so much was to coverup the mistake ridden bass playing of John Lennon which some think was done because of his anger towards Paul Awhile back I found a very funny interview with Hewson who was upset at being paid so little for the work that ended up being on the Beatles last number one
I was born in 1971. And by time I was 9 years old I was a major Beatles fan. My whole family loved them, and I heard all of the albums in my house growing up. My whole family always said that their break up is what bands do when they want to go out and explore their true talent on their own. So I just thought it was par for the course. That was until the day Lennon was killed. I never cried so hard in my life. It was at that moment I know that there would never possibly be any new Beatles album coming. Even to this day. If Lennon was alive. I am sure they would (excuse the pun) come together, and put out a couple more albums. But one crazy fan made sure that wasn't going to happen. Personally I never liked Ono. Mainly cause she was just weird. For everyone else. Their albums they put out solo, had their moments. Can't say anything bad about them at all. I was a bigger Lennon fan I admit. But I never bought into any of the other BS cause I was a young kid. The music I like is what was my driving force in life. To this day. When people look at my music collection. It makes their head spin cause they all think I am just a metal head. I am way more complexed then that. I was a DJ and Karaoke host for 20 years. So my taste in music crosses many lines.
It's surprising how many people like rock music and the beatles, I'm one of them, it was actually the beatles later stuff that got me into iron maiden 😁
@@MichaelNoland-TheBottomLine I’m sure you’ll agree, labeling and pigeonholing music does many terrific artists a huge disservice. There is no such thing as a bad style of music, as long as it comes from the soul.
I truly believe that had John Lennon lived, The Beatles would've reunited in the 1980's, even if it were just a brief, one-off album, appearance, or whatever. The legal messes had been pretty much settled and seeds for a possible reunion had been sown by the late 1970's. It just never happened, and John's murder fully put an end to it ever happening. People are very quick to simply blame Yoko for her near-constant presence in the band's inner circle, what was left of it by this time, but there was a lot more going on that led to their eventual undoing. In fact, Yoko really didn't have as much to do with it as many make her out to; she was just there, more or less, and once John broke the "no wives or girlfriends in the studio" scenario, very soon after, the rest of the band were bringing their better halves around, and the added footage in "Get Back" proves it. Brian Epstein's death first and foremost really sent them into a tailspin, one they would never recover from; his absence left a gaping hole in everything, and the band were ill-equipped as well as prepared to take on the business aspect of things when they'd had everything completely taken care of for them before. Apart from that, they were just growing apart as artists and as people; they were going different places. The Beatles really had run their course by then, and there was nowhere else for them to go in terms of musical and professional mountains; they'd already scaled them and plateaued....so where else to go but away? All things must pass...
As a huge Beatles fan since the 70´s when i was just a little kid i really love the way Spector produced the Let it be album especially The long and winding road. Paul is a total genius and he can say whatever he likes but i dont agree, i think since he is so close to his own vision of his music it may be the reason why he didnt like it. I am a composer myself although not famous and i can totally see myself disliking if someone changed the vision of my music even though everyone else thought it was much better, it can be really hard to see the other side of the argument when you are that close to the material.
Nobody would know any different if the stripped down version of "Winding Road" hadn't been released. You're exactly correct. It's amazing how people become overnight critics when they have something else to compare things to-even though the original held up for almost 50 years as one of the Beatle's Pantheons.
@@electrolytics Since i have listened to the original version of the Let it be album for about 25 years before the "naked" version even came out over 30 year after the original i must admit that i am of course "colored" by that, maybe someone that heard them both side by side or the "naked" version first would have a different perspective/opinion. Personaly i also dont care for any remixes of Beatles albums since the original is the version i have known for many decades and absolutely love, and also with the originals sounding so good i find the remixes pointless at best and never listen to them. I also feel that the song The Long and winding road really deserves that orchestra and choir treatment which makes it "bigger than life", it is of course a good song without it also but it really shows the difference of what production and this kind of arrangement can make.
I am not a fan of Phil Spector's work with the Beatles, and that includes All Things Must Pass. I remember seeing the Let It Be movies where Paul is singing the bare version of "...Winding Road" and remember thinking "I like that so much better". It just felt more intimate without that awful choir behind him.
Ringo was the first to leave The Beatles. He even left the country with his family and went on vacation to the islands. Then Paul left on musical differences. Phil Specter fired his gun in the studio inch’s in front of Johns face. John said, “Phil !! If you’re going to kill me then kill me, but don’t make me deaf.
OMG David, I so agree! It was bad enough the poor Beatles had to deal with the Police, but to have to deal with animal control officers too? That would have be cruel!😉
Very insightful video on some of the characters who didn't break up the Beatles, but ensured they wouldn't reunite when the door was still open. But I would add four major decisions throughout the 70s: - Paul suing the Beatles in Dec 1970 to dissolve the Beatles partnership. I think that decision really cemented the two irreconciliable "camps" in the band (Paul vs. the other three), and led to the lowest point in the Beatles' internal relationships which was 1971 with the press wars and with How Do You Sleep. - John's decision in 1971 to move to New York. This may be the single biggest reason why the Beatles never reunited, and some people even think this ruined John's career. - Yoko's intervention in January 1975 to get back with John (who was dating May Pang and making good music with Walls & Bridges), which immediately prevented John from flying to New Orleans to play on Paul's Venus and Mars album. The closest we ever got to a Lennon-McCartney reunion. - Mark David Chapman's murder of John.
Totally agree that it wasn't Yoko, but what do I know (I wasn't even alive yet). I would have thought it was inevitable as talk has always been that The White Album was actually a bunch of solo albums. I like your take on this, but I would say these guys were just the straw that broke the camel's back would be more fitting. Your channel and one other has really got me digging deeper into the McCartney / Wings solo albums. I feel I have unearthed a treasure.
I truly believe their breakup was a blessing. If they had stayed together they would most likely have gone down the black hole of disco. John even said in an interview with Tom Synder in 1974 he liked the disco trend that music was headed into. I just believe as a hard-core fan that it would have tarnished their legacy. It was just the right time in history for them to go their separate ways.
Very interesting view Michael !! I do agree with a lot of what you said here. The main point is these 3 guys messed up any chance of The Beatles getting back together.
Richard Hewson was the person who did the arrangement on 'The Long and Winding Road', not Phil Spector. Spector just produced the recording. McCartney knew Hewson and had worked with him prior to 1970. McCartney actually quite liked Hewson's arrangement of 'The Long and Winding Road' and used it in his live performances of the song in later years. McCartney also had Hewson do the arrangements for his 'Thrillington' version of the 'Ram' album in 1971, so there was no bad blood between the two of them.
Great report! I had never considered that these men did indeed destroy any chance that the tenuous breakup would pass. I have always assumed it was the Beatles themselves tiring of being in the group. But thanks to you I have a better understanding of the breakup.
Phil Spector's only excuse for ruining the Beatles might have been that Wagner existed before him. Listen to Wagner's orchestrations, then listen to Beethoven's second movement of his 7th Symphony, how cheap Wagner sounds.
I've never had any problem with the Let It Be album. The Long and Winding Road is beautiful, and it was all I knew for 30 years, before they put out Let It Be naked.
GAAAWD, I'm so sick of hearing people slam Phil Spector's production of "The Long and Winding Road"; it's a beautiful track, the choir, the orchestra. Trendy persecution is so childishly predictable. I know McCartney hated it, but that's just his opinion.
Not to dispute anything (I actually agree with just about everything), but where does the Abbey Road sessions fit into this timeline? It was after Let It Be, and although Abbey Road, especially Side 2 and its medley of half finished songs, does have the feel of "it's our last album, let's go out with a bang" there were apparently some discussions about another album (resulting some very interesting fan ideas of which tracks would've been on it).
Very interesting, as a big Beatles fan, I was certainly aware of the slimy Allan Klein (John later said "Paul was right!"). I also knew about Phil Spector. Perhaps his motivation was not only to continue his working relationship with John and George ($) but also a bit of revenge about Paul's negative comments about his production on the Let It Be album. But I never knew that Jann Wenner had such animosity towards Paul. I didn't think a lot of him for the way he ran the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, this video did nothing to improve that!
Part of the problem was that a working musical group in the 1960s was expected to work constantly. Record companies expected at least one or two albums per year, along with constant touring. Some artists could handle that, working with the same people, 12 hours a day, for years on end. Others couldn't. Over the decades, the music industry has changed expectations so one album every 3 years is the average. With a more relaxed release schedule, the Beatles could have continued to work together. However, Paul was a workaholic who wanted to keep recording constantly and John was sick of it. Note that John, George, and Ringo continued to socialize and work together on music after the breakup.
Oh my I couldn't agree more - those 3 men had *major* influence on the break up - It was not Paul's 'bossiness', it was not Yoko or poor Linda. Those men cashed on the Beatles' breakup and contributed to the bad relationship of John and Paul at the time. Jann Wenner built his newspaper's empire on the ruins of the band. Phil spector was a sociopath and Allen Klein a manipulative bully. Those three stood between John and Paul and prevented them from talking. An accurate video! it is time to reconsider the biases of the 70s narrative bullshit that John pushed in the begining.
My theory of the cause of the Beatles’ breakup is their phone call to Frank Zappa. They were shocked to learn that Frank was running the band’s business affairs. This motivated them to start Apple the difficulty of the running of which broke up the band.
after seeing this video i admit id never thought that it could be those weasels that finally caused the Beatles to call it quits, you are most likely right about that. and i never thought it was Yoko or Linda , i absolutely knew it had to be deeper than that. thanks!
I'm glad you did not dump on Yoko . Ringo is often the but of a lot of jokes . How ever , Ringo's live concerts featured an all ways an amazing group of musicians . The ticket prices were reasonable . It was fun and entertaining .
Geez this music critics were sure ahead of their time. Reminds me of film critics post 2016 attacking fan loved content because it Doesn't meet their crazy political views
I love your content, Michael! I get it, John was the first to officially break up the band. However, just notice what happened after Yoko came flying into John Lennon's limo! John breaks up with Cynthia in a fashion so cruel that, well, it seems only Yoko was truly capable of acheiving from behind the scene and below the bed cover! Then what happens? Ringo leaves. Then George leaves and when he comes back we can observe Yoko quietly encouraging George to record his own album by the aggressive encouraging shaking up and down of her head as he tells her about it! Then what happens? John and little miss Yoko find Alan Klein and John shares it with the other Beatles, convincing two of it while alienating Paul (Yoko's body language shows utter disdain for Paul throughout the newly released"Get Back" footage. And finally, Yoko succeeds in separating Julian from their lives almost entirely, convincing John not to give a penny to Cynthia or Julian. The poor guy has to sue her many years later in order to receive his rightful inheritance! PS...Yoko decides to leave John and provide him with a secretary mistress and what does John do with it? Once again, he goes along for the ride! It's Yoko, behind the scenes and most everyone believes it to this day. Why? Because most people are pretty good at reading a bad apple when they see it!😉
Awwww, another jealous of Yoko. John's breakup with Cyn wasn't any crueler than Paul's breakup with Jane. It's just the way things happen. Mick Jagger was the one who gave John Allen Klein's name, Yoko had nothing to do with it. The Get Back footage shows Paul and Linda and Yoko all got on fine. Sons have no rightful inheritance if fathers choose not to give them anything. You might blame Yoko for breaking up the Beatles, but the Beatles themselves didn't, and no offense, but I think I'll listen to those that know rather than those that don't.
@@barefootbooks69 that's a great idea! Obviously, you know little of what The Beatle's themselves have said (often under their breath) regarding Yoko. But I do like your idea! Keep we with the plan!
@@rogandbingofbingalahtravel3680 I know more than you. Check out George on Dick Cavett and Paul on Howard Stern. They both say it wasn't Yoko. Their words. And they should know. Funny how you think you know more than they do.
The main thing is they had grown apart. They were having families and meeting new people.They were on different paths musically. That was it. Enough said.
I always wonder why Linda McCartney got blamed for the break up of the Beatles. She never encouraged the break up of the Beatles. She actually attended the Shea Stadium concert the Beatles had in 1965. She was a Beatles fan.
I think I was about 10 years old when I first heard RAM. I loved it from my first hearing. I never read any of the reviews of it, just heard the music and the songs. To this day I thing very well of RAM. I can imagine Phil Spector saying all this and that about Paul during sessions with John and George, I can see it as Phil's way of blowing off steam over Paul's dislike of the way Let It Be turned out. And I never thought of Phil Spector or even Paul McCartney as having an ego before. I think The Beatles broke up because they reached the end of what they could do together. They all had newer songs that weren't going to work in a Beatles setting. I think they were feeling the confinements of the group boundaries, they needed to branch out and work outside the band. The outside influences didn't help, but I think it was just them realizing it was time to call it a day.
Since I retired I’ve really gone down the rabbit hole with the Beatles. And I’ve come to the conclusion that yes there were circumstances that broke them up. But when you look at the lives they lead from that time on it was obvious how different each and everyone of them was. John and George were pretty much free spirits. They didn’t have any children to hold them down and they rushed off to be in the mist of absolutely everything. Paul started a family and pursued being who he was in the way that worked in his life. Ringo was doing all kinds of different things at the time. But they’re all just very different people. And it’s sad it is is that they broke up. Imagine all the music we would have not heard if they stayed together.
John had a first wife, Cynthia, and a son Julian, who is a musician in his own right. Cynthia and John first met in art school in the late 50s, and early 60s. They married in 1962 when Cynthia was pregnant with Julian, just as the Beatles were recording their first songs on EMI. Julian was born in April 1963, just as the Beatles were taking off. At first, it was kept hidden because at the time teen idols were not supposed to be married and have families, the fans would have not bought their records. Originally on their appearance on the Ed Sullivan show, there was a caption over John saying, "Girls, he's married". John really wanted to take his family on the road, but the idea was nixed. Literally, the round of touring, performing, and recording left him with little time to spend with Cynthia, and especially Julian. But as John's fame grew and became entrenched in the rock and roll lifestyle, cracks in the marriage began appearing, which opened the door for Yoko. After they stopped touring, they embarked on separate projects; John was in Europe filming the anti-war film "How I Won the War"; Paul was composing songs for the Haley Mills movie "The Family Way"; George was studying under the Maharishi, and Ringo was working on other projects as well. They returned to the studio to record Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane, and later the Sgt. Pepper album. Brian's death in August 1967 was the tipping point for what would happen afterward. It was easy to blame the Beatles' breakup on Yoko rather than mitigating circumstances, but more stories have come out on what really went down, especially the new Get Back movie, and it was more about management than anything. Had the Beatles had a manager like Peter Grant, who managed Led Zeppelin, and made them billionaires, they would have had their song catalog and profited off of it, and been together a while longer.
There’s actually photographs of the Apple office the day John said he wanted a divorce from the Beatles. John, Paul and Ringo were there as George was not: he was visiting his mother Louise who is suffering from cancer. It is in the famous Anthony Fawcett book “One Day at a Time” book on John Lennon. That day was supposed to be the day where Alan Klein announced the bigger royalty payments for Beatles albums and everybody was supposed to be celebrating, and then Paul was going off about future Beatles plans and that’s when John laid down the law
Yeah, and Loren even said they could pay Ringo less, and keep the bulk of that FAB check, Mark! John and Paul saw that show live, and almost showed up! Paul was visiting john at the time!
@@MichaelNoland-TheBottomLine I heard that. I thought I watched a show where Belushi offered them $100 or something like that. Anyway, good videos you got here, thanks!
WELL DONE!!! But remember how Cline was able to work on John and Yoko personalities flattering them and knowing how John was frustrated for JOHN'S not appreciation of Yoko by his bandmates. In Get Back documentary we can clearly see that when John speaks about Cline just when Paul was.absent and try to convince George in a.very enthousiastic way. He was backed and strengthened by Joko who was very happy about Cline who had promised her an exposition in Syracuse. John was.pushed by her to try Cline anyway and he knew Paul wouldn't like him. So he was able.to convince his mates against Paul. And Linda? Why didn't she understand that the other 3 guys would never accept her father as a manager of the group? So I think.that Joko and Linda played a negative role in the situation even if minor. Your analisi is perfect. Thank you! It's the first time I've ever heard that. Good!
Great post and in a nutshell: The Beatles broke up when people got involved who were looking after themselves and not the band Ultimately, it was really Mark David Chapman who broke up The Beatles. He took John from the world and that ended any possibilities of a reunion. I think The Beatles were like most bands. They ended up needing a break from each other and then could eventually find reason to reconvene. Pink Floyd did. Talking Heads, Cream did and hell even froze over for a Eagles reunion. The Clash had agreed to reunite for their induction as well. Jan Wenner is a douchbag but the Hall Of Shame *does* provide a platform for heart warming reunions. We would have gotten the Beatles reunion for the Anthology project 💔
They are a big fuck up. In many ways. Nick Simper, first bassplayer on 3 albums was forgotten and did not get an invitation. The rest danced to what Gillan wanted who wanted to let only play the current line up as the valid one.
My take on the breakup is rather different, because I attribute it less to personalities than to their having matured stylistically as individuals with each going his own separate way. I don't consider the White Album a Beatles LP at all, and in fact critics at the time said that although the material was great it just didn't hold together stylistically. At the time I didn't know that they had pretty much recorded their own songs solo or nearly so, with little participation from the others. I recently tried to come up with one disc worth of Beatles songs from the White Album, and didn't come close to finding enough Beatle-ish material.for even two sides. Most of those songs on the White Album belonged on their solo LPs, not on a Beatles album -- because of style, not because of quality. In particular the John Lennon contributions are not Beatles songs at all -- which, again, is not to diss them. IMO, what they needed was for an impartial mentor whom they all respected to present a radically new vision for their future. Said mentor should have told them: "Lads, listen to me. You're maturing as artists, you're going in your own directions, and that's not a bad thing. Start working on your solo albums, but if you should happen to write anything Beatle-ish, put it aside. When enough Beatle-ish songs have accumulated you can come together to do another Beatles LP, say every two years or so. In the meantime, give some thought to what a 1970s Beatles would sound like, how it would be '70s and fresh but still distinctly Beatles." Unfortunately, there was no precedent in those days for such a farsighted approach. When bands broke up, the members went their own ways. But if there had been someone who could envision all of them having solo careers while still coming together every few years for a new Beatles album, he might have saved the day and we might have another 3 or 4 Beatles albums to be talking about today.
You have echoed my thoughts entirely. Sadly, one of the consequences of Beatle trailblazing was the idea of individual members going solo. It would be natural nowadays but then unthinkable. I thought like you at the time.
@@robertfmorton Even more unthinkable at the time was the idea of going solo AND continuing to record with the band (John Entwistle, Phil Collins) -- in retrospect, the obvious solution for the Beatles. In those days, if you wanted to record a solo album, you left the band forever.
I've been a Beatle"Manic" since 1990-something, I was in my teens then. I've also always been more of a McCartney fan than any other Beatle post Beatles. Even today when I've decided to check more of George's and John's solo efforts out I'm not sure what to think of John's works.
I agree with u! the 3 stooges of the Beatles business end was a big disappointment. not only on the band's side of it but, themselves as individuals as well!!!
There were four guys who broke up the Beatles. John, Paul, George and Ringo. They're own individual personalities lead them on a path of an eventual break up. Yeah they could have kept on making beautiful music but it didn't happen. Absolutely amazing what they did in 8 years..
I love how Paul says he didn't like what Phil did with The Long and Winding Road.....but he continues to use the backing tapes when he does the song live. 🤷♂️
Interesting content ! 👍 I guess I have always suspected that there *had* to be more to the Beatles break-up, than just the Yoko and Linda thing. And I totally agree, that Phil Spector didn't do the "Let It Be" album any good.
Interesting analysis, and I think you are right on all points. I am not as big a Beatles fan as you are, but Let It Be would have been my favorite of their albums if it wasn't butchered by Spector so much - I love the raw sound that is underneath it all, and that is heard in the footage that Michael indsay-Hogg shot. Some of this was fixed with the Let it Be - Naked release, but I have always felt that release had some issues too to become the right replacement. For my own pleasure I have therefore, in my iTunes library where my enthire music collection is brought together, compiled a version of the album that I believe comes as close to what could have been the best version. All of these tracks are easily available, but playing them together in this fashion, I believe, gives the best representation of this particular music overall. Try it, if you have the time some day 😃 1. Two Of Us (Album Version) 2. Dig A Pony (Album Version) 3. Across The Universe (Naked Version) 4. I Me Mine (Naked Version) 5. Dig It (Album Version) 6. Let It Be (Naked Version) 7. Maggie Mae (Album Version) 8. I've Got A Feeling (Album Version) 9. One After 909 (Album Version) 10. The Long And Winding Road (Master Track, no Spector alterations; Anthology 3 Version) 11. Don't Let Me Down (Single Version) 12. Get Back (Album Version)
You have put forward a good argument here even though most people have long realised that Allen Klein was a main contributing factor in the break of The Beatles. Adding Jan Wenner to the list of suspects is a new one to me and I can see what you're getting at. I feel though that you have missed two people out and that Lee and John Eastman and the fact that they were Paul's in-laws probably pushed the other three in favour of Klein. Also the Eastmans badly handled the situation with The Beatles, both as negotiators and with their lack of understanding of the music industry. Ultimately though it was John and Paul who were to blame and the fact that they were drifting apart musicaly.
BTW, for anyone looking to hear the BEST sounding "McCartney" look for the ones mastered by Robert Ludwig. I'm new to vinyl myself but someone I know sold me their copy with side A R. Ludwig mastered and my jaw dropped. I have two copies to have both sides mastered by R. Ludwig and I fell even deeper in love with Everynigh and Maybe I'm Amazed.
The Beatles had pretty much run their course by then. No one thing broke them up, it was 1000 little things that would eventually break up the band. The death of Epstein, family life, changing musical tastes, needing space to do their own thing, ect ect, and probably sick of each other. I think management, record company, and the press created more drama for the band than there should have been. These pressures probably made the lads more bitter towards each other than there was. Perhaps they would have just taken an extended hiatus and would have eventually gotten back together. Who knows but I enjoy and appreciate the material they made to this day. Their legacy will not be forgotten.
I had heard these 3 stories individually but never put them together. Good stuff. Specter was a great producer when collaborating with an artist, but he was on his own with Let It Be. Its serviceable, but needed more Beatles production values.
I get the beef that Paul had over John's decision - totally warranted - but I never had a problem with Phil Spector's production on Let it Be. The album just doesn't have quite the level of a cohesive "album" feel that a lot of their others had. In their process of "getting back," they didn't get it totally up into the proper Beatles gear in the direction department, yet it retains the level of quality of their higher-shelf early albums.
Really good for the most part thanks Michael. I *disagree* tho' on Phil Spector's actual work on Let it Be. The Beatles 'canon' is incredibly complex, diverse and eclectic hey? (and I'm sure all true Beatles fans would agree that's a *good* thing). The Luxurious production and 'vocal arias' on 'The Long and WInding Road' and 'Across the Universe' have always been divisive among fans - but I find these touches *astoundingly* beautiful!! For me, they're a lovely part of the whole Beatles story, (when viewed in a purely musical context). So maybe we should just 'let it lie' (or even 'Let it Be') at least from the standpoint of critiquing this album musically?... Bottom line: There are 2 or 3 Dodgy Lennon 'fillers' on that album - and if anything should be negatively criticised on Let it Be, then surely it's those?... 🙏🙏🥰
The Beatles were first in many things but taking a break from the group & releasing solo work before reuniting wasn’t one of them. George even mentioned it in Get Back.
The only Linda bashing I ever heard was the "she can't sing" dust up on a bootlegged demo tape. I remember Pete Townsend coming to her defense regarding it being a demo and lots of artists are out of tune while working out a song. Or words to that effect.
I always thought the critics thought Paul was just a "pretty girl" man who made bubble gum music. The DJs would say so, especially after John died. But even before they would get a woody over all of John's music. John was always considered more talented, more creative, more profound. IOW the "MAN". He had a huge male following and was put on a pedestal for all the inner meanings to his songs, even when he said there were none, it was all word play or copying and pasting sentences from a circus poster. It's not to say John wasn't talented - he did have a gift for words, even if they made no sense, but I think the music industry which is mostly, if not all, men and that includes record producers, DJs, music journalists - they were the ones along with all of John's fan boys, who attacked Yoko. I never heard them criticizing Linda, but it doesn't surprise me. All painting her as someone who wormed her way in as if she held a gun to John's head and he had no free will. Which, to me, looking back, it was kind of a contradiction because all his worshiping fans made him look kind of weak that he would let a woman control him. And they all dismissed Paul's talent. If his post album McCartney showed anything, it showed he was responsible for the Beatles' "sound". When I first heard it, I thought it was the Beatles and he was criticized for sounding the "same". As if. He took it to heart and ended up moving away from that Beatles sound. I personally thought it was a mistake.
Good video with many valid points. I love the McCartney and Ram albums but the latter is the stronger album of the two. McCartney has it's homemade charm but is not on par with Ram IMHO.
And the whole time telling reporters that Paul had no choice but to be a Beatles, by contract, when the asshole, wasn’t even officially their manager! He thought if he acted like his contract with them was actually worth the paper it was printed on, none would be the wiser! And since him, no man dares wear a turtleneck in public! He killed The Turttleneck Industry, Michael!❤
Great insight Mike! You also got to say they stopped touring,can't go to the local pub for pint,.....it has to wear on the lads,...damn shame.Yet we still have the MUSIC!
I've heard Let It Be Raw. I know it was Paul's preferred mix, but frankly it sounds like a collection of demos. I happen to like what Phil Specter did with the mix, which we originally came to know and love.
I remember the blame game regarding who broke up the Beatles🙄 Being 58 years old. The 4 wanted to go on to do different things and be with different people. I have loved them ALWAYS & still🥰
The breakup seemed to have been such a combination of things - no Epstein, the business rifts, tension over Paul’s control, growing up and having relationships that changed the band dynamic. They’d already run through a lot of momentum by late 66, and ending touring and John meeting Yoko during that time may have eventually caused Epstein’s fate and John’s interest to decline; its remarkable that the music from late 66 to early 68 was as good and harmoniously made as it was, and even more so that the less harmoniously made material from the White Album through Abbey Road was as good as it was.
I really think as both a serious content createt and as a true Beattle fan, you should quote or reference sources for some of your affirmations, such as Ian telling another music reviewer to do a negative one for Ram.
![🔴 ฟุตบอลแชมป์กีฬา 7HD แชมเปียน คัพ 2024 [รอบรองชนะเลิศ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zPm8ClLVhoE/mqdefault.jpg)
Sadly when Brian Epstein died they were screwed. Around Sgt peppers John was so strung out Paul had to take control which I think pissed John off but that could’ve been the end of them. Always loved Paul even though for the longest time it wasn’t cool. To me John became one of those ...I think they’re called limousine revolutionaries...something like that. Anyway with the things some bands are doing hell Paul & Ringo should do a show with Dani Harrison & Sean Lennon lol. Just kidding. Anyway I hated Allen Klein & Jann Wenner.
Perfect Joe!
‘Limousine Revolutionaries! You just helped write my next video on this subject! I’ll give ya a Shout-Out!❤❤❤
Can you even begin to guess who’ll be on my Limo-Revs list??? Hmmm…!!!!
Now see whatcha started?
@@MichaelNoland-TheBottomLine I can guess...Bono... Springsteen..etc.
@@MichaelNoland-TheBottomLine Hey Michael, I dont know if I subscribed in time for a shoutout but I hope I can still make one for a final cut of a future video before october 28th 2022.
Btw, could you consider a follow up video on this covering some post Beatles stuff?
Ringo is one of your favourite drummers and itd be cool to see you discuss some of his early solo stuff. Especially getting to narrate Thomas the tank engine and friends and shoot Pizza Hut commercials
In the UK we call people like that..Champagne Socialists.
All kidding aside, I think Julian would be a better stand in for John. Sean is closer to his mother with his musical styles.
I always thought McCartney received rough treatment for many years.
There's a Jan Wenner interview of Bob Dylan on TH-cam. He asks Dylan about what he thought of Lennon, and Dylan quickly turns it around to how astounded he is at McCartney's talent and gift for melody: "I'm just in awe of him". I bet that stuck in Wenner's craw, the prat!
he deserved that rough treatment. his 1st 2 were ok but whew his next few were awful. But man he always had a good single
@@victorarena23 You ever write even one Hit song? He deserved rough treatment? Because?
@@robertgiles9124 ok this may be the dumbest reply I've heard since 3rd grade."rough treatment" is a figure of speech. it means bad reviews. so yes those albums were not good and the poor reviews were deserved, and no I never wrote a hit and neither did any of the critics. however we are here discussing the albums so yes we are allowed to critique regardless of our individual music catalogs
@@victorarena23 So Victor, who couldn't write a song and perform it to save his life, likes to spew a lot of nonsense about a genius. That's your right. So is it mine to say you're full of hot air. Get it now, cry baby? Works both ways. "I never wrote a hit and neither did any of the critics" ...what a surprise there.
@@robertgiles9124 How many hits do you have? Works both ways. Just chill out ffs.
I've alluded to it here earlier and someone has touched on it in this thread as well. Losing Brian Epstein was the beginning of the end. He was the only one that could keep the Beatles on an even keel. He's the one they all trusted completely and he was also their friend, a real friend (particularly John). Without him, it was only a matter of time.
Also, you're absolutely correct as usual... The narrative of blaming the women was just a red herring to protect the interest of Klein, et al. Granted, Yoko had no business being in the studio and her constant presence and power over John did not help matters but the breakup was inevitable the moment Epstein was laid to rest and to put that burden on Yoko or Linda is about as unfair as it can get.
Definitely, Brian’s death was the biggest factor.
Way back before I knew better, the Yoko theory was at least somewhat believable. As for Linda, I never saw or read any evidence of her being overbearing or intrusive.
.....there was far, FAR more going on behind the scenes; Sergeant [JOHN, Ian Fleming's Bond inspiration Stephenson's successor] Pepper's begins to telegraph a LOT of SHOCKING information by BOTH its cover design and lyrics.....for another MASSIVE shock, seek out any videos related to 'Let HIM Be' on YT.....
While Epstein's death was clearly a turning point for the Beatles, as a practical matter they had already largely cut him out by the time of his death, just as they had largely taken over production responsibilities from George Martin. And truth is, they really didn't need a manager at that point, and being in their late twenties and seasoned professionals, they didn't really need someone to guide them through the industry. And they were eager to be their own men.
I think that is mostly accurate. Brian protected them from the vultures, but yet he made bad marketing deals with outsiders from Beatles Paraphanalia and such. Also part of their early song catalogue was sold because veteran publisher Dick James, who quickly secured The Beatles an appearance on the British pop show "Thank Your Lucky Stars." In February 1963, Dick James assisted the 22-year-old Lennon and the 20-year-old McCartney in forming a company called Northern Songs. Northern Songs would be 50% owned by Dick James and his partner Charles Silver, 10% owned by Brian Epstein, 20% owned by Lennon and 20% owned by McCartney. Years later, McCartney would explain that they were just too young and naive to know that this was a terrible deal. They never even read the contract. Incredibly, McCartney also admitted that neither he nor John ever actually met Charles Silver. So as faithful and protective as Brian was, he also screwed up royally...a lot...
You left out two things. John started to hate Klein and by 73 basically said that Paul was correct. Also, John did talk about making another album after Abbey Road a few weeks after the release. He also talked about working with the band a few years later but said the logistics were difficult. They had all become independent artists by this time. This was around the time he and Paul started talking again.
This talking point gets repeated a lot, but its missing context. Paul was right... about Klein but not Eastman. Paul was very wrong to try and have his father-in-law to manage Beatles' affairs. The other three were already tired of him treating them like session musicians and appearing to try and take over. Trying to jam Eastman down their throat made them even more suspicious of Paul's motivations. There are all kinds of potential conflicts of interest related to Paul's family managing John, George and Ringo's financial affairs, contracts, band decisions, writing credit issues, etc. I doubt Paul ever had bad motivations and honestly always had good intentions... but he didn't realize how John and George and Ringo were viewing his actions. That's what led to the band breaking up.
@@MrTCHOSS I think Eastman might have been fine however I would agree it was not a good move on Paul's part to have a family member run Apple
@@keithdf2001 I agree with you that Eastman would have been fine. And I don't think Paul would have ever done anything to screw over his band mates... in any way. I think he was a bit oblivious to how they really felt about their roles in his songs and maybe too young to understand the implications of conflict-of-interest in business dealings. And those two things collided at the same time to create this 3 against 1 dynamic.
Don't forget Klein bought the rights to He's So Fine and further pursued the plagiarism claim against George AFTER the court found him guilty of unintentional infringement.
@@keensoundguy6637 What a jerk.
The Let it Be single was great!
Remember, they broke up after Abbey Road.
Yoko’s presence, her involvement in the Beatles, her introducing John to heavy drugs plus, Alan Klein and his manipulation of John by playing up his understanding of Yoko and desire to promote them ; both those factors hurried John along into leaving.
After that you can see where John got the insane idea that we all wanted to buy recordings of songs about him and Yoko; that we wanted to see films about their every move day to day (as if each second was historically monumental and earth shaking!
Nope. We wanted The Beatles!
Exactly.. downplaying Yoko's clamp on John's self did NOT help matters at all. She does not get all the blame, but "christ you know it ain't easy!"
I agree, RAM was a masterpiece. Overall Rolling Stone Magazine, then and now, is a rag. I do believe if Yoko wanted John to carry on with the Beatles they would not have broken up at the end of 69. I’m sure they could have made two or three more album through 72 or 73. Given the outstanding solo material available during that time, the potential new album(s) would have been just as great if not better than what had proceeded any future records. Great video and topic. 👍
Rolling Stone did have some great writers on staff. In the later years they would have some good profiles of artists like Gregg Allman and Chuck Berry. But they continued to go downhill. I cancelled my subscription the day the issue with Kim Kardashian on the cover arrived
The breakup was bound to happen no matter what. It was a great life cycle for a rock and roll band. They started at #1 in the United States 🇺🇸 with, “I Want to Hold Your Hand” and ended at #1 with, “The Long and Winding Road.”
And they accomplished more during that short span (about 6 years, depending on how you calculate) than any other band in a similar period. They will never be surpassed!
@@WGBader they did it with fewer technology advances too.
During their heyday, tv broadcasted in black and white, radio had a bigger presence and home video wasnt created yet
@@Thomasmemoryscentral An enabler to their phenomenal success (their talents being the main reason) was that they hit a technology window. Firstly they got to be big at a time when huge numbers of people were watching very few TV channels. Also, as they matured as artists more and more studio tech became available to help them do better and better work.
So they gained more concentrated exposure to more people (of all generations) than is possible now (or ever will be again) in our multi-channel world PLUS they could make use of the very best of new tech at the moment it became available. For those two reasons and many others they were - and will remain - unique.
@@alanmusicman3385 It's amazing how people still want MORE MORE MORE from artists who gave so much. You see it all the time; people have a full meal and act like they are still hungry. Better for the Beatles to split and enter thier next incarnations in music. George sure flourished. And at least there was a bit less Yoko. John would have gotten her onto their records next.
@@robertgiles9124 Well, John was in love and besotted so he might well have done. She undoubtedly did him good in terms of his mental state, but whether she did him any favours as an artist is a different question. But the man was born before the work as an artist so I guess it's fair that the priorities were that way around.
Michael outstanding review brother. Once again you fill in the blanks for us. These details are easily lost over time, great job my man!
Yeah, the average fans were fed the Yoko/Linda stuff, while the 3 stooges made money off of the Beatles’ breakup, just chaps my hide, brother! Get a Rope!
Great perspective Michael. With all that was going on with their lives there’s no way they could have continued as a band. Total tragedy.
Interesting, I learned something about the Let It Be sessions and the political dynamics that helped break up the Beatles. When you watch the recent 3-part Get Back documentary, the Beatles had a lot of camaraderie with each other and diligently worked on each other's songs. Although the Beatles weren't living parallel lives anymore, and George being frustrated and wanting to be heard, they were friendly with one another for the most part. It took Klein, and a lesser extent, Wenner & Spector to further divide the Beatles. Fine presentation!
Honestly, how many bands stay together with same lineup as long as the Beatles did (particularly if you discount Ringo since the other 3 were together far longer)? And how many were essentially children at the start? Imagine how well they knew each other and how much they had changed from childhood to their late 20s. It's remarkable they stayed together to 1970.
The Who.
And essentially you just said that it wasn't the same 4. And there actually are bands that stayed together.
I was born in '65 but my grandparents owned a tavern so I was a Beatles fan when they were still together. I remember it seemed that the critics dismissed the solo efforts because they compared them to the Beatles, not because they thought the music was bad. Like if we ignore their solo work maybe they'll get back together, but these are early memories.
Let It Be was sandwiched between the White Album cornucopia and the sublime Abby Road. The album is lackluster and uncreative ('Ride a pony'? Come on!)
Get back is a nice rocker, but the title song is some damned torch song gospel, Long & Winding ('whining') Road is like Elton John's Candle in the Wind which I also hope I'll never hear again. Only Lennon's Across The Universe had the true Beatles magic. (the original, not the Spector rape). And the Let It Be album HAD NO RINGO SONG!
:--))
William once again it’s all about opinions. I really like the album Let it be that doesn’t make you wrong or me wrong it’s just an opinion. If we all liked the same we would all be Justin Bieber fans.
@@chrisbennett1243 It's nice to have a reasonable difference of opinions, it's a measure of their appeal that we like them for different reasons, I'm sorry I don't normally engage as most people want to argue there's one correct answer.
I think most people feel like you, why I like Let It Be so much is I listened to it as a kid and you could hear the break up in the music. It fascinated me how music reflected their lives.
I didn't realize Ringo didn't have a song, I keep thinking Octopus' Garden because it's in the movie. I hate the disrespect for Ringo as well, he's so talented but he was eclipsed in being with such great musicians.
This is a superb perspective of the real reason. These 3 just wanted to capitalize on the greatest band of all time. Finally some true insight 🙌 bravo!!
I pretty much agree with your assessment of the break up of The Beatles. At the heart of it, the 3 to one division of the Beatles over Klein was the end. If they just would have stepped back and found someone they all could agree on, they could have gone on indefinitely. Yes, they definitely needed a separation to explore solo projects but their wouldn't have been any bad blood between them.
The problem in the early negotiations was that KLEIN destroyed the Eastman camp, as Lee Eastman (Linda's father) sent his son to negotiate as he didn't feel it merited his time.... big mistake... and that allowed Klein to get the toe in the door where he found loophole in the APPLE structure which only needed three of the Beatles to sign. Paul finally signed only when he knew he would be beaten anyway and tried a last gasp tactic of going along with it all.
Please learn the difference between there, their, and they're, so that you don't come off sounding like an ignorant moron. Thank you, that is all.
The thing about the break up that I often think about is: Could it had been avoided? in some ways it was inevitable, there are a series of factors that led the break up, like the death of their manager Brian Epstein, The financial turmoil of Apple Records, The musical disagreements, rancour,bitterness,and distrust,drugs,egos,-and finally the Beatles had become domesticated with Wives and children. one asks: if only conciliatory opportunities had not been missed,that the differences of opinion had been resolved, that the buisness difficulties of Apple had been sormounted, where compromise could have trumped confrontation, where negotiation pacified provaction...one asks if only...
11:33 ... Exactly!! I still listen to McCartney and Ram today and they are as terrific as when I first heard them over 50 years ago!
Both albums were ahead of their time!
I still remember hearing “Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey” on the radio back in 1971, thinking it was a lost Beatles track. “Ram” is still my favourite McCartney album.
Now we know how Springsteen keeps getting 5 stars in Rolling Stone.That's one clown I just can't stand
Well, to be fair he did produce several 5-star albums in the 1970s. It's just they give him 5 even when he produces a 💩
@@docsavage8640 I know alot of people like him just not my cup of tea too mainstream
Springsteen is good for a greatest hits album. After that it’s boring.
In 1975 I was 16 and only months after seeing the Stones, (3rd row from the tip of the 5 pointed star shaped stage) I learned how to market a band. In October both Newsweek and Time had some no-name guy on the cover in the exact same week. Sprinstien's family has nothing but New York and Jersey scumbag Lawyers. They marketed, over produced and crammed him down our ears.
Brucie is a poser. Just older than Nickelback
Who is “we”? That’s your own opinion, which is fine. Springsteen’s work is uneven, but his legacy is intact. My own opinion.
Thank You. This is one of those videos you wish wouldn’t end. The Beatles will never end.
I was born in 1962 when the Beatles broke up it made the front page of newspapers and in my Philadelphia neighborhood you could walk around and see people crying on their stoops …we thought it would last forever
Thought I saw an interview with George Martin where the label wanted him listed as producer on Let it Be and he resisted cause of Spector’s work, finally said they could list produced by George Martin and over produced by Phil Spector.
Nobody broke up The Beatles. They simply took it as far as it would go. They ran out of creative gas. Imagine living in that bubble. Nobody can. There’s only four people that know. It was a wonderful ride. Thanks, guys!
They stopped being a band and became a corporation only recording - like having a job. No self respecting rock and roller wants one of those. They should have done ''secret gigs'' like the Stones. In my opinion they would have got their impetus back. As for this album I can't believe that they didn't have the final say as to which arrangement was released.
So their solo work was no good in your opinion.
Creative gas was still steaming . They grew up and the bubble burst . Can you imagine ?
I think the argument that they ran out of creative gas is a bad one seeing how their solo efforts did so well after.
@@phonokilleddigitalstar it’s not hard to put together couple of great Beatles albums using their solo material. Even Ringo shines with Photograph & It don’t come easy.
This was really interesting. I've often wondered about the last year and the reasons for their break and this hits on one of my 'suspicions'. Admittedly I am a huge fan of Mac but I never bought that the underlying cause was John and Mac's new relationships. I knew that it, of course, played a part, but now I further believe that 'others' kind of encouraged it and tried to keep it that way, to their benefit of course. I always suspected Kline and Specter were a part to this and now one more. I don't put this as a big nefarious conspiracy or coordinated in any way - just unfortunate. Thank you for mentioning 2 of Mac's best albums. I often make the joke that one of Paul's best solo songs was probably only a couple months away from being a Beatles song (Maybe I'm Amazed). McCartney, as brilliant as that album is, I think of it as a collection of Beatle demos for Paul to take to the 'boys'.
Absolutely a wonderful analize !
Congratulations.I love your chanel.
I admittedly grew up with the Phil Spector versions of "The Long And Winding Road" and "Across The Universe", so I am imprinted on them. But still, I think they are better for his orchestral and choral arrangements. Without them, they both sound like demos at risk of being ultimately shelved before being developed fully.
Agreed.
I prefer LiB Naked. The whole intention for LiB was a back to basics, keep it simple, suitable for playing live, something like their earliest stuff. Strings took it away from that intention, whether or not they improve it or not. LiB Naked almost functions as an early version of Unplugged albums from 1980s.
Michael always good to get you deep opinions on music. You are leading me back to more Beatles music, as well as viewing others commenting positively on Beatle Greatness. One great loose comment, listen 1,000 times and hear something new each time. PS not from remix but the original albums or CD.
They were responsible. I could see in the documentary that they were all ready to move on. They were getting older and their priorities changed. Remember they were together from the Hamburg days. That’s a long time.
Yeah, the Beatles broke up the Beatles.
Absolutely fascinating Mike. Keep up the good work👍
I think Paul's solo career is very good material... Solid work
yeah, Mull Of Kintyre, Ebony and Ivory 🤮
But you would never have even listened to it if it wasn't for his time in the Beatles. It doesn't stand alone.
@@lemming9984 You're pointing out two duds compared to many masterpieces he wrote, sang and produced.
Well put. Did you read what Geoff Emerick was saying about Phil Spector's approach to mixing the Beatles?
When I first played Let it be, the album, I didn't know anything about who did what, who hated what, whatever, it was just a magical record. Starting with 'Two of us', when I saw PM in concert, the way the band played 'The long and winding Road' was exactly with the Phil Spector orchestrations. Maybe Paul didn't originally like it, but once heard. difficult to unhear it. It remains a great song, one of his all time greats, and he's written one or two! I cried when I heard it the first time, it was just so beautiful. As George sang later, All those years ago! Alan Klein was a sh*ite of the first order, he should never have been allowed anywhere near the band. The wonderful thing about the Beatles was they were of their time. They changed music in the world forever just 4 lads from Liverpool who wanted to make music rather than go to work. A band would never survive forever with 3 genius' songwriters out of 4, and I'm not putting Ringo down by saying that. He had the best back beat in town and the rest of the guys knew it.
You liking extra syrup instead of good taste means lillte. Most people prefer crap. Let it BE Naked proves what is bettter. Paul, the genius, was sitht. Spector killed songs...and people.
I always loved Long and Winding Road and Two f Us is also great. I get what you are saying here. These are wonderful songs and I can't say I disliked the original Phil Spector produced album.
@@jaceconverse6337 The song is far better without the corn syrup Killer Phil poured all over it. And too much Reverb is too much. Listen to Let it Be Naked for a while. It's getting better.
@@robertgiles9124 The strings were arranged by Richard Hewson who started with only using 6 violins Spector said he wanted 20 violins and a chorus. Hewson actually was known to Paul and worked with Mary Hopkin before this. He was paid 40 pounds for the work. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but I think the string arrangement is great though obviously overdone by Spector who insisted on a chorus and more strings then necessary . The string arrangement itself which could have been played by one violin, I think , compliments the melody exquisitely and is missing from the Let it Be Naked version. Part of the reason Spector added so much was to coverup the mistake ridden bass playing of John Lennon which some think was done because of his anger towards Paul Awhile back I found a very funny interview with Hewson who was upset at being paid so little for the work that ended up being on the Beatles last number one
@@jaceconverse6337 It's a kitschy song to begin with and awful with those strings even if Paul himself liked it.
Lovely work, great presentation.
So cool hearing you singing the praises of Paul's first two albums. Love this vid.
I heard it was George Harrison, John Lennon, Paul McCartney, and Richard Starkey who broke up the Beatles.
👏
You might be on to something there.... lol
I was born in 1971. And by time I was 9 years old I was a major Beatles fan. My whole family loved them, and I heard all of the albums in my house growing up. My whole family always said that their break up is what bands do when they want to go out and explore their true talent on their own. So I just thought it was par for the course. That was until the day Lennon was killed. I never cried so hard in my life. It was at that moment I know that there would never possibly be any new Beatles album coming. Even to this day. If Lennon was alive. I am sure they would (excuse the pun) come together, and put out a couple more albums. But one crazy fan made sure that wasn't going to happen. Personally I never liked Ono. Mainly cause she was just weird. For everyone else. Their albums they put out solo, had their moments. Can't say anything bad about them at all. I was a bigger Lennon fan I admit. But I never bought into any of the other BS cause I was a young kid. The music I like is what was my driving force in life. To this day. When people look at my music collection. It makes their head spin cause they all think I am just a metal head. I am way more complexed then that. I was a DJ and Karaoke host for 20 years. So my taste in music crosses many lines.
The fact that you love two completely different approaches to music, means you’ve got more to you than meets the eye, T! Good for you!❤
It's surprising how many people like rock music and the beatles, I'm one of them, it was actually the beatles later stuff that got me into iron maiden 😁
@@MichaelNoland-TheBottomLine
I’m sure you’ll agree, labeling and pigeonholing music does many terrific artists a huge disservice. There is no such thing as a bad style of music, as long as it comes from the soul.
@@johnross2924 Maybe you like GILLANs version of HELTER SKELTER with Janick Gers?
@@jonblackers4339 I will check it out.
I truly believe that had John Lennon lived, The Beatles would've reunited in the 1980's, even if it were just a brief, one-off album, appearance, or whatever. The legal messes had been pretty much settled and seeds for a possible reunion had been sown by the late 1970's. It just never happened, and John's murder fully put an end to it ever happening.
People are very quick to simply blame Yoko for her near-constant presence in the band's inner circle, what was left of it by this time, but there was a lot more going on that led to their eventual undoing. In fact, Yoko really didn't have as much to do with it as many make her out to; she was just there, more or less, and once John broke the "no wives or girlfriends in the studio" scenario, very soon after, the rest of the band were bringing their better halves around, and the added footage in "Get Back" proves it.
Brian Epstein's death first and foremost really sent them into a tailspin, one they would never recover from; his absence left a gaping hole in everything, and the band were ill-equipped as well as prepared to take on the business aspect of things when they'd had everything completely taken care of for them before. Apart from that, they were just growing apart as artists and as people; they were going different places. The Beatles really had run their course by then, and there was nowhere else for them to go in terms of musical and professional mountains; they'd already scaled them and plateaued....so where else to go but away? All things must pass...
Excellent analysis. Painful, but excellent. Thank you.
As a huge Beatles fan since the 70´s when i was just a little kid i really love the way Spector produced the Let it be album especially The long and winding road. Paul is a total genius and he can say whatever he likes but i dont agree, i think since he is so close to his own vision of his music it may be the reason why he didnt like it. I am a composer myself although not famous and i can totally see myself disliking if someone changed the vision of my music even though everyone else thought it was much better, it can be really hard to see the other side of the argument when you are that close to the material.
Nobody would know any different if the stripped down version of "Winding Road" hadn't been released. You're exactly correct.
It's amazing how people become overnight critics when they have something else to compare things to-even though the original held up for almost 50 years as one of the Beatle's Pantheons.
@@electrolytics Since i have listened to the original version of the Let it be album for about 25 years before the "naked" version even came out over 30 year after the original i must admit that i am of course "colored" by that, maybe someone that heard them both side by side or the "naked" version first would have a different perspective/opinion. Personaly i also dont care for any remixes of Beatles albums since the original is the version i have known for many decades and absolutely love, and also with the originals sounding so good i find the remixes pointless at best and never listen to them.
I also feel that the song The Long and winding road really deserves that orchestra and choir treatment which makes it "bigger than life", it is of course a good song without it also but it really shows the difference of what production and this kind of arrangement can make.
I am not a fan of Phil Spector's work with the Beatles, and that includes All Things Must Pass. I remember seeing the Let It Be movies where Paul is singing the bare version of "...Winding Road" and remember thinking "I like that so much better". It just felt more intimate without that awful choir behind him.
Hey buddy ✌️
Thank God Yoko didn’t have a microphone on the rooftop concert.
Ringo was the first to leave The Beatles.
He even left the country with his family and went on vacation to the islands.
Then Paul left on musical differences.
Phil Specter fired his gun in the studio inch’s in front of Johns face. John said,
“Phil !! If you’re going to kill me then kill me, but don’t make me deaf.
Geez, that is crazy! Why fire the gun at Lennon anyway?
OMG David, I so agree!
It was bad enough the poor Beatles had to deal with the Police, but to have to deal with animal control officers too? That would have be cruel!😉
Very insightful video on some of the characters who didn't break up the Beatles, but ensured they wouldn't reunite when the door was still open. But I would add four major decisions throughout the 70s:
- Paul suing the Beatles in Dec 1970 to dissolve the Beatles partnership. I think that decision really cemented the two irreconciliable "camps" in the band (Paul vs. the other three), and led to the lowest point in the Beatles' internal relationships which was 1971 with the press wars and with How Do You Sleep.
- John's decision in 1971 to move to New York. This may be the single biggest reason why the Beatles never reunited, and some people even think this ruined John's career.
- Yoko's intervention in January 1975 to get back with John (who was dating May Pang and making good music with Walls & Bridges), which immediately prevented John from flying to New Orleans to play on Paul's Venus and Mars album. The closest we ever got to a Lennon-McCartney reunion.
- Mark David Chapman's murder of John.
Totally agree that it wasn't Yoko, but what do I know (I wasn't even alive yet). I would have thought it was inevitable as talk has always been that The White Album was actually a bunch of solo albums. I like your take on this, but I would say these guys were just the straw that broke the camel's back would be more fitting. Your channel and one other has really got me digging deeper into the McCartney / Wings solo albums. I feel I have unearthed a treasure.
yoko was a HUGE factor. HUGE
I truly believe their breakup was a blessing. If they had stayed together they would most likely have gone down the black hole of disco. John even said in an interview with Tom Synder in 1974 he liked the disco trend that music was headed into. I just believe as a hard-core fan that it would have tarnished their legacy. It was just the right time in history for them to go their separate ways.
the Beatles would have most likely went into playing disco if they stayed together?? Now this is funny.
And then it could be said they’ve come full circle. Their early work was music to dance to I guess 👍
The Stones had Miss You, KISS had I was made for loving you baby and Rod Stewart had DO You Think I'm Sexy. All hits.
@@tammylewis2408 could you really imagine the Lennon and McCartney vocals over a disco track?
Uao love your video man! As a big macca fan love to check people who really know how things really happen !
Very interesting view Michael !! I do agree with a lot of what you said here. The main point is these 3 guys messed up any chance of The Beatles getting back together.
Richard Hewson was the person who did the arrangement on 'The Long and Winding Road', not Phil Spector. Spector just produced the recording. McCartney knew Hewson and had worked with him prior to 1970. McCartney actually quite liked Hewson's arrangement of 'The Long and Winding Road' and used it in his live performances of the song in later years. McCartney also had Hewson do the arrangements for his 'Thrillington' version of the 'Ram' album in 1971, so there was no bad blood between the two of them.
the strings were over the top. Eleanor Rigby and Yesterday were well done. Winding Road was kitsch.
Great report! I had never considered that these men did indeed destroy any chance that the tenuous breakup would pass. I have always assumed it was the Beatles themselves tiring of being in the group. But thanks to you I have a better understanding of the breakup.
Phil Spector's only excuse for ruining the Beatles might have been that Wagner existed before him. Listen to Wagner's orchestrations, then listen to Beethoven's second movement of his 7th Symphony, how cheap Wagner sounds.
I've never had any problem with the Let It Be album. The Long and Winding Road is beautiful, and it was all I knew for 30 years, before they put out Let It Be naked.
Ram is so good, I remember discovering it and then being perplexed when I learned it had been panned.
Nice post! Though I've heard McCartney say himself that he was a bit in a rut for a short period.
Thank you for telling me why The Beatles actually disbanded, I needed this!
GAAAWD, I'm so sick of hearing people slam Phil Spector's production of "The Long and Winding Road"; it's a beautiful track, the choir, the orchestra. Trendy persecution is so childishly predictable. I know McCartney hated it, but that's just his opinion.
Whether Paul liked it or not, it's my favorite version of Long And Winding Road
It was done very well , we're all used to it, It's just that Paul preferred something else and it was done behind his back.
Not to dispute anything (I actually agree with just about everything), but where does the Abbey Road sessions fit into this timeline? It was after Let It Be, and although Abbey Road, especially Side 2 and its medley of half finished songs, does have the feel of "it's our last album, let's go out with a bang" there were apparently some discussions about another album (resulting some very interesting fan ideas of which tracks would've been on it).
Very interesting, as a big Beatles fan, I was certainly aware of the slimy Allan Klein (John later said "Paul was right!"). I also knew about Phil Spector. Perhaps his motivation was not only to continue his working relationship with John and George ($) but also a bit of revenge about Paul's negative comments about his production on the Let It Be album.
But I never knew that Jann Wenner had such animosity towards Paul. I didn't think a lot of him for the way he ran the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, this video did nothing to improve that!
Part of the problem was that a working musical group in the 1960s was expected to work constantly. Record companies expected at least one or two albums per year, along with constant touring. Some artists could handle that, working with the same people, 12 hours a day, for years on end. Others couldn't. Over the decades, the music industry has changed expectations so one album every 3 years is the average. With a more relaxed release schedule, the Beatles could have continued to work together. However, Paul was a workaholic who wanted to keep recording constantly and John was sick of it. Note that John, George, and Ringo continued to socialize and work together on music after the breakup.
George, Paul and John put out solo music before the Beatles broke up. John had 3 charting hits which gave him the courage to end it.
Oh my I couldn't agree more - those 3 men had *major* influence on the break up - It was not Paul's 'bossiness', it was not Yoko or poor Linda. Those men cashed on the Beatles' breakup and contributed to the bad relationship of John and Paul at the time. Jann Wenner built his newspaper's empire on the ruins of the band. Phil spector was a sociopath and Allen Klein a manipulative bully. Those three stood between John and Paul and prevented them from talking. An accurate video! it is time to reconsider the biases of the 70s narrative bullshit that John pushed in the begining.
Those are three horrible men but absolutely nobody cashed in on the breakup of the Beatles more than Yoko Ono did.
My theory of the cause of the Beatles’ breakup is their phone call to Frank Zappa. They were shocked to learn that Frank was running the band’s business affairs. This motivated them to start Apple the difficulty of the running of which broke up the band.
after seeing this video i admit id never thought that it could be those weasels that finally caused the Beatles to call it quits, you are most likely right about that. and i never thought it was Yoko or Linda , i absolutely knew it had to be deeper than that. thanks!
I'm glad you did not dump on Yoko . Ringo is often the but of a lot of jokes . How ever , Ringo's live concerts featured an all ways an amazing group of musicians . The ticket prices were reasonable . It was fun and entertaining .
Interesting that Ram was slammed….. it’s considered the father of indie albums
Ram was slammed because they were told to slam it to punish Paul.
Geez this music critics were sure ahead of their time.
Reminds me of film critics post 2016 attacking fan loved content because it Doesn't meet their crazy political views
I agree with you that McCartneys post Beatles work was excellent.
I love your content, Michael!
I get it, John was the first to officially break up the band. However, just notice what happened after Yoko came flying into John Lennon's limo!
John breaks up with Cynthia in a fashion so cruel that, well, it seems only Yoko was truly capable of acheiving from behind the scene and below the bed cover!
Then what happens? Ringo leaves. Then George leaves and when he comes back we can observe Yoko quietly encouraging George to record his own album by the aggressive encouraging shaking up and down of her head as he tells her about it!
Then what happens? John and little miss Yoko find Alan Klein and John shares it with the other Beatles, convincing two of it while alienating Paul (Yoko's body language shows utter disdain for Paul throughout the newly released"Get Back" footage.
And finally, Yoko succeeds in separating Julian from their lives almost entirely, convincing John not to give a penny to Cynthia or Julian. The poor guy has to sue her many years later in order to receive his rightful inheritance!
PS...Yoko decides to leave John and provide him with a secretary mistress and what does John do with it? Once again, he goes along for the ride!
It's Yoko, behind the scenes and most everyone believes it to this day. Why? Because most people are pretty good at reading a bad apple when they see it!😉
Awwww, another jealous of Yoko. John's breakup with Cyn wasn't any crueler than Paul's breakup with Jane. It's just the way things happen. Mick Jagger was the one who gave John Allen Klein's name, Yoko had nothing to do with it. The Get Back footage shows Paul and Linda and Yoko all got on fine. Sons have no rightful inheritance if fathers choose not to give them anything. You might blame Yoko for breaking up the Beatles, but the Beatles themselves didn't, and no offense, but I think I'll listen to those that know rather than those that don't.
@@barefootbooks69 that's a great idea! Obviously, you know little of what The Beatle's themselves have said (often under their breath) regarding Yoko.
But I do like your idea! Keep we with the plan!
@@rogandbingofbingalahtravel3680 None of the Beatles blamed Yoko, ever. They've all said the opposite. Stop peddling lies. Grow up.
@@barefootbooks69 you are so funny! Obviously, you know little about the Fab Four. That's ok, in time you will grow enough to know the truth.
@@rogandbingofbingalahtravel3680 I know more than you. Check out George on Dick Cavett and Paul on Howard Stern. They both say it wasn't Yoko. Their words. And they should know. Funny how you think you know more than they do.
Howard Stern asked Paul this exact question and he said John broke up the Beatles a few years ago.
Yep, and Paul had to live with that false narrative for decades! Thanx Jake!👌
The main thing is they had grown apart. They were having families and meeting new people.They were on different paths musically. That was it.
Enough said.
I always wonder why Linda McCartney got blamed for the break up of the Beatles. She never encouraged the break up of the Beatles. She actually attended the Shea Stadium concert the Beatles had in 1965. She was a Beatles fan.
I think I was about 10 years old when I first heard RAM. I loved it from my first hearing. I never read any of the reviews of it, just heard the music and the songs. To this day I thing very well of RAM. I can imagine Phil Spector saying all this and that about Paul during sessions with John and George, I can see it as Phil's way of blowing off steam over Paul's dislike of the way Let It Be turned out. And I never thought of Phil Spector or even Paul McCartney as having an ego before.
I think The Beatles broke up because they reached the end of what they could do together. They all had newer songs that weren't going to work in a Beatles setting. I think they were feeling the confinements of the group boundaries, they needed to branch out and work outside the band. The outside influences didn't help, but I think it was just them realizing it was time to call it a day.
Since I retired I’ve really gone down the rabbit hole with the Beatles. And I’ve come to the conclusion that yes there were circumstances that broke them up. But when you look at the lives they lead from that time on it was obvious how different each and everyone of them was. John and George were pretty much free spirits. They didn’t have any children to hold them down and they rushed off to be in the mist of absolutely everything. Paul started a family and pursued being who he was in the way that worked in his life. Ringo was doing all kinds of different things at the time. But they’re all just very different people. And it’s sad it is is that they broke up. Imagine all the music we would have not heard if they stayed together.
John had a first wife, Cynthia, and a son Julian, who is a musician in his own right. Cynthia and John first met in art school in the late 50s, and early 60s. They married in 1962 when Cynthia was pregnant with Julian, just as the Beatles were recording their first songs on EMI. Julian was born in April 1963, just as the Beatles were taking off. At first, it was kept hidden because at the time teen idols were not supposed to be married and have families, the fans would have not bought their records. Originally on their appearance on the Ed Sullivan show, there was a caption over John saying, "Girls, he's married". John really wanted to take his family on the road, but the idea was nixed. Literally, the round of touring, performing, and recording left him with little time to spend with Cynthia, and especially Julian. But as John's fame grew and became entrenched in the rock and roll lifestyle, cracks in the marriage began appearing, which opened the door for Yoko. After they stopped touring, they embarked on separate projects; John was in Europe filming the anti-war film "How I Won the War"; Paul was composing songs for the Haley Mills movie "The Family Way"; George was studying under the Maharishi, and Ringo was working on other projects as well. They returned to the studio to record Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane, and later the Sgt. Pepper album. Brian's death in August 1967 was the tipping point for what would happen afterward. It was easy to blame the Beatles' breakup on Yoko rather than mitigating circumstances, but more stories have come out on what really went down, especially the new Get Back movie, and it was more about management than anything. Had the Beatles had a manager like Peter Grant, who managed Led Zeppelin, and made them billionaires, they would have had their song catalog and profited off of it, and been together a while longer.
@@tammylewis2408 I agree.
There’s actually photographs of the Apple office the day John said he wanted a divorce from the Beatles. John, Paul and Ringo were there as George was not: he was visiting his mother Louise who is suffering from cancer. It is in the famous Anthony Fawcett book “One Day at a Time” book on John Lennon. That day was supposed to be the day where Alan Klein announced the bigger royalty payments for Beatles albums and everybody was supposed to be celebrating, and then Paul was going off about future Beatles plans and that’s when John laid down the law
Would have been cool to reunite on the 70's Saturday Nights Live. I know SNL offered a handsome sum to play, $3,000. 🙃
Yeah, and Loren even said they could pay Ringo less, and keep the bulk of that FAB check, Mark!
John and Paul saw that show live, and almost showed up! Paul was visiting john at the time!
@@MichaelNoland-TheBottomLine I heard that. I thought I watched a show where Belushi offered them $100 or something like that. Anyway, good videos you got here, thanks!
WELL DONE!!! But remember how Cline was able to work on John and Yoko personalities flattering them and knowing how John was frustrated for
JOHN'S not appreciation of Yoko by his bandmates. In Get Back documentary we can clearly see that when John speaks about Cline just when Paul was.absent
and try to convince George in a.very
enthousiastic way. He was backed and strengthened by Joko who was very happy about Cline who had promised her an exposition in Syracuse. John was.pushed by her to try Cline anyway and he knew Paul wouldn't like him.
So he was able.to convince his mates against Paul. And Linda? Why didn't she understand that the other 3 guys would never accept her father as a manager of the group? So I think.that Joko and Linda played a negative role in the situation even if minor. Your analisi is perfect.
Thank you! It's the first time I've ever heard that. Good!
Great video and commentary!
Great post and in a nutshell: The Beatles broke up when people got involved who were looking after themselves and not the band
Ultimately, it was really Mark David Chapman who broke up The Beatles. He took John from the world and that ended any possibilities of a reunion.
I think The Beatles were like most bands. They ended up needing a break from each other and then could eventually find reason to reconvene. Pink Floyd did. Talking Heads, Cream did and hell even froze over for a Eagles reunion. The Clash had agreed to reunite for their induction as well. Jan Wenner is a douchbag but the Hall Of Shame *does* provide a platform for heart warming reunions.
We would have gotten the Beatles reunion for the Anthology project 💔
They are a big fuck up. In many ways. Nick Simper, first bassplayer on 3 albums was forgotten and did not get an invitation. The rest danced to what Gillan wanted who wanted to let only play the current line up as the valid one.
My take on the breakup is rather different, because I attribute it less to personalities than to their having matured stylistically as individuals with each going his own separate way. I don't consider the White Album a Beatles LP at all, and in fact critics at the time said that although the material was great it just didn't hold together stylistically. At the time I didn't know that they had pretty much recorded their own songs solo or nearly so, with little participation from the others. I recently tried to come up with one disc worth of Beatles songs from the White Album, and didn't come close to finding enough Beatle-ish material.for even two sides. Most of those songs on the White Album belonged on their solo LPs, not on a Beatles album -- because of style, not because of quality. In particular the John Lennon contributions are not Beatles songs at all -- which, again, is not to diss them.
IMO, what they needed was for an impartial mentor whom they all respected to present a radically new vision for their future. Said mentor should have told them: "Lads, listen to me. You're maturing as artists, you're going in your own directions, and that's not a bad thing. Start working on your solo albums, but if you should happen to write anything Beatle-ish, put it aside. When enough Beatle-ish songs have accumulated you can come together to do another Beatles LP, say every two years or so. In the meantime, give some thought to what a 1970s Beatles would sound like, how it would be '70s and fresh but still distinctly Beatles." Unfortunately, there was no precedent in those days for such a farsighted approach. When bands broke up, the members went their own ways. But if there had been someone who could envision all of them having solo careers while still coming together every few years for a new Beatles album, he might have saved the day and we might have another 3 or 4 Beatles albums to be talking about today.
I disagree with everything you just said
Paul's contributions themselves don't even hold together stylistically: pop, ragtime, reggae, folk, blues, hard rock, comedy
Fleetwood Mac (Stevie Nicks, Lindsey Buckingham), CSNY, CSN....need I say more?
You have echoed my thoughts entirely. Sadly, one of the consequences of Beatle trailblazing was the idea of individual members going solo. It would be natural nowadays but then unthinkable. I thought like you at the time.
@@robertfmorton Even more unthinkable at the time was the idea of going solo AND continuing to record with the band (John Entwistle, Phil Collins) -- in retrospect, the obvious solution for the Beatles. In those days, if you wanted to record a solo album, you left the band forever.
I've been a Beatle"Manic" since 1990-something, I was in my teens then. I've also always been more of a McCartney fan than any other Beatle post Beatles. Even today when I've decided to check more of George's and John's solo efforts out I'm not sure what to think of John's works.
I agree with u! the 3 stooges of the Beatles business end was a big disappointment. not only on the band's side of it but, themselves as individuals as well!!!
There were four guys who broke up the Beatles. John, Paul, George and Ringo. They're own individual personalities lead them on a path of an eventual break up. Yeah they could have kept on making beautiful music but it didn't happen.
Absolutely amazing what they did in 8 years..
I love how Paul says he didn't like what Phil did with The Long and Winding Road.....but he continues to use the backing tapes when he does the song live. 🤷♂️
Because he plays what he feels fans would want to hear, and that’s the way the song was released.
Backing tapes? What backing tapes?
Interesting content ! 👍 I guess I have always suspected that there *had* to be more to the Beatles break-up, than just the Yoko and Linda thing. And I totally agree, that Phil Spector didn't do the "Let It Be" album any good.
Interesting analysis, and I think you are right on all points.
I am not as big a Beatles fan as you are, but Let It Be would have been my favorite of their albums if it wasn't butchered by Spector so much - I love the raw sound that is underneath it all, and that is heard in the footage that Michael indsay-Hogg shot. Some of this was fixed with the Let it Be - Naked release, but I have always felt that release had some issues too to become the right replacement.
For my own pleasure I have therefore, in my iTunes library where my enthire music collection is brought together, compiled a version of the album that I believe comes as close to what could have been the best version. All of these tracks are easily available, but playing them together in this fashion, I believe, gives the best representation of this particular music overall. Try it, if you have the time some day 😃
1. Two Of Us (Album Version)
2. Dig A Pony (Album Version)
3. Across The Universe (Naked Version)
4. I Me Mine (Naked Version)
5. Dig It (Album Version)
6. Let It Be (Naked Version)
7. Maggie Mae (Album Version)
8. I've Got A Feeling (Album Version)
9. One After 909 (Album Version)
10. The Long And Winding Road (Master Track, no Spector alterations; Anthology 3 Version)
11. Don't Let Me Down (Single Version)
12. Get Back (Album Version)
You have put forward a good argument here even though most people have long realised that Allen Klein was a main contributing factor in the break of The Beatles. Adding Jan Wenner to the list of suspects is a new one to me and I can see what you're getting at. I feel though that you have missed two people out and that Lee and John Eastman and the fact that they were Paul's in-laws probably pushed the other three in favour of Klein. Also the Eastmans badly handled the situation with The Beatles, both as negotiators and with their lack of understanding of the music industry.
Ultimately though it was John and Paul who were to blame and the fact that they were drifting apart musicaly.
It appeared to me in the movie Get Back that they were enjoying working together.
BTW, for anyone looking to hear the BEST sounding "McCartney" look for the ones mastered by Robert Ludwig. I'm new to vinyl myself but someone I know sold me their copy with side A R. Ludwig mastered and my jaw dropped. I have two copies to have both sides mastered by R. Ludwig and I fell even deeper in love with Everynigh and Maybe I'm Amazed.
The Beatles had pretty much run their course by then. No one thing broke them up, it was 1000 little things that would eventually break up the band. The death of Epstein, family life, changing musical tastes, needing space to do their own thing, ect ect, and probably sick of each other.
I think management, record company, and the press created more drama for the band than there should have been. These pressures probably made the lads more bitter towards each other than there was. Perhaps they would have just taken an extended hiatus and would have eventually gotten back together. Who knows but I enjoy and appreciate the material they made to this day. Their legacy will not be forgotten.
I had heard these 3 stories individually but never put them together. Good stuff. Specter was a great producer when collaborating with an artist, but he was on his own with Let It Be. Its serviceable, but needed more Beatles production values.
Excellent analysis.
I get the beef that Paul had over John's decision - totally warranted - but I never had a problem with Phil Spector's production on Let it Be. The album just doesn't have quite the level of a cohesive "album" feel that a lot of their others had. In their process of "getting back," they didn't get it totally up into the proper Beatles gear in the direction department, yet it retains the level of quality of their higher-shelf early albums.
Really good for the most part thanks Michael. I *disagree* tho' on Phil Spector's actual work on Let it Be. The Beatles 'canon' is incredibly complex, diverse and eclectic hey? (and I'm sure all true Beatles fans would agree that's a *good* thing). The Luxurious production and 'vocal arias' on 'The Long and WInding Road' and 'Across the Universe' have always been divisive among fans - but I find these touches *astoundingly* beautiful!! For me, they're a lovely part of the whole Beatles story, (when viewed in a purely musical context). So maybe we should just 'let it lie' (or even 'Let it Be') at least from the standpoint of critiquing this album musically?... Bottom line: There are 2 or 3 Dodgy Lennon 'fillers' on that album - and if anything should be negatively criticised on Let it Be, then surely it's those?... 🙏🙏🥰
Love ur channel greetings from Germany ….Mach so weiter
The Beatles were first in many things but taking a break from the group & releasing solo work before reuniting wasn’t one of them. George even mentioned it in Get Back.
The only Linda bashing I ever heard was the "she can't sing" dust up on a bootlegged demo tape. I remember Pete Townsend coming to her defense regarding it being a demo and lots of artists are out of tune while working out a song. Or words to that effect.
I always thought the critics thought Paul was just a "pretty girl" man who made bubble gum music. The DJs would say so, especially after John died. But even before they would get a woody over all of John's music. John was always considered more talented, more creative, more profound. IOW the "MAN". He had a huge male following and was put on a pedestal for all the inner meanings to his songs, even when he said there were none, it was all word play or copying and pasting sentences from a circus poster. It's not to say John wasn't talented - he did have a gift for words, even if they made no sense, but I think the music industry which is mostly, if not all, men and that includes record producers, DJs, music journalists - they were the ones along with all of John's fan boys, who attacked Yoko. I never heard them criticizing Linda, but it doesn't surprise me. All painting her as someone who wormed her way in as if she held a gun to John's head and he had no free will. Which, to me, looking back, it was kind of a contradiction because all his worshiping fans made him look kind of weak that he would let a woman control him. And they all dismissed Paul's talent. If his post album McCartney showed anything, it showed he was responsible for the Beatles' "sound". When I first heard it, I thought it was the Beatles and he was criticized for sounding the "same". As if. He took it to heart and ended up moving away from that Beatles sound. I personally thought it was a mistake.
John wrote more songs for the beatles than Paul
@@tonymccusker501 So.......?
Good video with many valid points. I love the McCartney and Ram albums but the latter is the stronger album of the two. McCartney has it's homemade charm but is not on par with Ram IMHO.
Hmm may as well call him Col. Alan Klein.
And the whole time telling reporters that Paul had no choice but to be a Beatles, by contract, when the asshole, wasn’t even officially their manager!
He thought if he acted like his contract with them was actually worth the paper it was printed on, none would be the wiser!
And since him, no man dares wear a turtleneck in public! He killed The Turttleneck Industry, Michael!❤
Great insight Mike! You also got to say they stopped touring,can't go to the local pub for pint,.....it has to wear on the lads,...damn shame.Yet we still have the MUSIC!
I've heard Let It Be Raw. I know it was Paul's preferred mix, but frankly it sounds like a collection of demos. I happen to like what Phil Specter did with the mix, which we originally came to know and love.
Disagree
You sure you heard it? Because it's actually called Let It Be Naked.
@@aliceborealis they might have a bootleg copy that is called Let it Be Raw. Wouldn’t be surprised.
This video sounds reasonable, good job!
Thanx, Mark!
I remember the blame game regarding who broke up the Beatles🙄 Being 58 years old. The 4 wanted to go on to do different things and be with different people. I have loved them ALWAYS & still🥰
The breakup seemed to have been such a combination of things - no Epstein, the business rifts, tension over Paul’s control, growing up and having relationships that changed the band dynamic. They’d already run through a lot of momentum by late 66, and ending touring and John meeting Yoko during that time may have eventually caused Epstein’s fate and John’s interest to decline; its remarkable that the music from late 66 to early 68 was as good and harmoniously made as it was, and even more so that the less harmoniously made material from the White Album through Abbey Road was as good as it was.
I really think as both a serious content createt and as a true Beattle fan, you should quote or reference sources for some of your affirmations, such as Ian telling another music reviewer to do a negative one for Ram.
I love this explenation.yesss I Agree all.