He was the teacher and they were the students who graduated into geniuses. It wasn’t an accident that their poor album Let it Be wasn’t produced by him. Another excellent video Tudor 😊
It would have been a different 60s. Although they originally started out with rock and roll and ballads, their wider reach and influence made a big impact.
Great video as usual, George martin was without a doubt the 5th beatle. What he and the beatles created together, will never be beaten. In my life, penny lane, Eleanor rigby, to abbey road. The best album ever. A great man, a great tribute Tudor, look forward to your next video. All the best, kev chatterley.
I was listening to some of George’s music today The film scores, and orchestral music ,he Always had a smile on his face when he spoke of the Beatles .heTruly believed in them , he leaves a Fabulous legacy behind.
I have come to realize after all the glitz and glamour has died down...George Martin was cooler than any one of the Beatles. He was humble, but a world class talent who wasn't looking for fame, just wanted to create great music.
I agree with much of this. Martin's unusual mix of background skills and interests, from orchestration to "radio workshop"-style experiments, via the comedic likes of the Goons and Bernard Cribbins, not only resonated with the Beatles at a personal level but definitely did much to set the tone and provided the environment in which the Beatles could flourish. He also provided editorial advice on song structure and the like, and helped them learn what would work in the studio and what would not. But it seems to me you want to credit Martin with ideas that actually came from the Beatles, ideas where he was an important enabler, but not an originator. For example, the tape loops used on Tomorrow Never Knows were McCartney's inspiration, coming from his exposure to the London avant garde scene and were developed from loops initially made by him at home and in the little experimental tape studio he set up in Ringo's former Montagu Square house with the help of electronics innovator ian Sommerville, where they recorded the likes of Sommerville's friend the beat poet William Burroughs. Similarly, you mention A Day In The Life, with it's cacophanous orchestral crescendi and iconic piano coda, in a way which seems to imply that this shows how Martin, as you put it, "shaped" the "soundscape" of the Beatles' music and "elevated" it by his "sophisticated orchestral arrangements". But the evidence is clear that the shape of this arrangement, including the crescendi, was due to Lennon and McCartney, and that Martin was even *resistant* to their wish to orchestrate it. According to engineer Emerick, Martin "rolled his eyes" at such a costly and "ridiculous" idea and had to be persuaded. The whole shape of the arrangement is there in the very first studio take on the morning of day one, which Martin said was the first time he'd ever heard the song, proving that, as Lennon said, he and McCartney "rehearsed it at home the afternoon before, so we knew exactly what we were playing." As for Eleanor Rigby and Penny Lane, where you say it was Martin who added depth and grandeur" by "introducing string and brass sections":- The idea of using strings on Rigby was again McCartney's - "it was Paul's idea," said John. "Jane Asher had turned him to Vivaldi, I can't take any credit for that at all." George Martin can take credit for, as he recalled, listening receptively to Paul's idea for a chordal string backing with what he called a "stabbing rhythn" and then "sitting down with Paul at the piano and taking note of his music" to produce a brilliant score along the lines suggested. George Martin did score brass for Penny Lane, but remember that Paul was very much in control of that arrangement, producing the bulk of its multi-overdubbed piano backing on his own "and had very definite thoughts about the instrumentation" (Emerick) that Martin was charged with scoring over a weekend. As for the iconic piccolo trumpet solos, these were entirely Paul's idea, inspired by hearing a Bach concerto on TV, and were composed entirely by Paul, using piano and voice to tell Martin what he wanted to hear, whilst Martin wrote it down for David Mason to play. "We spent three hours working it out," Mason recalled. "Paul sang the parts he wanted, George Martin wrote them out, I tried them." Martin: "As we came to each little section where we wanted the sound, Paul would think up the notes he wanted, and I would write them down for David. The result was unique, something that had never been done in rock music before, and it gave 'Penny Lane' a very distinct character.” George refected, "I could have written some notes myself, but," he admitted, "they wouldn't have been such good notes." And although your account of George Martin seeing something that others didn't in the Beatles, and having the nerve to take a chance on them, is based fairly on Martin's own version of events, I think that version is a little out-of-date since Lewisohn's research into the documents related to their Parlophone signing and surrounding circumstances, which indicate that Martin was less than willing, and was manipulated into taking the Beatles on by his EMI boss Len Wood, mainly to satisfy persistent lobbying by EMI's publishing arm Ardmore and Beechwood, who wanted the Beatles under contract so they could take advantage of McCartney's "Like Dreamers Do". Having previously sent Epstein and the Beatles packing, like everyone else, Martin was given the chore by Wood not as an opportunity but more as a punishment for a) making himself unpopular with EMI management by demanding a percentage of royalties for Parlophone hits and for b) morally outraging Len Wood by having an extramarital affair with his Parolophone secretary.
Yes George Martin was the clever glue to them and not always appreciated. Ive been watching that classy harpist on Virgin Rock analyse Shes Leaving Home and Strawberry Fields Forever and she was so impressed she's started to do all the Beatle songs.from early on
George Martin was Brilliant! He not only saw something in them that curiously had more to do with their personalities than their musicality in the beginning , perhaps hinting of why they became a cultural phenomenon on top of the musical phenomenon they became. If there is a 5th Beatle he definitely would be it imo!
Always a pleasure to watch your videos Tudor. I think the relationship between George and the Beatles was ideal. The boys were not overawed by George ("well I don't like your tie" said Harrison at their first meeting when Martin had outlined how they'd work together and asked if they had any objections) but had a charming respect for him (they'd go on the roof or in the toilets at Abbey Road away from Martin's prying eyes to smoke some exotic tabacco or drop acid, like naughty school kids.) The fact that there was obviously huge mutual respect between George and the lads, despite the fact that he was considerably older and from an entirely different background speaks volumes of both parties. Great work Tudor!
I love that George quote! 🤣 GM was an innovator and constantly pushed the technological boundaries- and it suited the writing of the Beatles as they further developed their skills. 👍
Another interesting video Tudor. Well done. How lucky were the Beatles to get George Martin. It's another one of those amazing quirks of fate, one of many in the Beatles story. He initially thought they were nothing special, indeed quite average but after meeting them he knew there was something very special about them. Without Brian Epstein and then George Martin we may have never heard of the Fab Four. So pivotal were they.
It really was a twist of fate. Right place right time for all of them. Perhaps the stars and the planets were just all aligned properly. You can’t let an opportunity like that pass you by!
@@TudorSmith .Indeed. The amount of twists of fate in the Beatles story is quite remarkable. Have you read Lewisohn's book Tudor?(Tune In) I devoured it as soon as it came out in 2013 and have just re-read it...fascinating, I couldn't put it down once I had started it. And I aleady know the whole story...lol
@Tudor Smith .It's a must read for anyone remotely interested in the Beatles. It is quite simply the most authoritative telling of their story. The amount of research Lewisohn did is amazing. He is currently writing part two (of three). It's taken him 10 years and he's full time on it.
I would've liked to ask George Martin about the process of working with Paul to realize his vision of what his songs should be, especially when they included orchestral sounds.
I had the privilege of seeing Martin give a multimedia presentation on the recording of Sgt Pepper in New York in 1998. It could've lasted twice as long and I'd still have been listening with rapt attention. George Martin and the Beatles were a match made in heaven.
The Beatles and Sir George Martin were perfect partners. His musical expertise and openness to creativity waa integral. And the engineers like Norman Smith and Geoff Emeric pushed technical innovations You mentioned many of the others but missed, ADT (Artificial Double Tracking), a technique created as Lennon hated double tracking his voice
@@TudorSmith And due to Lennon's laziness lol. And there's "flanging", which Lennon actually named. Direct injection was another technique for recording guitar and bass which McCartney used. Macca was the tape loop guru. Would you give The Existential Alcoholic's Blues a listen? Be interesting to hear your views as we both share a lot of musical tastes and influences.
If you listen to The Beatles contemporaries like The Rolling Stones and The Kinks, the Beatles production is far, far superior. Then as you rightly say George Martin adds in (or agrees to) so much creativity, adds in wonderful orchestrations and arrangements. Giles Martin has relatively little to change with all the remixes because his Dad got it right the first time. Great stuff again, Tudor.
It’s an interesting comparison. I’m sure George Martin would not settle for anything than 100% commitment from the artist or the studio team! Giles made a fine split of the mono to stereo mixes with the new technology to isolate tracks as used in Get Back. I love his working of the LOVE album. It’s genius but I’m sure the purists will say “leave the originals alone”
@@TudorSmith Yes I agree. The Love album sounds amazing! I think Giles has done a great job with the new stereo mixes in terms of the panning of the sound. I will look forward to the next one…. Rubber Soul?
Well, I was going to point out that in your previous video you seemed to ignore the contribution and influence of George Martin to thier music, but now I see why 😊 Nice one Tudor, you have the knack of putting into words what we Beatles nurds can't.
Always thought George Martin was a total lad. The get back film confirmed this. I studied sound tech at LIPA where the main studio is called the GMS (George Martin Studio). Some of my classmates were interviewed in that studio by channel 4 when George died back in 2016
Yes Tudor well put! I smiled when I heard that John told Martin that he'd like to redo all the Beatles songs again and Martin said surely not Strawberry Fields Forever and John replied "especially Stawberry Fields Forever " ! 🤡
I wonder if his comments related to how long it took to record the avant-garde music initially to how quickly they might be able to produce it with the then more modern equipment they had to hand?
Typical John! Odd considering that only a couple of his post-Beatle albums came close to the quality of production that GM provided during the 60s - and we all know how awful Let It Be sounded on original release (I might be wrong, but I think it was John who wanted Phil Spector to produce?) Probably the nearest we got to hearing what The Beatles could have sounded like recorded with modern equipment were the records GM made with Paul in the 80s - which are beautifully recorded - Give My Regards to Broadstreet contains a few redos of Beatles songs………
Absolutely agree. The only post Beatles album of Johns I’m happy to listen to is Double Fantasy (and that’s only the A side!) because I love the production of it. McCartney I feel had a huge respect for GM and it shows with their many collaborations post-Beatles.
@@TudorSmith yes John was less nuanced or as polished than Paul but I really like the Imagine LP , Walls And Bridges and parts of the others particularly those tracks on Double Fantasy ! Hell I even like some of Yaka's. *🤡
Agreed Tudor! We owe a debt of gratitude to George Martin for seeing in the Beatles what others didn’t! After all the Decca demo tapes weren’t all that good were they?
I never quite understood why John seemingly turned against George Martin. I know in late period Beatles and his early solo career he became obsessed with paring everything down to the basics, most notably on John Lennon Plastic Ono Band. And he says to George during the making of Let It Be, "We don't want your studio tricks" - or words to that effect. But to my mind the great Beatles recordings, let's say the middle period Beatles from 1966 to 1968, were full of "studio tricks" and all the better for it.
Possibly George made the mistake of explaining his process and showing what he was doing. This made the boys subconsciously contemptuous of him as what he was doing was so "simple". This also meant Phil Spector was able to come in to the picture later, who's production style is all about keeping things hidden and "magical" (ie carrying guns and getting pissed in the studio).
It's important to note that Martin's Piano work on In My Life and his chromatic runs on the Organ in Being For The Benefit Of Mr. Kite! were done at half-speed.
The Beatles most creative period was obviously their first, when they brought their local Mersey sound briefly to the status of a World Music. By the very end of this initial period on the "Help" album, i hear the full scope of studio artistry (and budget) is being stealthily applied to make thinner material sound slick and sophisticated while seemingly simple. On many of the songs, for example, someone, perhaps uncredited, is noodling exquisite harmonies behind the band on a cheap harmonium, which adds a richness and depth in the most minimalist way. This alone is an element of genius which may not be the work of any of the band members. The Beatles had the genius at times to make a toy piano sound variously like a carnival, a bell carillion, or a choir of angels. But whoever is playing that harmonium was similarly gifted. My other point being that by Help, we can hear the studio making a full press to milk their cash cow for all it is worth. We too easily overlook how much influence the studio has in producing and marketing their "product", regardless of the talent or involvement of the actual band. The band is just another show, and the show is primarily a business. If the band is talented and can play their own instruments, even better, but not strictly necessary! I think in the Beatles case, the bands talent rose above the studio polishing, but maybe around Help, it was becoming more of a "hit factory".
can anyone believe that the 3 greatest songwrighters of the 20th century and possibly the greatest producer in history ,all just happened to meet by accident.....unbelievable !...If this had been presented to a film producer as a possible film script , it would have been binned and the script writer turfed out on his ear !
In the fade out of A Day in The Life piano chord at 4:50 to 4:53 I hear a chair squeaking and a sniffle in the right speaker. Any other theories Tudor?
Mark Lewisohns version of why George Martin 'took a chance' with the Beatles is slightly different. He was blackmailed by music publishers who knew of his affair with Judy the Parlophone receptionist. He did realise their potential and talent soon after but he did have his arm twisted initially
One of those stories that has surfaced so late ( and I have been collecting all printed matter on the Beatles for over 50 years) that I am inclined not to believe it.
Martin met Judy Lockhart Smith on his first day of work at EMI Studios in 1950, when she served as secretary to Parlophone director Oscar Preuss. Martin chose to retain her as secretary when he assumed direction of Parlophone in 1955, and they began a discreet affair in the late 1950s. They married on June 24, 1966 and remained married until George's death in 2016.
@@TudorSmith Just a one-man band lyrically speaking, Ray Davies having all the song-writing duties, of course. But, hey, Waterloo Sunset, Dedicated Follower of Fashion, See My Friends, Lola .....we're talking top drawer here. But, yes, lacking the four-headed monster multi-talent ensemble that was The Beatles.
@@kennyglesga I'm a big fan of the Beatles. I came to them late, in the last few years, in which I've had a great time listening to everything and am consistently delighted and amazed. After that I did the same with Pink Floyd (great band, though the Beatles are still way out in front for me). Recently started this process with the Kinks, and I'm up and down with them. They have a lot of fabulous songs, songs as good as any band's. There are more truly great Kinks songs than any other bands has truly great songs. Compared to the Beatles, though, I find there are far, far more meh and even bad songs in the Kinks' catalogue, to go with the great. I guess that's largely due, as you suggest, to the fact that the Beatles had John, Paul and George writing at such a high level, and at such a ferocious rate. That's rare. Maybe unique. Also, they had such a long career (I think 24 albums). The Kinks relied on Ray - who was a brilliant songwriter, but just one guy. His lyrics, too, at their best are superb. He has a wonderfully distinctive voice, too (I mean voice as a writer in this instance). His lyrics are just so Ray Davies. That said, his bro Dave did contribute a few very good songs. So far, anyway (I'm only up to the 70s stuff now). Have to say, I ain't looking forward to the Kinks' 80s period. What I've already heard (singles etc) I don't like at all.
Years later, John Lennon went out of his way to downplay George Martin's contributions, even claiming that songs like 'Strawberry Fields Forever', 'Help!'. and 'A Day In The Life' were so poorly produced that he was very dissatisfied with them. That was, unfortunately, typical of post-Beatles Lennon, biting that hand that fed him.
A sad thing. I’m pretty sure the Beatles would have made it regardless of who produced them, but George Martin did have a big hand in their development.
Mr. Martin had a very big hand in their development and John was very fortunate he had the chance to work with him. Imagine (no pun intended) if the Beatles had ended up with a different producer. I dare say we might not be talking about them today.
John may have been dissatisfied, but he lacked the vision to know how to make it better, so helpers like Martin were limited by Johns material. It must have been very challenging for them to try to make hits out of esoteric ideas. And meanwhile there's Paul writing "Hello, Goodbye"...no wonder John went off the rails.
George Martin was vital. Not sure if you ever heard Take 1 of Tomorrow Never Knows but it sounds just terrible. If I had been in the Beatles I’d have said to John .. ‘John, that’s a pretty weak effort to be fair - can you come back with something better?’ And then George Martin evolved it into a Beatles classic- it’s probably just as well I wasn’t in the Beatles! 😅
Well, if there ever was a person entitled to the title 5th Beatle, it was George Martin…….in my view they just wouldn’t have been anywhere near as great as they were without him.
He was the teacher and they were the students who graduated into geniuses. It wasn’t an accident that their poor album Let it Be wasn’t produced by him. Another excellent video Tudor 😊
Can anyone imagine the 60s without The Beatles? If it wasn't for George Martin they wouldn't be there in the way they were.
It would have been a different 60s. Although they originally started out with rock and roll and ballads, their wider reach and influence made a big impact.
Great video as usual, George martin was without a doubt the 5th beatle. What he and the beatles created together, will never be beaten. In my life, penny lane, Eleanor rigby, to abbey road. The best album ever. A great man, a great tribute Tudor, look forward to your next video. All the best, kev chatterley.
Thanks Kev. George Martin slots into the fifth Beatle category for me 👍
I was listening to some of George’s music today The film scores, and orchestral music ,he Always had a smile on his face when he spoke of the Beatles .heTruly believed in them , he leaves a Fabulous legacy behind.
He was great. And he took no nonsense from anyone!
I have come to realize after all the glitz and glamour has died down...George Martin was cooler than any one of the Beatles. He was humble, but a world class talent who wasn't looking for fame, just wanted to create great music.
I agree with much of this. Martin's unusual mix of background skills and interests, from orchestration to "radio workshop"-style experiments, via the comedic likes of the Goons and Bernard Cribbins, not only resonated with the Beatles at a personal level but definitely did much to set the tone and provided the environment in which the Beatles could flourish. He also provided editorial advice on song structure and the like, and helped them learn what would work in the studio and what would not. But it seems to me you want to credit Martin with ideas that actually came from the Beatles, ideas where he was an important enabler, but not an originator.
For example, the tape loops used on Tomorrow Never Knows were McCartney's inspiration, coming from his exposure to the London avant garde scene and were developed from loops initially made by him at home and in the little experimental tape studio he set up in Ringo's former Montagu Square house with the help of electronics innovator ian Sommerville, where they recorded the likes of Sommerville's friend the beat poet William Burroughs.
Similarly, you mention A Day In The Life, with it's cacophanous orchestral crescendi and iconic piano coda, in a way which seems to imply that this shows how Martin, as you put it, "shaped" the "soundscape" of the Beatles' music and "elevated" it by his "sophisticated orchestral arrangements". But the evidence is clear that the shape of this arrangement, including the crescendi, was due to Lennon and McCartney, and that Martin was even *resistant* to their wish to orchestrate it. According to engineer Emerick, Martin "rolled his eyes" at such a costly and "ridiculous" idea and had to be persuaded. The whole shape of the arrangement is there in the very first studio take on the morning of day one, which Martin said was the first time he'd ever heard the song, proving that, as Lennon said, he and McCartney "rehearsed it at home the afternoon before, so we knew exactly what we were playing."
As for Eleanor Rigby and Penny Lane, where you say it was Martin who added depth and grandeur" by "introducing string and brass sections":-
The idea of using strings on Rigby was again McCartney's - "it was Paul's idea," said John. "Jane Asher had turned him to Vivaldi, I can't take any credit for that at all." George Martin can take credit for, as he recalled, listening receptively to Paul's idea for a chordal string backing with what he called a "stabbing rhythn" and then "sitting down with Paul at the piano and taking note of his music" to produce a brilliant score along the lines suggested.
George Martin did score brass for Penny Lane, but remember that Paul was very much in control of that arrangement, producing the bulk of its multi-overdubbed piano backing on his own "and had very definite thoughts about the instrumentation" (Emerick) that Martin was charged with scoring over a weekend. As for the iconic piccolo trumpet solos, these were entirely Paul's idea, inspired by hearing a Bach concerto on TV, and were composed entirely by Paul, using piano and voice to tell Martin what he wanted to hear, whilst Martin wrote it down for David Mason to play. "We spent three hours working it out," Mason recalled. "Paul sang the parts he wanted, George Martin wrote them out, I tried them." Martin: "As we came to each little section where we wanted the sound, Paul would think up the notes he wanted, and I would write them down for David. The result was unique, something that had never been done in rock music before, and it gave 'Penny Lane' a very distinct character.” George refected, "I could have written some notes myself, but," he admitted, "they wouldn't have been such good notes."
And although your account of George Martin seeing something that others didn't in the Beatles, and having the nerve to take a chance on them, is based fairly on Martin's own version of events, I think that version is a little out-of-date since Lewisohn's research into the documents related to their Parlophone signing and surrounding circumstances, which indicate that Martin was less than willing, and was manipulated into taking the Beatles on by his EMI boss Len Wood, mainly to satisfy persistent lobbying by EMI's publishing arm Ardmore and Beechwood, who wanted the Beatles under contract so they could take advantage of McCartney's "Like Dreamers Do". Having previously sent Epstein and the Beatles packing, like everyone else, Martin was given the chore by Wood not as an opportunity but more as a punishment for a) making himself unpopular with EMI management by demanding a percentage of royalties for Parlophone hits and for b) morally outraging Len Wood by having an extramarital affair with his Parolophone secretary.
Yes George Martin was the clever glue to them and not always appreciated. Ive been watching that classy harpist on Virgin Rock analyse Shes Leaving Home and Strawberry Fields Forever and she was so impressed she's started to do all the Beatle songs.from early on
They truly were universal Tudor ! 🌈🤡
They had the ability to stray from the confines of rock and roll.
I had a chat a while ago with someone from MPL about George Martin; never learned half as much as I just did from your video!
Great analysis of the pivotal role of George Martin in the Beatles story.
Cheers! He was worth a mention 🙂
George Martin was Brilliant! He not only saw something in them that curiously had more to do with their personalities than their musicality in the beginning , perhaps hinting of why they became a cultural phenomenon on top of the musical phenomenon they became. If there is a 5th Beatle he definitely would be it imo!
Always a pleasure to watch your videos Tudor. I think the relationship between George and the Beatles was ideal. The boys were not overawed by George ("well I don't like your tie" said Harrison at their first meeting when Martin had outlined how they'd work together and asked if they had any objections) but had a charming respect for him (they'd go on the roof or in the toilets at Abbey Road away from Martin's prying eyes to smoke some exotic tabacco or drop acid, like naughty school kids.) The fact that there was obviously huge mutual respect between George and the lads, despite the fact that he was considerably older and from an entirely different background speaks volumes of both parties. Great work Tudor!
I love that George quote! 🤣 GM was an innovator and constantly pushed the technological boundaries- and it suited the writing of the Beatles as they further developed their skills. 👍
Another interesting video Tudor. Well done.
How lucky were the Beatles to get George Martin. It's another one of those amazing quirks of fate, one of many in the Beatles story. He initially thought they were nothing special, indeed quite average but after meeting them he knew there was something very special about them.
Without Brian Epstein and then George Martin we may have never heard of the Fab Four. So pivotal were they.
It really was a twist of fate. Right place right time for all of them. Perhaps the stars and the planets were just all aligned properly. You can’t let an opportunity like that pass you by!
@@TudorSmith .Indeed. The amount of twists of fate in the Beatles story is quite remarkable.
Have you read Lewisohn's book Tudor?(Tune In)
I devoured it as soon as it came out in 2013 and have just re-read it...fascinating, I couldn't put it down once I had started it. And I aleady know the whole story...lol
I’ve not read it. I’m going to have to now eh?
@Tudor Smith .It's a must read for anyone remotely interested in the Beatles. It is quite simply the most authoritative telling of their story. The amount of research Lewisohn did is amazing. He is currently writing part two (of three). It's taken him 10 years and he's full time on it.
Thanks for the heads up. I'll look into it.
Great video and insight into his contribution, Thanks!
Thanks for watching 👍
I would've liked to ask George Martin about the process of working with Paul to realize his vision of what his songs should be, especially when they included orchestral sounds.
A good point. I’m pretty sure George Martin was instrumental in bringing some of Paul’s compositions to life!
I had the privilege of seeing Martin give a multimedia presentation on the recording of Sgt Pepper in New York in 1998. It could've lasted twice as long and I'd still have been listening with rapt attention. George Martin and the Beatles were a match made in heaven.
Wow. I know I’d have sat riveted to my seat listening. How fortunate were you? 👍
The Beatles and Sir George Martin were perfect partners. His musical expertise and openness to creativity waa integral.
And the engineers like Norman Smith and Geoff Emeric pushed technical innovations
You mentioned many of the others but missed, ADT (Artificial Double Tracking), a technique created as Lennon hated double tracking his voice
Ah yes the ADT. A great innovation. George and the Beatles grew and learned from each other. An amazing combination
@@TudorSmith And due to Lennon's laziness lol. And there's "flanging", which Lennon actually named. Direct injection was another technique for recording guitar and bass which McCartney used. Macca was the tape loop guru.
Would you give The Existential Alcoholic's Blues a listen? Be interesting to hear your views as we both share a lot of musical tastes and influences.
If you listen to The Beatles contemporaries like The Rolling Stones and The Kinks, the Beatles production is far, far superior. Then as you rightly say George Martin adds in (or agrees to) so much creativity, adds in wonderful orchestrations and arrangements. Giles Martin has relatively little to change with all the remixes because his Dad got it right the first time. Great stuff again, Tudor.
It’s an interesting comparison. I’m sure George Martin would not settle for anything than 100% commitment from the artist or the studio team!
Giles made a fine split of the mono to stereo mixes with the new technology to isolate tracks as used in Get Back. I love his working of the LOVE album. It’s genius but I’m sure the purists will say “leave the originals alone”
@@TudorSmith Yes I agree. The Love album sounds amazing! I think Giles has done a great job with the new stereo mixes in terms of the panning of the sound. I will look forward to the next one…. Rubber Soul?
Hi Tudor
Nice Video Highlighting the Massive Collaboration/Contribution that George Martin had in Shaping the Groundbreaking Sound of The Beatles.😊
Thanks 🙏
Well, I was going to point out that in your previous video you seemed to ignore the contribution and influence of George Martin to thier music, but now I see why 😊 Nice one Tudor, you have the knack of putting into words what we Beatles nurds can't.
I had an agenda 🤣
I understand that in the song, "In My Life," George Martin played the piano instrumental himself at half speed.
Yes I’ve read that too 👍
Always thought George Martin was a total lad. The get back film confirmed this. I studied sound tech at LIPA where the main studio is called the GMS (George Martin Studio). Some of my classmates were interviewed in that studio by channel 4 when George died back in 2016
Yes Tudor well put! I smiled when I heard that John told Martin that he'd like to redo all the Beatles songs again and Martin said surely not Strawberry Fields Forever and John replied "especially Stawberry Fields Forever " ! 🤡
I wonder if his comments related to how long it took to record the avant-garde music initially to how quickly they might be able to produce it with the then more modern equipment they had to hand?
Typical John! Odd considering that only a couple of his post-Beatle albums came close to the quality of production that GM provided during the 60s - and we all know how awful Let It Be sounded on original release (I might be wrong, but I think it was John who wanted Phil Spector to produce?) Probably the nearest we got to hearing what The Beatles could have sounded like recorded with modern equipment were the records GM made with Paul in the 80s - which are beautifully recorded - Give My Regards to Broadstreet contains a few redos of Beatles songs………
Absolutely agree. The only post Beatles album of Johns I’m happy to listen to is Double Fantasy (and that’s only the A side!) because I love the production of it. McCartney I feel had a huge respect for GM and it shows with their many collaborations post-Beatles.
@@TudorSmith yes John was less nuanced or as polished than Paul but I really like the Imagine LP , Walls And Bridges and parts of the others particularly those tracks on Double Fantasy ! Hell I even like some of Yaka's. *🤡
🤣
Agreed Tudor! We owe a debt of gratitude to George Martin for seeing in the Beatles what others didn’t! After all the Decca demo tapes weren’t all that good were they?
Changes had to be made after the Decca auditions didn’t they?
I never quite understood why John seemingly turned against George Martin. I know in late period Beatles and his early solo career he became obsessed with paring everything down to the basics, most notably on John Lennon Plastic Ono Band. And he says to George during the making of Let It Be, "We don't want your studio tricks" - or words to that effect. But to my mind the great Beatles recordings, let's say the middle period Beatles from 1966 to 1968, were full of "studio tricks" and all the better for it.
And John would ask George to embellish his music with those “tricks”. Was it likely John was coerced somehow?
Possibly George made the mistake of explaining his process and showing what he was doing.
This made the boys subconsciously contemptuous of him as what he was doing was so "simple".
This also meant Phil Spector was able to come in to the picture later, who's production style is all about keeping things hidden and "magical" (ie carrying guns and getting pissed in the studio).
It's important to note that Martin's Piano work on In My Life and his chromatic runs on the Organ in Being For The Benefit Of Mr. Kite! were done at half-speed.
Yes that’s true
Rather lovely when his son Giles produced Now and Then.
He’s certainly done some excellent work on the reissues of the albums 👍
The Beatles most creative period was obviously their first, when they brought their local Mersey sound briefly to the status of a World Music. By the very end of this initial period on the "Help" album, i hear the full scope of studio artistry (and budget) is being stealthily applied to make thinner material sound slick and sophisticated while seemingly simple. On many of the songs, for example, someone, perhaps uncredited, is noodling exquisite harmonies behind the band on a cheap harmonium, which adds a richness and depth in the most minimalist way. This alone is an element of genius which may not be the work of any of the band members. The Beatles had the genius at times to make a toy piano sound variously like a carnival, a bell carillion, or a choir of angels. But whoever is playing that harmonium was similarly gifted.
My other point being that by Help, we can hear the studio making a full press to milk their cash cow for all it is worth. We too easily overlook how much influence the studio has in producing and marketing their "product", regardless of the talent or involvement of the actual band. The band is just another show, and the show is primarily a business. If the band is talented and can play their own instruments, even better, but not strictly necessary! I think in the Beatles case, the bands talent rose above the studio polishing, but maybe around Help, it was becoming more of a "hit factory".
Excellent points 👍 Did I read somewhere that they’d hoped for a couple of years success initially? It certainly did become a business in the end!
Oh wow, you have a violin bass? Nice. I have one of the cheaper Höfners. Still a hell of an instrument, such a nice bubbly tone.
Mine isn’t a real Hofner - but is sounds nice and looks the part 🙂
and the Beatles made him.
For sure 👍
can anyone believe that the 3 greatest songwrighters of the 20th century and possibly the greatest producer in history ,all just happened to meet by accident.....unbelievable !...If this had been presented to a film producer as a possible film script , it would have been binned and the script writer turfed out on his ear !
It is unbelievable. Perhaps they were as great as individuals until they grew as a unit?
Brian Wilson takes a back seat to no one.
In the fade out of A Day in The Life piano chord at 4:50 to 4:53 I hear a chair squeaking and a sniffle in the right speaker. Any other theories Tudor?
Probably Mal Evans 🤣 I’ll have to have a listen now!
Mark Lewisohns version of why George Martin 'took a chance' with the Beatles is slightly different. He was blackmailed by music publishers who knew of his affair with Judy the Parlophone receptionist. He did realise their potential and talent soon after but he did have his arm twisted initially
I’d not heard that one.
@@TudorSmith Go google
One of those stories that has surfaced so late ( and I have been collecting all printed matter on the Beatles for over 50 years) that I am inclined not to believe it.
Bit of a Beatles nerd me. never heard that. Where did ypu get that nugget? If indeed true!
Martin met Judy Lockhart Smith on his first day of work at EMI Studios in 1950, when she served as secretary to Parlophone director Oscar Preuss. Martin chose to retain her as secretary when he assumed direction of Parlophone in 1955, and they began a discreet affair in the late 1950s. They married on June 24, 1966 and remained married until George's death in 2016.
Je pense une chose simple il n'aurait pas faut autant de money si sa route n'avait croisé celle des Beatles ...alors il n'a que du positif à raconter.
The Kinks could have done with a George Martin.
I was never into the kinks. I like a couple of their tunes though 👍
@@TudorSmith Just a one-man band lyrically speaking, Ray Davies having all the song-writing duties, of course. But, hey, Waterloo Sunset, Dedicated Follower of Fashion, See My Friends, Lola .....we're talking top drawer here. But, yes, lacking the four-headed monster multi-talent ensemble that was The Beatles.
@@kennyglesga I'm a big fan of the Beatles. I came to them late, in the last few years, in which I've had a great time listening to everything and am consistently delighted and amazed. After that I did the same with Pink Floyd (great band, though the Beatles are still way out in front for me). Recently started this process with the Kinks, and I'm up and down with them. They have a lot of fabulous songs, songs as good as any band's. There are more truly great Kinks songs than any other bands has truly great songs. Compared to the Beatles, though, I find there are far, far more meh and even bad songs in the Kinks' catalogue, to go with the great.
I guess that's largely due, as you suggest, to the fact that the Beatles had John, Paul and George writing at such a high level, and at such a ferocious rate. That's rare. Maybe unique. Also, they had such a long career (I think 24 albums).
The Kinks relied on Ray - who was a brilliant songwriter, but just one guy. His lyrics, too, at their best are superb. He has a wonderfully distinctive voice, too (I mean voice as a writer in this instance). His lyrics are just so Ray Davies.
That said, his bro Dave did contribute a few very good songs. So far, anyway (I'm only up to the 70s stuff now).
Have to say, I ain't looking forward to the Kinks' 80s period. What I've already heard (singles etc) I don't like at all.
Years later, John Lennon went out of his way to downplay George Martin's contributions, even claiming that songs like 'Strawberry Fields Forever', 'Help!'. and 'A Day In The Life' were so poorly produced that he was very dissatisfied with them. That was, unfortunately, typical of post-Beatles Lennon, biting that hand that fed him.
A sad thing. I’m pretty sure the Beatles would have made it regardless of who produced them, but George Martin did have a big hand in their development.
Mr. Martin had a very big hand in their development and John was very fortunate he had the chance to work with him. Imagine (no pun intended) if the Beatles had ended up with a different producer. I dare say we might not be talking about them today.
Yes you’re probably right. Everything clicked in to place just at the right time!
John may have been dissatisfied, but he lacked the vision to know how to make it better, so helpers like Martin were limited by Johns material. It must have been very challenging for them to try to make hits out of esoteric ideas. And meanwhile there's Paul writing "Hello, Goodbye"...no wonder John went off the rails.
George Martin was vital. Not sure if you ever heard Take 1 of Tomorrow Never Knows but it sounds just terrible. If I had been in the Beatles I’d have said to John .. ‘John, that’s a pretty weak effort to be fair - can you come back with something better?’ And then George Martin evolved it into a Beatles classic- it’s probably just as well I wasn’t in the Beatles! 😅
That’s probably why they did so many takes. A little bit of good work in each version all spliced together 🤣
Well, if there ever was a person entitled to the title 5th Beatle, it was George Martin…….in my view they just wouldn’t have been anywhere near as great as they were without him.
He wins the title for me!
i some times wounder how thing would have been if it had been some body else in stead of george martin
Indeed. All the right ingredients for the pot for this recipe.