Both versions have great things about them. The '62 version is more of a rough/raw version. It's a classic, raw and somewhat edgy style that most "early" Beatle fans enjoy. This version, (which was made in '69 I'm assuming?) shows the skills and maturity that The Beatles attained from all those years. I'm sure if you tune out a specific instrument from the song, it would still sound great! This is a recording of a jam session and it sounds much better than the '62 version. I still love both.
To all of you saying that you prefer the 1962 version over this one: try to get past John's terrible but interesting singing and listen to the MUSIC. George's guitar, Paul's bass... It's far more musically superior to the 1962 version IMHO.
And all the Ringo haters can GTFO. You are no true Beatles fan.
One day at Liverpool art college, at lunch time, a teenage John Lennon, whose mother had just been killed, was playing this song, sat by his mates on the side of the small stage in the refectory. Cynthia, his future wife, heard the rendition, voice cracked and sad a bit like this version, and realised he had incredible potential to make others feel through his voice. Once his lyrics started coming along too, bob was his uncle..
Thanks for posting this! Just wanted to let you know that I used this video recently in my George Harrison blog - link is on my channel if you're interested in seeing it!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
this is not good compared to the hamburg cut, good to see them return to the material from that period, but were is Pete best, the general secretery of twist touch, everything went banans when peter randolph best left!
'this is john singing, what a difference 9 years can do, and alot of drugs ', obviously his voice was going most likely because he had sang for a long time, if the drugs effected him so bad why was he so good at singing everything he did after this
well then your not a real beatles fan real beatle fans think every song is good maybe you are a beatles fan but you dont understand music like a true one does
@finnsox96 Kay you don't need to think every Beatles song is great. I'm a HUGE Beatles fan but I don't like Penny Lane too much same with The Fool On The Hill.
Once again...I prefer this version much better than the early version. On the first count, this version sounds much more modern and it's mellow - on the second count, Ringo was the drummer in this song meaning he had a 5-piece drum-set that sounds much better than the one Pete Best used. I love this song!
Well, at least this version has a nice guitar solo, and you have bad taste in music! Ringo was a pretty good drummer - especially in his 1967 era (in my opinion). By the way, Ringo used a 5-piece drum-set which sounds a whole lot better. What the hell are you talking about? It's not bad, it's not okay, it's the Get Back sessions of Ain't She Sweet - it's a reallyb good song shut up!
Hahahh I prefer the Anthology 3 version than the Anthology 1 version better. The first version is boring and the drums suck. This song has this mature ihp raggae sound. I wish this song was added into the Abbey Road album instead of that 'Her Majesty' song.
I dunno I think the song 'Her Majesty' is a waste of track. I mean c'mon how wasn't possibe for this song to go in the Abbey Road album. I mean if Paul McCartney didn't like it he could've remstered it.
Yeah, I didn't realize this was a jazz version until you sent me the comment. Well, I'm not a jazz erson 'cause I dn't really listen to it at all. But yeah, it is a nice version.
at that time the beatles didn't put any cover songs in their albums. only let it be, because they didn't have anything to do with that anymore. btw, her majesty is beautiful to me, as a ghost track it is.
I like this version more than the other version
fuertefeos1996 6 days ago
i prefer the original. i think its because i m more of an early beatles guy
TehAnthrax 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
BeatlemaniiacaLennon 3 weeks ago
both versions are good in my opinion <3
XLoveXBeatles 2 months ago
Both versions have great things about them. The '62 version is more of a rough/raw version. It's a classic, raw and somewhat edgy style that most "early" Beatle fans enjoy. This version, (which was made in '69 I'm assuming?) shows the skills and maturity that The Beatles attained from all those years. I'm sure if you tune out a specific instrument from the song, it would still sound great! This is a recording of a jam session and it sounds much better than the '62 version. I still love both.
824lotus 3 months ago
To all of you saying that you prefer the 1962 version over this one: try to get past John's terrible but interesting singing and listen to the MUSIC. George's guitar, Paul's bass... It's far more musically superior to the 1962 version IMHO.
And all the Ringo haters can GTFO. You are no true Beatles fan.
NotWastedTime 3 months ago
is that les paul playing lead? And please i know it is george i am only kidding
SuperFirewire1 4 months ago
This is a terrible rendition of this song. The original was much better.
MrBEB123 5 months ago
@MrBEB123 then go listen it
hwanj 4 months ago
What album is this song on
xfearXkingx 7 months ago
@xfearXkingx Anthology 3
ThatsGoodTelevision 1 month ago
I believe that's Paul's dog Martha. He did a song about her on the white album.
Maximusz62 9 months ago
@Maximusz62 you have found the hot water!!
TheBeatles95here 9 months ago
I'd love to hear this in an elevator...
Shancus32796 9 months ago
well i ask you very hydropholocy aint she nice.
Msemospongebob 10 months ago
One day at Liverpool art college, at lunch time, a teenage John Lennon, whose mother had just been killed, was playing this song, sat by his mates on the side of the small stage in the refectory. Cynthia, his future wife, heard the rendition, voice cracked and sad a bit like this version, and realised he had incredible potential to make others feel through his voice. Once his lyrics started coming along too, bob was his uncle..
adamkincaid1234 10 months ago
Did John just wake up from a horrible nap or was he drinking? :D
AblePumper 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
w 0:15 słychać strzały!!
Ysiu8882 1 year ago
w 0:15 słychać strzały!!
Ysiu8882 1 year ago
this is the worst version
hillbillyboy77 1 year ago
ain't she sweet 1965 from album rubber soul
Paulohenrique0 1 year ago
@Paulohenrique0 get ur beatles straight!!!! it was a single that came out in i believe, 1962
beatlezrawesome 11 months ago
@beatlezrawesome But this version is from Anthology 3 and Rubber Soul 1965.
The 1962 version is this >> /watch?v=NGY9KcxE5UA
Paulohenrique0 11 months ago
I always loved John's lyric altering on this song:
"Well I ask you very.... hydrofollicky, ain't she nice?"
LadyAerowyn 1 year ago
I like George's guitar in this song. It suits him really well. or he makes it suit him, whatever, he was pretty adaptable.
strummersbrother 1 year ago
luckiest dog eva!
duhhh187 1 year ago
i like that dog :)
BlackStratShredder 1 year ago
When compared the two versions, one can see how they evolved through time, even if this 1969 version is just a rehearsal.
haveajerk 1 year ago
Thanks for posting this! Just wanted to let you know that I used this video recently in my George Harrison blog - link is on my channel if you're interested in seeing it!
loveyouinstead 1 year ago
It sounds like Paul singing
Alien8990 1 year ago 2
@Alien8990 It's funny, on John's worst day it sounds like Paul on some of his best
residentevlidead 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
all I can say is pete for ever ringo never!
janfreidun 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this is not good compared to the hamburg cut, good to see them return to the material from that period, but were is Pete best, the general secretery of twist touch, everything went banans when peter randolph best left!
janfreidun 2 years ago
I'm a huge beatles fan, and personally I prefer their version from Hamburg, but this one is good also.
1SPYRO 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
'this is john singing, what a difference 9 years can do, and alot of drugs ', obviously his voice was going most likely because he had sang for a long time, if the drugs effected him so bad why was he so good at singing everything he did after this
lennonsbiggestfan 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This Shit Sucks....i like da other verzion betta
ThePrettyangel7225 2 years ago
well then your not a real beatles fan real beatle fans think every song is good maybe you are a beatles fan but you dont understand music like a true one does
finnsox96 2 years ago 2
@finnsox96 Kay you don't need to think every Beatles song is great. I'm a HUGE Beatles fan but I don't like Penny Lane too much same with The Fool On The Hill.
Marshallsg 2 years ago 4
Once again...I prefer this version much better than the early version. On the first count, this version sounds much more modern and it's mellow - on the second count, Ringo was the drummer in this song meaning he had a 5-piece drum-set that sounds much better than the one Pete Best used. I love this song!
Alien8990 2 years ago 3
this is john singing, what a difference 9 years can do, and alot of drugs
airnsmke 2 years ago 4
It actually sounds like Paul in the beginning ^^ thanks for straighting it out for me
Owlproductions0v0 2 years ago 4
What is John saying at the end of the song? "I hoped you liked that...."???? WHAT?!,trick? tune? Yoko? It's been driving me mad for months :( help!
Ingridthepoet 2 years ago 3
he says "Tune"
broly14 2 years ago
I prefer this version too
hwanj 2 years ago 10
I love Paul dearly, but I prefer the other version of this...
misterquark 2 years ago 5
Comment removed
ThePrettyangel7225 2 years ago
Why do you think that?
Orysz517 2 years ago
Well, at least this version has a nice guitar solo, and you have bad taste in music! Ringo was a pretty good drummer - especially in his 1967 era (in my opinion). By the way, Ringo used a 5-piece drum-set which sounds a whole lot better. What the hell are you talking about? It's not bad, it's not okay, it's the Get Back sessions of Ain't She Sweet - it's a reallyb good song shut up!
Alien8990 2 years ago 2
@ThePrettyangel7225 buen comentario idiota
eduluna96 1 year ago
Hahahh I prefer the Anthology 3 version than the Anthology 1 version better. The first version is boring and the drums suck. This song has this mature ihp raggae sound. I wish this song was added into the Abbey Road album instead of that 'Her Majesty' song.
Alien8990 2 years ago 5
Yes, thats true. But i think that Her Majesty is pretty good song too but it takes about 20 second
Orysz517 2 years ago 6
I dunno I think the song 'Her Majesty' is a waste of track. I mean c'mon how wasn't possibe for this song to go in the Abbey Road album. I mean if Paul McCartney didn't like it he could've remstered it.
Alien8990 2 years ago 3
@Orysz517 Her Majesty is a pretty nice song but she doesn't have a lot to say
wtfhah 7 months ago 5
its Jazz man .... real Jazz ... the beatles are excellent in every kind of music !
StairwayToHeaven666 2 years ago 4
Yeah, I didn't realize this was a jazz version until you sent me the comment. Well, I'm not a jazz erson 'cause I dn't really listen to it at all. But yeah, it is a nice version.
Alien8990 2 years ago 4
at that time the beatles didn't put any cover songs in their albums. only let it be, because they didn't have anything to do with that anymore. btw, her majesty is beautiful to me, as a ghost track it is.
paolomanueldec 2 years ago 2
You kinda get the idea that JOHN'S voice is not in the best of conditions this take???
record1207 2 years ago 10
I think that is just improvisation and they record one take of this song in 1969. John couldn't adequately prepare.
Orysz517 2 years ago
oh, i dont think so..in this kind of song, when he desire for a girl..its nice, whne his voice is kind of ...husky? :)
i think this is better version then the others on youtube..ive got it on alternate abbey road:)
itchyk 2 years ago 2
5\5
Ysiu8882 2 years ago