This would have been a great album. No doubt John and Paul would have helped rewrite "My Sweet Lord" to keep the track on the album, while not sounding as similar to "He's So Fine." I think they would have also written a number for Ringo on this album, too. Great speculation, based on the songs that were released in the Post-Beatles era. Thanks for posting.
"Give me some truth" sounds a little like the Beatles. But in the other songs I dont hear The Beatles...While John was into underproducing, Paul into keeping it simple, George had Spector, the "overproducer" per definition
Interesting concept, and since most (all?) of these songs had made at least one appearance at a real Beatles session, a post-Abbey Road album might well have had something like this line-up. Except for "My Sweet Lord"--my guess is someone would have told George, "Sorry, but this sounds too much like 'He's So Fine.'" But the Beatles did do versions of "Hear Me Lord" and "Isn't It a Pity?" (both of which IMHO are better songs). And don't forget "Child of Nature" ("Jealous Guy") by JL.
You know they were going to reunite till some looney who deserves to go to hell for the rest of the universe's life killed John. Picture it. The Beatles 13th album in 1980.
@Burromovie I have "All Things Must Pass" on a bootleg CD, its so 1969, I think it could have been a good Beatles' too if John and Paul would have put forth an effort to make it so. George did a good job of recording it for his own LP.
@beatleman69 I hope if John and Paul did hear George's final version of All Things Must Pass that they kicked themselves for not realising the potential the song had.
My hypothetical 'last Beatles album' set list (the album aptly being titled ALL THINGS MUST PASS and released in Oct./Nov. 1970): SIDE ONE: "What Is Life" "Another Day" "Well, Well, Well" "Every Night" "Isolation" "Let It Down" "It Don't Come Easy" SIDE TWO: "All Things Must Pass" "Monkberry Moon Delight" "Look at Me" "Madman" or "Give Me Some Truth" "Maybe I'm Amazed" "Isn't It a Pity" [long version] Their penultimate single released in summer '70: "Instant Karma!" b/w "Wah-Wah."
Tried to keep it to their first albums or singles prior to 1971. Cheated a little with Oh Woman, Oh Why but Paul needed a good rocker somewhere. Hard to boil it down to a single album.
Side One: Instant Karma : Every Night : My Sweet Lord : Oh Woman, Oh Why : Junk : Art of Dying : Working Class Hero
Side Two: Let It Down: Isolation: Teddy Boy : It Don't Come Easy : Beware of Darkness : Remember : Maybe I'm Amazed
I'd add to the mix Paul McCartney's Junk and maybe Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey, plus one of Ringo's tracks from form Beacups of Blues or Sentimental Journey, or It don't come easy.
There's an interview with John when he said to do this. He said if you want the Beatles just take a track off each of their albums. You get stuck at 1976 because of Johns break. John also said in the Dick Cavett interview that if it wasn't for the Beatles breakup they wouldn't have done the great music since their splitup, Imagine etc.
Agree. But it's still interesting to wonder which songs would have made it to the final albums, and how had they sounded performed by all the four instead of John+session musicians, Paul+Wings etc.
I like the idea of this, but I agree with the earlier poster who said that the Beatles broke up around about the right time.
I'm not sure they could have continued to sound fresh up against bands like Zeppelin and the Floyd, and worry they might have resorted to the sort of over the top studio production that marred some of the Beatles solo releases in the 70s.
It would be awful to think of a Beatles album as sounding dated! Nice idea, but i'm also happy they called it a day when they did!
I think in 1970 they could have made (if they were still a band) their last album, it could have been a double with all the material they had. An album with those songs couldn't ever sound dated, and the zep and pink floyd would have longed to do something like that. they couldn't, they were just great bands, not the best one. but you're right, in the middle seventies none of the beatles was doing memorable things (except Harrison 33and 1/3).
Yeah, I agree with you there Paolo, if they made a last album in 70/71, it would (if you collected their songs from respective solo albums) been probably their best album.
But, if they made an album like that, it would have been obvious it was the work of four individuals, and not "The Beatles" that we had been used to.
So yeah, I agree with Paolo, one final album with their 70/71 material would have been unbeatable, even by Floyd, Zep, Roxy, Yes, Genesis etc etc etc.
A lot of their solo songs were tested out in the 1969 Get Back sessions, but were left undeveloped. If they'd had the time and inclination they could have developed them within the Beatles' time, but I also think that by then they were keen to release their own stuff on their own solo albums.
They had pretty much just become sessions musicians for each other's solo songs by 1968. Abbey Road was a great send off, a shame it was spoiled a little by the 1970 release of Let it Be, but if you pretend that came out before Abbey Road it's okay. After that, you can pick your favourite solo songs and make an album out of it. I don't think they could have achieved any more by being together.
Actually, there are four of George's songs on here. The hypothetical album is evenly split between the three songwriting Beatles -- very nicely done, superman11978. One of the biggest faults of the Beatles was only allowing George to have a meagre one or two songs per album.
That was brought up during one of their last meeting prior to the breakup; that George had to be allowed an even number of songs on albums. John, at least, was in favor of this...4 or 5 songs from each of the songwriters with Ringo throwing in one or two if he so desired.
Yeah, I REALLY wish they'd have managed one just more album that would presumably have been released in Fall '70, and, I do think ALL THINGS MUST PASS would've been the most appropriate title. And I also don't think giving George an equal # of songs would've been too much to ask either. "Instant Karma" b/w "Wah-Wah" would have been a summer '70 single release.
I saw a Dick Cavett interview with John and Yoko where John said, "If Yoko is going to be blamed for breaking the four of us up, can she at least be thanked for all the great music the four of us have made since then?"
Well, listening those songs as The Beatles' really give a different perspective.
I love all your 13th, 14th and 15th albums, but probably the 13th album : All Things Must Pass is the best of them and feels more sound like a Beatles record. Then probably the 15th album : Band On The Run. The 14th : Imagine feels less cohesive to me. But, good job, anyway. Thank you.
But to top Abbey Road, we might have to put Imagine,My Sweet Lord,All Things Must Pass,Band On The Run, Mind Games in one album.
"That Would Be Something" belongs on there as well, and I'd use "Let it Down" from George. It's got the right sound. Maybe John's version of I'm 'The Greatest.'
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Agree 'Hey Bulldog' was a gem, but 'Only A North..'? 'It's all to much'? christ those sucked.... really, some of the worst beatle's songs, don't you think?
'It's all too much' was way ahead of it's time, while at the same time of it's time. Totally hip hop beats on that one, and great lyrics over a psychedelic wash of sound. Add some infectious guitar riffs. It's a classic.
Through the ten years of their being together, The Beatles managed to time everything so well. Though their break-up was messy, it seemed to come at just the right time. If they hadn't just let it slide and forced themselves to stay together, they would have become a tired and shallow 70s band, gradually destroying all the genius of the 60s with lazy releases (kind of like Let It Be). It was the timing of their break-up which keeps alive their authenticity and legend today.
I didn't like Spector's production of 'All Things Must Pass'. Way too much echo / reverb, too many unnecessary instruments , George's vocal buried in the mix. To be fair, I thought Spector did a good job on the 'Imagine' album and parts of 'Let It Be' ..
ia, getthedoggie - if you listen to Beware of Abkco, you can hear quite a few of the ATMP songs in their purest form, and they sound best that way, carried just by an acoustic guitar and George's voice. The only exception where I can see a song needing extra production is "My Sweet Lord", because it's got that gospel sound to it. It needs to be loud and joyous.
the idea is cool but the beatles had gone in such different directions paul was playing pop , john was protesting and doing heroin and george was looking for god while ringo was trying to make a career out of being ringo(i am not disparaging him) do you think the albums would have been true beatle albums or just mini white albums? after all they were doing songs that didn't make it as beatle's tracks on there solo records a very intriguing idea though thanks
@gibsondrummer I agree. Good comment. Paul was all about keeping the Beatles together but I think he really wanted them to keep making pop music. The others wanted to do other things. They took it as far as they could. That Abbey Road is so good is a testament to their commitment to making great music since it is quite clear theat they had enough of each other.
The question is what is a true Beatles album? Even if you consider Sgt Pepper to be the ultimate "Beatles" album as a work of complete cooperation and unity, there wre great "Beatles songs" after it, if not albums. Lets' remember that behind the "Lennon-Mccartney" signature was usually one or the other, seldom both. And to me the songs Paul, John and George wrote in the early seventies were still "Beatles songs'". With such an impressive energy and creativity
Great idea here. I always wondered how they would have turned out if they stayed together. Would they have given in the excess of the seventies like many of their contemporaries or would they stayed ahead of the game? Interesting choice of songs....good job.
Yes, in England it was an EP, but an EP is an album, with all original songs, the disc, the sleeve, and all that stuff of a normal album... so I consider it.
if there had been a 13th Beatles album the George stuff may have suffered from a George Martin style production. I just can't imagine anyone doing a better job than Spector did on "All Things Must Pass"
THE REAL STORY GOES THAT PHIL DID A GOOD JOB OF ATMP' BUT THEN GEORGE KEEP LAYing MORE SHIT ON IT THAT IT ENDED UP thee overblowen shitepile it is Give or take 2/3 songs ,,. THE beatles= THINGS MUST PASS, IS WAY BETTER..PAUL HAD A BEAUTFUL BASS LINE GOING ON JOHN HAD A GREAT ORGAN PART BUT THE WAY GEORGE DID IT WITHOUT THEM TO ME stiff in comparrison like it anit got the beauty it could of had.
as I remember "all Things Must Pass" was all the George songs that the Beatles had passed on, so be it it by the powers the be...it was no Beatles album even hypotheticly it was and will always be his labor of love.
Apparently you missed this in the information field at the top right, "This is a hypothetical album that they might have released if they hadn't broken up. It is made up of their solo work from that time period." The individual that posted this video wrote that. This a "What if?" kind of concept.
Oops! Sorry! I must have misread! What a great album it would have been if they wouldn't have broken up! I thought you were posting George Harrison's All Things Must Pass! Sorry for the mix-up!
This takes me back to the days when we were lost without the Beatles. I remember one of the budget labels put out 'soundalike' beatle albums with the solo stuff on. Happy days when we had lots of hair and it was always exciting.
I would've rather seen/heard a New Album similar to "the Beatles again" a/k/a "Hey Jude" , consisting of Previously-UnReleased Songs , such-as "not guilty" + "if You've got Troubles" + "What's the News , MaryJane ?" , along with the "LeftOver Tracks" from 1968-1969 such-as "Teddy Boy" +"All Things must pass" (the Beatles' Recordings , not the "Solo"s) ... there WERE Enough of These Recordings to fill 3-or-4 Vinyl "Albums" , equivalent to 2-or-3 CDs.
ive heard, Ive HEARD you know that the beatles werent made for the 70s, but seriously, they would have kept making classic album after album I would definetly buy this album.
Have anybody had the guts to hear ATMP jam complete (thanks for the pepperoni, it's Johnnys Birthday, etc.) I never saw any reason to include this jam in the ATMP masterpiece......
My opinion is that this is a great album, and all the tracks probably would've been a better if the others had input on all the songs, and they had all been produced by George Martin.
Well yes, a lot of the post-Beatles songs would have been of a Beatles record standard, had they been put through the Beatles system. That's what made them great
U could even expand the track No.s out to 15, 16 or 17 tracks as the beatles were known for their output eg. Abbey Road 17 tracks. However I don't know how many Harrisongs would have made it 3 at most I suppose ie. Revolver. (I think there are 3 anyway hey!) Anyway I love this concept, the old 'what if' would have been amazing! It never would of happened unfortunately but we can still 'Imagine'. Beatles forever.
I suppose had they have carried on, before long, all their albums would have been 2-disk, they would have had to have been to keep up with the input from all 4, i mean George had tons of stuff, and so did Paul and John, and even Ringo had a steady output of his own songs in the 70's, either that or there would be the 4 solo albums a year, and an anual Beatles Disk too, which seems what would have been the most logical idea.
Double album like the White album. 1 Mother, 2 Junk,3 Instant Karma 4 Every Night 5 Wah wah 6 Working class hero 7 Isolation, 8 Man we was lonely 9 What is Life 10 Love 11 Back off Boogaloo 12 Maybe l 'm amazed 13 Look at me 14 Teddy Boy 15 God 16 My mummy's dead 17 Remember 18 Beaucoups of Blues Beware of darkness 20 Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey 21 Smile away 22 Cold Turkey 23 My sweet lord 24 The lovely Linda
all these song's were written before 1970 1 My Sweet Lord 2 Working Class Hero 3 Maybe I'm Amazed 4 Cold Turkey 5 Teddy Boy 6 Beware Of Darkness 7 Hold on 8 Junk 9 That Would Be Something 10 Isolation 11 Every Night 12 Isn't It A Pity 13 Give Peace a Chance
It's true that many of the songs they released in 1970-1971 were unfinished songs begun during the Beatles era, or might have been recorded by the Beatles, like Cold Turkey.
1 instant karma 2 maybe i'm amazed 3 what is life 4 it don't come easy 5 another day 6 teddy boy 7 junk 8 gimme some truth 9 love 10 all things must pass 11 my sweet lord 12 back off boogalo 13 isn't it a pitty 14 cold turkey
Yeesh, so much argument. Yes, Linda wouldn't be on this, but this is all just hypothetical. Really it's just a way to put all their solo stuff together and admire it. If they had made another album it would have been MUCH better than this.
That was sort of the point of this. You always hear people say how the sum of the 4 individually was not equal to the whole, as if they had lost their magic or something, and this just shows that if you put their solo songs together you still get magic. They never lost a thing. There was just more filler in their albums to fill the quota.
Never realized it, but heck yeah, this album would have been nearly as good as abbey road or Get Back....... had they worked together on the songs some of them would have even been better.... except for George's... his work with specter was pretty close to perfection.
They would definitely have muscled George out of putting four songs on a single album. His songs were particularly strong at this time, his two on Abbey Road really shone. On an album like this imaginary one, they make some of Paul's stuff seem really weedy. A very cool idea of yours though to mix those early solo albums up, I've five starred you just for that...we can all make our own versions really, bless technology! Now onto Beatles album 14! Looking foward to it!
John Lennon did say that if you chose random solo career songs by the former Beatles, that it would sound like a Beatles album, because albums like the White album were mainly individual songs. Good selection, but I suppose that with the former Beatles catalog of songs you couldn't get a bad selection.
When I see they on this video-photos I say: boys, they were beautifull... BEAUTIFULL!! They were really ...four beetles!! ah ah THE BEATLES THE BEST BAND I EVER LISTENED TO! IN ALL FORM OF THEIR ARTS!! Love you superman 1978!!
I often imagine what the Beatles next album would have been after Let It Be. I imagine they may have taken a break after the fraught Let It Be sessions of 1969, and then returned to the studio in 1971. It is true that in order to stay together Harrisons songs would have had to have had equal billing to Lennon/Mcartneys. Therefor i think they will have released a double album in 1971 made up of the best songs from POB, Imagine, Mcartney, Ram, and All Things Must Pass. Prob about 24 songs.
I love this concept of the 13th, 14th album, ect. The music is so good. I always loved the beatles but, there music has been in some was saturated and in other ways there is so much I have not heard it all. They are so good they are in a class alone, and on the top of the heap.
this is probably what they would of released george harrison said if they stayed together they would of probably released the solo work they did and teddy boy i thought it was done before they were famous
Junk(P) Remember(J) Love(J) Man We Was Lonely(P) All Things Must Pass(G)
Well Well Well(J) Look at Me(J)
Oo Yoo (P)
My Mummy's Dead(J) Maybe I'm Amazed(P)
Last 2 are great back to back.You cant use that many songs from Ram, because Linda is on there. I only use their 1st solo albums. Wah Wah isnt good because that is George mocking Paul
Excuse me? Did I say anything negative about Linda McCartney? No I did not. What I said was that she would not be present on a Beatles album. Learn to read, friend.
Plainly I CAN read, hence my comment. Did you mean "read more carefully"? If so, please say so. Given The Beatles featured other performers on their records (e.g. Billy Preston, Eric Clapton and Yoko Ono) I am at a loss as to why you think Paul's wife should be barred from a Beatles album.
Having Eric Clapton is one thing. Having Yoko on a couple of songs is one thing. Having Linda on nearly every one of Paul's songs does not sound like something the Beatles would do. I'm not insulting Linda, as you implied. You apparently don't know much about the Beatles.
Whether or not I know as much as you about The Beatles, I at least seem to understand that Paul WOULD have had Linda on a Beatles album after 1971, and if that was good enough for him, it's good enough for us. Despite your lack of apology about me not being able to read - it seems that suddenly I have become literate enough for you to reply to! Perhaps you do not know much about manners, which are much more important than The Beatles!
So in other words, if the Beatles had stayed together, rather than have John or George as back up singers for his songs-on Beatles albums- he would use Linda for most of his songs. On Beatles albums. Right.
Again, having Linda on one Beatles song, sure. A couple of songs, fine. Most of his songs? Nope.
Did anyone here suggest he would have had Linda on MOST of the Beatles songs? No. You may have to read posts more carefully in the future if you don't want to look like someone who feels they have more of a right than Paul to decide who he sang with.
One of your previous posts said "she would not be present on a Beatles album". You seemed to have changed your tune - sadly not as clever as the tunes Paul & Linda created in their lives together.
Apparently you don't even understand the point of this video. The point is that this guy is talking about taking songs off of their solo albums, Paul's and the others, and making a "new" Beatles album. What I said was that the problem with Ram is that Linda would be on most of Paul's songs, which he would NOT have done on a Beatles album. A couple of songs? Possibly. Not all of them.
We have not been discussing this video at all, so your reference to it is irrelevant. We are discussing your original suggestion that "Paul & Linda" songs have no place on a post 1971 Beatles album. As you have now accepted that was plainly not the case ("A couple of songs, fine"), a polite apology would show you had learnt a little, albeit from someone who apparently knows very little about The Beatles.
Try not to condescend to us "amateurs" who merely like the music - we also have opinions.
Oh, and giving all my comments negative ratings is pretty mindless. We can all do that. Try actually thinking before you post if you can't handle being pulled up for inaccuracies.
I have been talking about the video this whole time, as I was in the post that you initially addressed. Again, you are lost.
What I said was that his Ram songs would not be appropriate on a Beatles album because Linda would be on nearly all of Paul's songs. Linda might make a couple of appearances on a Beatles album, as Yoko did on two White Album songs, but she would not be a consistent presence. You suggested that she would be, which is wrong.
We did not mention the video in any of our posts until your last one. This is easily checked, if you care to look at them.
You did not remark that Linda could not be "a consistent presence" on a Beatles album - you said "she would not be present on a Beatles album". These are different statements!
You plainly DO have an interest in my opinion, as you have just written 1000 plus words justifying your inaccurate comments. Or were you going to be doing that anyway?
I'm responding to an unfortunate pedestrian who has wondered into a Beatles video who is trying to lecture me about my comments. I have no interest in your opinion.
I said that its possible, maybe, that she might be on a song or two as a novelty, as Yoko was. She would not be on most of his Beatles songs, which is my point.
The comment you first addressed is in regards to this video, friend. The context of this conversation is about the notion of taking songs off of their solo albums. Catch up
The other Beatles would be Paul's back up singers on his Beatles songs, not Linda. My comments are inaccurate? Try listening to a Beatles album, rather than wasting people's time with your greenhorn comments.
Trying to browbeat other posters in this way is abusive and shows an inability to accept criticism. Not everyone who disagrees with you is wrong, regardless of their relative lack of Beatles knowledge, alleged illiteracy or the fact they may not have spent 10 million hours listening to one band.
Not everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. But you are. But thanks for trying, and I hope that next time that you will try to learn about a topic before trying to discuss it.
Please tell me exactly what I "didn't know", so I can learn from a real Beatles expert - all I can see from our conversation is you changing your mind. You may have to do it in monosyllables as I am apparently not very literate. [Mind you, at least I am aware that John Lennon did not see Yoko's presence on a Beatles album as "a novelty".]
BTW, for someone who does not care about my opinion you spend a lot of time tellimg me I am wrong! Why bother?
Yoko being on the White Album was a novelty. As was Eric Clapton's presence on the album. There's nothing necessarily negative about the term "novelty", perhaps you should look up the term and learn about it. You're learning a lot today; I'm glad that you're having a chance to experience this phenomenon.
I don't care about your opinion, I'm responding to your inane responses to mine. I don't need some sententious novice to smear what I'm saying, and present it as if I'm insulting Linda M.
A novelty usually does refer to something less deserving of respect. I doubt many other people have descibed Eric Clapton's guitar work on "While..." as "a novelty". But, indeed, you are right, it CAN also mean something new/exciting, like Linda's presence on a Beatless album would have been, if she had been allowed to partake by rabid Beatle groupies.
You still haven't pointed out exactly what this "novice" didn't know...
Thanks for clearing up my daft idea that you cared about my opinion.
Yes, but it is clear that I did not mean it in that context, so you're simply playing with words in an effort to prolong an argument that you've already lost. What exactly are you trying to accomplish in this exchange? Would Linda McCartney have been the main back up singer on Paul's Beatles songs or would it have been the other Beatles, as it always had been, and was on Let it Be where Paul and Linda were already married? Clearly it would be the other Beatles, so you're wasting my time.
I am not aware that arguing on YouTube is a competition that one can win or lose. Thank you for even more enlightenment! It seems unfair, though, that one adversary is allowed to decide the loser.
As I have already asked twice, exactly what is it at this "novice" did not know about The Beatles, that you did.
BTW, Let It Be was recorded (not mixed) just before P&L married!
Don't backtrack: you suggested Linda would not be on a Beatles album AT ALL. I disagreed. That IS allowed!
I'm glad you had wikipedia handy. Yes, the songs on Let it Be had been recorded earlier, so they were not yet married. Fine, Abbey Road would be a better example.
What I said was that Paul's songs on Ram would not be appropriate for a Beatles album because she would be on most of his songs. You implied that this would somehow not be a problem. Again, you don't know enough about this band to be conversing about it.
You, the self-styled expert, have had to bow to a novice re something that a REAL expert would have known. Any idea just how ridiculous you look now?
You have missed a few "negatives" - may a well do them all. Sad.
As for what you said - we can all see it above: "she would not be present on a Beatles album" - AT ALL! You have since agreed she would have been, on "a couple". Thank you.
It's late here - 0305 hrs and you don't seem to "know" any more than me, so I am off. Have fun replying!
When did I call myself an expert? What I said is that I know more about the Beatles, I didn't say that I know the date that Paul and Linda were married. Nor did I need to look up when their albums came out, as you likely did.
Elvis would not be present on a Beatles album. Could they invite him in as a guest? Sure. But its unlikely. Its unlikely Linda would be on a Beatles album, and if she did it would not be for all of Paul's songs, which was my point.
i liked the idea!!! but not the mix album!!
RubberSoul1968 10 months ago
I like what you did with this :)
tomorrowneverknows94 10 months ago
so All Things Must Pass and Imagine are their 14th album? Decide man!
keyblok 11 months ago
this isn't a beatles album? it was GEORGE's ALBUM
vampiresd0ntsparkle 1 year ago
This would have been a great album. No doubt John and Paul would have helped rewrite "My Sweet Lord" to keep the track on the album, while not sounding as similar to "He's So Fine." I think they would have also written a number for Ringo on this album, too. Great speculation, based on the songs that were released in the Post-Beatles era. Thanks for posting.
Stonewallization 1 year ago
isn't it a pity?
MrTuesbigpac 1 year ago
Let it be is the 13th album....
unless you're not considering Yellow Submarine
juffan 1 year ago
"Give me some truth" sounds a little like the Beatles. But in the other songs I dont hear The Beatles...While John was into underproducing, Paul into keeping it simple, George had Spector, the "overproducer" per definition
acoronab 1 year ago
Interesting concept, and since most (all?) of these songs had made at least one appearance at a real Beatles session, a post-Abbey Road album might well have had something like this line-up. Except for "My Sweet Lord"--my guess is someone would have told George, "Sorry, but this sounds too much like 'He's So Fine.'" But the Beatles did do versions of "Hear Me Lord" and "Isn't It a Pity?" (both of which IMHO are better songs). And don't forget "Child of Nature" ("Jealous Guy") by JL.
thucy2 1 year ago
probably,they won`t name an album after george`s song
k0stil 1 year ago
they did for ringo (yellow submarine)
steamingpoopfart 1 year ago
@steamingpoopfart
yellow submarine is not a ringo song.
it`s lennon/mccartney
k0stil 1 year ago
You know they were going to reunite till some looney who deserves to go to hell for the rest of the universe's life killed John. Picture it. The Beatles 13th album in 1980.
TRSStv 1 year ago
incorrect, Monkberry Moon Delight was included on Ram (1971), so it can´t be at 1970 album. Should be there "Man we was lonely" instead.
MichalFokt 1 year ago
teddy boy was almost on a beatles album, "let it be"
well it was originally on the "get back" album, but that never came out, and mccartney didnt want it on the let it be album
all things must pass was recorded by the beatles
Burromovie 1 year ago
@Burromovie I have "All Things Must Pass" on a bootleg CD, its so 1969, I think it could have been a good Beatles' too if John and Paul would have put forth an effort to make it so. George did a good job of recording it for his own LP.
beatleman69 1 year ago
@beatleman69 I hope if John and Paul did hear George's final version of All Things Must Pass that they kicked themselves for not realising the potential the song had.
beatleman69 11 months ago
ComeOnIsSuchAJoy 1 year ago
Where's the hypothetical album artwork?!
TheJacquesHappy 1 year ago
i hate "teddy boy"!!!!
k0stil 1 year ago
I miss John's voice in Paul's Teddy Boy
But thanks for this, I like it =)
luvexrozes 1 year ago
You left out Ringo's "It Don't Come Easy"!
ureadmymind 1 year ago
@ureadmymind I'd probably use Ringo's "Coochy Coochy" from the B-side of "Beacoups of Blues" since it was written in 1970.
beatleman69 1 year ago
What Is Life is George putting together all the tricks he learned from John and Paul and topping the teachers.
steveconn 1 year ago 3
Tried to keep it to their first albums or singles prior to 1971. Cheated a little with Oh Woman, Oh Why but Paul needed a good rocker somewhere. Hard to boil it down to a single album.
Side One: Instant Karma : Every Night : My Sweet Lord : Oh Woman, Oh Why : Junk : Art of Dying : Working Class Hero
Side Two: Let It Down: Isolation: Teddy Boy : It Don't Come Easy : Beware of Darkness : Remember : Maybe I'm Amazed
StrangeBrewJT 2 years ago
I'd add to the mix Paul McCartney's Junk and maybe Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey, plus one of Ringo's tracks from form Beacups of Blues or Sentimental Journey, or It don't come easy.
begbieboy 2 years ago
There's an interview with John when he said to do this. He said if you want the Beatles just take a track off each of their albums. You get stuck at 1976 because of Johns break. John also said in the Dick Cavett interview that if it wasn't for the Beatles breakup they wouldn't have done the great music since their splitup, Imagine etc.
TheNicholas0202 2 years ago
@TheNicholas0202
Agree. But it's still interesting to wonder which songs would have made it to the final albums, and how had they sounded performed by all the four instead of John+session musicians, Paul+Wings etc.
begbieboy 2 years ago
Where is Junk?
mecaesare 2 years ago
Not sure it really meshes as an album, though. You can hear the difference between the producers a bit clearly.
feckingbillgates 2 years ago
Side by side like this, you know what I think? George Harrison was producing the best songs in the early 70s.
feckingbillgates 2 years ago 14
@feckingbillgates Yes probably agree. Except for Plastic Ono Band album. That was a winner. That beat All Things Must Pass
TheJacquesHappy 1 year ago
@feckingbillgates He was the most talented beatle i think
markev123 1 year ago
Comment removed
feckingbillgates 2 years ago
The guy who posted it: You're kinda stupid. This is not a Beatles album, this is one of George's solo albums
Sean4362 2 years ago
Were this a real album, it really starts picking up at song 4. AWESOME.
Even so, I'm quite a fan of All Things Must Pass, and Lennon and McCartney's albums as well. Not a bad compilation at all though.
LeoMidori 2 years ago
Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey has to be in here also Too Many People.
delatorre26 2 years ago
I like the idea of this, but I agree with the earlier poster who said that the Beatles broke up around about the right time.
I'm not sure they could have continued to sound fresh up against bands like Zeppelin and the Floyd, and worry they might have resorted to the sort of over the top studio production that marred some of the Beatles solo releases in the 70s.
It would be awful to think of a Beatles album as sounding dated! Nice idea, but i'm also happy they called it a day when they did!
Orwell12345678910 2 years ago 3
I think in 1970 they could have made (if they were still a band) their last album, it could have been a double with all the material they had. An album with those songs couldn't ever sound dated, and the zep and pink floyd would have longed to do something like that. they couldn't, they were just great bands, not the best one. but you're right, in the middle seventies none of the beatles was doing memorable things (except Harrison 33and 1/3).
paolomanueldec 2 years ago
Yeah, I agree with you there Paolo, if they made a last album in 70/71, it would (if you collected their songs from respective solo albums) been probably their best album.
But, if they made an album like that, it would have been obvious it was the work of four individuals, and not "The Beatles" that we had been used to.
So yeah, I agree with Paolo, one final album with their 70/71 material would have been unbeatable, even by Floyd, Zep, Roxy, Yes, Genesis etc etc etc.
sparklefrost 2 years ago
A lot of their solo songs were tested out in the 1969 Get Back sessions, but were left undeveloped. If they'd had the time and inclination they could have developed them within the Beatles' time, but I also think that by then they were keen to release their own stuff on their own solo albums.
feckingbillgates 2 years ago
They had pretty much just become sessions musicians for each other's solo songs by 1968. Abbey Road was a great send off, a shame it was spoiled a little by the 1970 release of Let it Be, but if you pretend that came out before Abbey Road it's okay. After that, you can pick your favourite solo songs and make an album out of it. I don't think they could have achieved any more by being together.
feckingbillgates 2 years ago
this is class mate!!! tried to do it myself and failed. not a fan of teddy boy but i kinda works!
daysmil82 2 years ago
theres 3 harrison songs normally they would let 1 or 2 songs of his on one album , idk if the others would aprove of my sweet lord .
TheBeatlesfan1991 2 years ago
Me neither. I think Let it Down would have been a better inclusion. It was tested out in the 1969 Get Back sessions as well.
feckingbillgates 2 years ago
Actually, there are four of George's songs on here. The hypothetical album is evenly split between the three songwriting Beatles -- very nicely done, superman11978. One of the biggest faults of the Beatles was only allowing George to have a meagre one or two songs per album.
firebreeze 2 years ago
That was brought up during one of their last meeting prior to the breakup; that George had to be allowed an even number of songs on albums. John, at least, was in favor of this...4 or 5 songs from each of the songwriters with Ringo throwing in one or two if he so desired.
StrangeBrewJT 2 years ago 2
Yeah, I REALLY wish they'd have managed one just more album that would presumably have been released in Fall '70, and, I do think ALL THINGS MUST PASS would've been the most appropriate title. And I also don't think giving George an equal # of songs would've been too much to ask either. "Instant Karma" b/w "Wah-Wah" would have been a summer '70 single release.
CHEFGUY445 1 year ago
FOR SURE tracks for the album --
JOHN: Well Well Well, Isolation
PAUL: Maybe I'm Amazed, Every Night
GEORGE: All Things Must Pass, Let It Down, What Is Life, Isn't It a Pity (long version)
Remaining songs for consideration:
JOHN: Madman, Give Me Some Truth, Look at Me
PAUL: Another Day, Oh Woman Oh Why, Man We Was Lonely, Monkberry Moon Delight, The Back Seat of My Car
RINGO: Coochy Coochy, It Don't Come Easy
Any song included on the album had to have been written by Aug. '70 at latest.
CHEFGUY445 1 year ago
Comment removed
CHEFGUY445 1 year ago
Comment removed
CHEFGUY445 1 year ago
Sorry but "It Don't Come Easy" would be essential for this album (seeing as it's all '70/71) otherwise, yeah, it's solid.
vincentxp40 2 years ago
if this was an album were do u think it would be ranked with there best?
Jay4P 2 years ago
great album
what is life
best "beatles" song ever
jozz412 2 years ago
I saw a Dick Cavett interview with John and Yoko where John said, "If Yoko is going to be blamed for breaking the four of us up, can she at least be thanked for all the great music the four of us have made since then?"
cwbellor 2 years ago
the singles would be
My Sweet Lord
Maybe I'm Amazed
Gimmie Some Truth
Working Class Hero
they'd belong on the best ofs
beestonpoet 2 years ago
What is life is better than Gimmie some truth.
Marshallsg 2 years ago 2
This is really good.
31danielx 2 years ago
Well, listening those songs as The Beatles' really give a different perspective.
I love all your 13th, 14th and 15th albums, but probably the 13th album : All Things Must Pass is the best of them and feels more sound like a Beatles record. Then probably the 15th album : Band On The Run. The 14th : Imagine feels less cohesive to me. But, good job, anyway. Thank you.
But to top Abbey Road, we might have to put Imagine,My Sweet Lord,All Things Must Pass,Band On The Run, Mind Games in one album.
jequx 2 years ago
It needs 'Early 1970' or 'It Don't Come Easy' by Ringo
RodCow 2 years ago
hey! superman, do the next albums: 16,17, 18,etc. it´s a great idea
jamich7 2 years ago 2
thats a fuckin sick album lol
VinnieG690 2 years ago
No 'Cold Turkey?' I feel like giving this a shot!
BoilingSkyFilms 2 years ago
"That Would Be Something" belongs on there as well, and I'd use "Let it Down" from George. It's got the right sound. Maybe John's version of I'm 'The Greatest.'
This is fun!
BoilingSkyFilms 2 years ago
Plus, no Ringo tune. Maybe he'd a sung Monkberry if the Beatles did it, though. But that was '71, too!
subg88 2 years ago
The Beatles never would have released "My Sweet Lord" either in my opinion. Too overtly religious.
subg88 2 years ago
You cheated - Gimme Some Truth was from '71!
subg88 2 years ago
John had written an early version during the "Get Back" sessions.
PinkFloydManiac1973 2 years ago
yea i count yellow submarine solely for hey bulldog
buewgewstmeiers 2 years ago
Hey Bulldog was a great song, as were "Only a Northern Song" and "It's All Too Much". I could do without "All Together Now", though.
PinkFloydManiac1973 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Agree 'Hey Bulldog' was a gem, but 'Only A North..'? 'It's all to much'? christ those sucked.... really, some of the worst beatle's songs, don't you think?
PatTheBoone 2 years ago
Not at all. I love the music on those songs. I really don't think any beatles song sucked (except for maybe "Wild Honey Pie")
PinkFloydManiac1973 2 years ago
'It's all too much' was way ahead of it's time, while at the same time of it's time. Totally hip hop beats on that one, and great lyrics over a psychedelic wash of sound. Add some infectious guitar riffs. It's a classic.
subg88 2 years ago 2
Are you kidding..Only a northern song is about the best psychedelic song from that time!! You're nuts.
butterp7 2 years ago 2
Through the ten years of their being together, The Beatles managed to time everything so well. Though their break-up was messy, it seemed to come at just the right time. If they hadn't just let it slide and forced themselves to stay together, they would have become a tired and shallow 70s band, gradually destroying all the genius of the 60s with lazy releases (kind of like Let It Be). It was the timing of their break-up which keeps alive their authenticity and legend today.
ArcticUnited1999 2 years ago 3
Yeah, I think if you'd thrown in Instant Karma or Junk in there somewhere it would've made it that much better..haha
cmartmozzy 2 years ago
I didn't like Spector's production of 'All Things Must Pass'. Way too much echo / reverb, too many unnecessary instruments , George's vocal buried in the mix. To be fair, I thought Spector did a good job on the 'Imagine' album and parts of 'Let It Be' ..
getthedoggie 2 years ago
ia, getthedoggie - if you listen to Beware of Abkco, you can hear quite a few of the ATMP songs in their purest form, and they sound best that way, carried just by an acoustic guitar and George's voice. The only exception where I can see a song needing extra production is "My Sweet Lord", because it's got that gospel sound to it. It needs to be loud and joyous.
firebreeze 2 years ago
the idea is cool but the beatles had gone in such different directions paul was playing pop , john was protesting and doing heroin and george was looking for god while ringo was trying to make a career out of being ringo(i am not disparaging him) do you think the albums would have been true beatle albums or just mini white albums? after all they were doing songs that didn't make it as beatle's tracks on there solo records a very intriguing idea though thanks
gibsondrummer 2 years ago 15
@gibsondrummer I agree. Good comment. Paul was all about keeping the Beatles together but I think he really wanted them to keep making pop music. The others wanted to do other things. They took it as far as they could. That Abbey Road is so good is a testament to their commitment to making great music since it is quite clear theat they had enough of each other.
PaulM678347 1 year ago
@gibsondrummer
The question is what is a true Beatles album? Even if you consider Sgt Pepper to be the ultimate "Beatles" album as a work of complete cooperation and unity, there wre great "Beatles songs" after it, if not albums. Lets' remember that behind the "Lennon-Mccartney" signature was usually one or the other, seldom both. And to me the songs Paul, John and George wrote in the early seventies were still "Beatles songs'". With such an impressive energy and creativity
geraldolivier 1 year ago
Great idea here. I always wondered how they would have turned out if they stayed together. Would they have given in the excess of the seventies like many of their contemporaries or would they stayed ahead of the game? Interesting choice of songs....good job.
Paulmancieri67 2 years ago
in fact this would be the 14th, because Magical Mystery Tour was an album, so it is counted.
klausgroi 2 years ago 3
yeah but most ppl don't count yellow submarine (including the beatles) so really it is the 13th studio album
shatteredlamp12 2 years ago
I count Yellow Submarine, though I think it is the worst of them. And officially, it is counted as an album...
klausgroi 2 years ago 3
Magical Mystery Tour was an EP. Not counted as a studio album.
marvelfan281 2 years ago
Yes, in England it was an EP, but an EP is an album, with all original songs, the disc, the sleeve, and all that stuff of a normal album... so I consider it.
klausgroi 2 years ago
if there had been a 13th Beatles album the George stuff may have suffered from a George Martin style production. I just can't imagine anyone doing a better job than Spector did on "All Things Must Pass"
inkey2 3 years ago
THE REAL STORY GOES THAT PHIL DID A GOOD JOB OF ATMP' BUT THEN GEORGE KEEP LAYing MORE SHIT ON IT THAT IT ENDED UP thee overblowen shitepile it is Give or take 2/3 songs ,,. THE beatles= THINGS MUST PASS, IS WAY BETTER..PAUL HAD A BEAUTFUL BASS LINE GOING ON JOHN HAD A GREAT ORGAN PART BUT THE WAY GEORGE DID IT WITHOUT THEM TO ME stiff in comparrison like it anit got the beauty it could of had.
sunriseRISE 2 years ago
lol forever at "THAT PHIL DID A GOOD JOB OF ATMP". Whatever, sunriseRISE. Listen to Beware of Abkco and then get back to me.
firebreeze 2 years ago 2
as I remember "all Things Must Pass" was all the George songs that the Beatles had passed on, so be it it by the powers the be...it was no Beatles album even hypotheticly it was and will always be his labor of love.
Denial of reality is called fantasy or delusion
loowood2 3 years ago
swap out gimme some truth with instant karma, and you've got a hit
dnsla823 3 years ago
here is what if..what if micky dolenz and davy jones the beatles and make an album singing any chicago songs
thedude19766 3 years ago
and what about a single made of "My sweet lord / Give me some truth"; or another one with "Maybe I'm amazed / All things must pass"
dylanstark75 3 years ago
And it didn't have track from any of the other Beatles either!
modifproductions 3 years ago
All Things Must Pass was a George Harrison solo album, not a Beatles album!
modifproductions 3 years ago
Apparently you missed this in the information field at the top right, "This is a hypothetical album that they might have released if they hadn't broken up. It is made up of their solo work from that time period." The individual that posted this video wrote that. This a "What if?" kind of concept.
superdeformed313 3 years ago
Oops! Sorry! I must have misread! What a great album it would have been if they wouldn't have broken up! I thought you were posting George Harrison's All Things Must Pass! Sorry for the mix-up!
modifproductions 3 years ago
This takes me back to the days when we were lost without the Beatles. I remember one of the budget labels put out 'soundalike' beatle albums with the solo stuff on. Happy days when we had lots of hair and it was always exciting.
idle44 3 years ago
I Got A Playlist Of The 13th Beatle Album Songs
Songs I Think Would Be On That Album.
Check It Out
trev8200 3 years ago
I would've rather seen/heard a New Album similar to "the Beatles again" a/k/a "Hey Jude" , consisting of Previously-UnReleased Songs , such-as "not guilty" + "if You've got Troubles" + "What's the News , MaryJane ?" , along with the "LeftOver Tracks" from 1968-1969 such-as "Teddy Boy" +"All Things must pass" (the Beatles' Recordings , not the "Solo"s) ... there WERE Enough of These Recordings to fill 3-or-4 Vinyl "Albums" , equivalent to 2-or-3 CDs.
thePharoah90086 3 years ago
ive heard, Ive HEARD you know that the beatles werent made for the 70s, but seriously, they would have kept making classic album after album I would definetly buy this album.
indiebird12 3 years ago
Have anybody had the guts to hear ATMP jam complete (thanks for the pepperoni, it's Johnnys Birthday, etc.) I never saw any reason to include this jam in the ATMP masterpiece......
raponte1955 3 years ago
People are forgetting 'Not Guilty'.
derrickgoodrich 3 years ago 2
How that song got passed over for shite like "The Continuing Story of Bungalow Bill" and "Wild Honey Pie" is beyond me.
firebreeze 2 years ago 2
Anyone out there remember when these songs were just released? I am one. To me, it was
like the antisapation of a the "New" Beatles song to come out.. Never again will I ever feel that way again.Those were the days!!
I thank God for The Beatles. And I know God has 2 of the Beatles with him..
Merry Christmas to All!!!!!!
hankphelps 3 years ago
My opinion is that this is a great album, and all the tracks probably would've been a better if the others had input on all the songs, and they had all been produced by George Martin.
TheYoungMusician 3 years ago
Well yes, a lot of the post-Beatles songs would have been of a Beatles record standard, had they been put through the Beatles system. That's what made them great
fredmila 3 years ago
U could even expand the track No.s out to 15, 16 or 17 tracks as the beatles were known for their output eg. Abbey Road 17 tracks. However I don't know how many Harrisongs would have made it 3 at most I suppose ie. Revolver. (I think there are 3 anyway hey!) Anyway I love this concept, the old 'what if' would have been amazing! It never would of happened unfortunately but we can still 'Imagine'. Beatles forever.
WTT1978 3 years ago
I suppose had they have carried on, before long, all their albums would have been 2-disk, they would have had to have been to keep up with the input from all 4, i mean George had tons of stuff, and so did Paul and John, and even Ringo had a steady output of his own songs in the 70's, either that or there would be the 4 solo albums a year, and an anual Beatles Disk too, which seems what would have been the most logical idea.
beatleboybob 3 years ago
Double album like the White album. 1 Mother, 2 Junk,3 Instant Karma 4 Every Night 5 Wah wah 6 Working class hero 7 Isolation, 8 Man we was lonely 9 What is Life 10 Love 11 Back off Boogaloo 12 Maybe l 'm amazed 13 Look at me 14 Teddy Boy 15 God 16 My mummy's dead 17 Remember 18 Beaucoups of Blues Beware of darkness 20 Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey 21 Smile away 22 Cold Turkey 23 My sweet lord 24 The lovely Linda
paul195614 3 years ago
OMG! I thought about doing this same thing about five years ago! You beat me to it, my friend;-)
JoshJen1023 3 years ago
This would have been a reeally good album. it would be there folkiest album.
indiebird12 3 years ago
I would buy it
klausgroi 3 years ago
InspectorFoley 3 years ago
why would half of the songs that were released in 1968 and 1969 be release on this would of album.
daverudynski 3 years ago
Oh I've played this game. I thought about burning a few mock CDs.
RichYan33 3 years ago
It's true that many of the songs they released in 1970-1971 were unfinished songs begun during the Beatles era, or might have been recorded by the Beatles, like Cold Turkey.
OroborusFMA 3 years ago
daverudynski 3 years ago
yer pathetic with all the argument...why not enjoy them all as a collective and each individual...sheesh
karelmeerbach 3 years ago
It doesnt make sense...its too early, you know.
sonidolisiado 3 years ago
Ja muy buena idea, felicidades muy bueno
Guillermo8998 3 years ago
Yeesh, so much argument. Yes, Linda wouldn't be on this, but this is all just hypothetical. Really it's just a way to put all their solo stuff together and admire it. If they had made another album it would have been MUCH better than this.
superman11978 3 years ago
you mean 14th album
AeroBeatlesDoorsLed 3 years ago
yeah..lol.
EmmaEarthquake 3 years ago
That was sort of the point of this. You always hear people say how the sum of the 4 individually was not equal to the whole, as if they had lost their magic or something, and this just shows that if you put their solo songs together you still get magic. They never lost a thing. There was just more filler in their albums to fill the quota.
superman11978 3 years ago
Never realized it, but heck yeah, this album would have been nearly as good as abbey road or Get Back....... had they worked together on the songs some of them would have even been better.... except for George's... his work with specter was pretty close to perfection.
hanniballecturer 3 years ago
They would definitely have muscled George out of putting four songs on a single album. His songs were particularly strong at this time, his two on Abbey Road really shone. On an album like this imaginary one, they make some of Paul's stuff seem really weedy. A very cool idea of yours though to mix those early solo albums up, I've five starred you just for that...we can all make our own versions really, bless technology! Now onto Beatles album 14! Looking foward to it!
fishslappingdance 3 years ago
John Lennon did say that if you chose random solo career songs by the former Beatles, that it would sound like a Beatles album, because albums like the White album were mainly individual songs. Good selection, but I suppose that with the former Beatles catalog of songs you couldn't get a bad selection.
aubenhairything 3 years ago
It would be amazing if the Beatles were together for a long time.
luengaga1978 3 years ago
where's come and get it?
biner01 3 years ago
"Come and get it" was Badfinger.
RamiMtl 3 years ago
When I see they on this video-photos I say: boys, they were beautifull... BEAUTIFULL!! They were really ...four beetles!! ah ah THE BEATLES THE BEST BAND I EVER LISTENED TO! IN ALL FORM OF THEIR ARTS!! Love you superman 1978!!
coanmarc 3 years ago
I often imagine what the Beatles next album would have been after Let It Be. I imagine they may have taken a break after the fraught Let It Be sessions of 1969, and then returned to the studio in 1971. It is true that in order to stay together Harrisons songs would have had to have had equal billing to Lennon/Mcartneys. Therefor i think they will have released a double album in 1971 made up of the best songs from POB, Imagine, Mcartney, Ram, and All Things Must Pass. Prob about 24 songs.
BoogieWoogie1963 3 years ago
Beautiful thought there.
It would have been amazing, wouldn't it?
LadyCayenne 3 years ago
But the next album recorded after Let It Be was Abbey Road - so we know what it sounded like.
wzevonrip 3 years ago
my previous comment was supposed to be a response to greenpuppet43's comment that they'd never let george put 4 songs on the album.
komkua 3 years ago
I love this concept of the 13th, 14th album, ect. The music is so good. I always loved the beatles but, there music has been in some was saturated and in other ways there is so much I have not heard it all. They are so good they are in a class alone, and on the top of the heap.
DAVWAVE 3 years ago
Never noticed it before, but some of the backing vocals on "Wah Wah" sound McCartney-esque. Ironic.
danthemankhan 3 years ago
this is probably what they would of released george harrison said if they stayed together they would of probably released the solo work they did and teddy boy i thought it was done before they were famous
shamanofsexy90 3 years ago
yeah theres a rehearsal of them doing teddy boy
AeroBeatlesDoorsLed 3 years ago
What about an All the best of Post Beatles Album. I'd pick these songs:
Imagine,Woman,Stand by me( cover),Jealous guy, (Just like)Starting over.
Band on the run,Silly love songs,Say say say(Beatles and Michael Jackson, HEy why not?)
Maybe I'm amazed, Fine line.
My sweet lord,All things must pass,I've got my mind set on you, This is love, Blow away, Crackerbox palace,When we was fab.
Photograph, It don't come easy and I'm the greatest(or No no song).
Pierin24 3 years ago
This is my order:
Mother(J) All Things Must Pass(G)
Stardust(R) That Would Be Something(P)
Every Night(P) Working Class Hero(J)
Junk(P) Remember(J) Love(J) Man We Was Lonely(P) All Things Must Pass(G)
Well Well Well(J) Look at Me(J)
Oo Yoo (P)
My Mummy's Dead(J) Maybe I'm Amazed(P)
Last 2 are great back to back.You cant use that many songs from Ram, because Linda is on there. I only use their 1st solo albums. Wah Wah isnt good because that is George mocking Paul
lombard34 4 years ago
Actually, I have "Isn't it a Pity" by George as the second song.
lombard34 4 years ago
If Linda was good enough for Paul, she's good enough for us.
wzevonrip 3 years ago
Excuse me? Did I say anything negative about Linda McCartney? No I did not. What I said was that she would not be present on a Beatles album. Learn to read, friend.
lombard34 3 years ago
Plainly I CAN read, hence my comment. Did you mean "read more carefully"? If so, please say so. Given The Beatles featured other performers on their records (e.g. Billy Preston, Eric Clapton and Yoko Ono) I am at a loss as to why you think Paul's wife should be barred from a Beatles album.
wzevonrip 3 years ago
Having Eric Clapton is one thing. Having Yoko on a couple of songs is one thing. Having Linda on nearly every one of Paul's songs does not sound like something the Beatles would do. I'm not insulting Linda, as you implied. You apparently don't know much about the Beatles.
lombard34 3 years ago
Whether or not I know as much as you about The Beatles, I at least seem to understand that Paul WOULD have had Linda on a Beatles album after 1971, and if that was good enough for him, it's good enough for us. Despite your lack of apology about me not being able to read - it seems that suddenly I have become literate enough for you to reply to! Perhaps you do not know much about manners, which are much more important than The Beatles!
wzevonrip 3 years ago
So in other words, if the Beatles had stayed together, rather than have John or George as back up singers for his songs-on Beatles albums- he would use Linda for most of his songs. On Beatles albums. Right.
Again, having Linda on one Beatles song, sure. A couple of songs, fine. Most of his songs? Nope.
lombard34 3 years ago
Did anyone here suggest he would have had Linda on MOST of the Beatles songs? No. You may have to read posts more carefully in the future if you don't want to look like someone who feels they have more of a right than Paul to decide who he sang with.
One of your previous posts said "she would not be present on a Beatles album". You seemed to have changed your tune - sadly not as clever as the tunes Paul & Linda created in their lives together.
wzevonrip 3 years ago
Apparently you don't even understand the point of this video. The point is that this guy is talking about taking songs off of their solo albums, Paul's and the others, and making a "new" Beatles album. What I said was that the problem with Ram is that Linda would be on most of Paul's songs, which he would NOT have done on a Beatles album. A couple of songs? Possibly. Not all of them.
You're lost, and you're wasting my time.
lombard34 3 years ago
We have not been discussing this video at all, so your reference to it is irrelevant. We are discussing your original suggestion that "Paul & Linda" songs have no place on a post 1971 Beatles album. As you have now accepted that was plainly not the case ("A couple of songs, fine"), a polite apology would show you had learnt a little, albeit from someone who apparently knows very little about The Beatles.
Try not to condescend to us "amateurs" who merely like the music - we also have opinions.
wzevonrip 3 years ago
Oh, and giving all my comments negative ratings is pretty mindless. We can all do that. Try actually thinking before you post if you can't handle being pulled up for inaccuracies.
wzevonrip 3 years ago
I have been talking about the video this whole time, as I was in the post that you initially addressed. Again, you are lost.
What I said was that his Ram songs would not be appropriate on a Beatles album because Linda would be on nearly all of Paul's songs. Linda might make a couple of appearances on a Beatles album, as Yoko did on two White Album songs, but she would not be a consistent presence. You suggested that she would be, which is wrong.
And, sorry, I have no interest in your opinion
lombard34 3 years ago
We did not mention the video in any of our posts until your last one. This is easily checked, if you care to look at them.
You did not remark that Linda could not be "a consistent presence" on a Beatles album - you said "she would not be present on a Beatles album". These are different statements!
You plainly DO have an interest in my opinion, as you have just written 1000 plus words justifying your inaccurate comments. Or were you going to be doing that anyway?
wzevonrip 3 years ago
I'm responding to an unfortunate pedestrian who has wondered into a Beatles video who is trying to lecture me about my comments. I have no interest in your opinion.
I said that its possible, maybe, that she might be on a song or two as a novelty, as Yoko was. She would not be on most of his Beatles songs, which is my point.
The comment you first addressed is in regards to this video, friend. The context of this conversation is about the notion of taking songs off of their solo albums. Catch up
lombard34 3 years ago
The other Beatles would be Paul's back up singers on his Beatles songs, not Linda. My comments are inaccurate? Try listening to a Beatles album, rather than wasting people's time with your greenhorn comments.
lombard34 3 years ago
Trying to browbeat other posters in this way is abusive and shows an inability to accept criticism. Not everyone who disagrees with you is wrong, regardless of their relative lack of Beatles knowledge, alleged illiteracy or the fact they may not have spent 10 million hours listening to one band.
wzevonrip 3 years ago
Not everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. But you are. But thanks for trying, and I hope that next time that you will try to learn about a topic before trying to discuss it.
lombard34 3 years ago
Please tell me exactly what I "didn't know", so I can learn from a real Beatles expert - all I can see from our conversation is you changing your mind. You may have to do it in monosyllables as I am apparently not very literate. [Mind you, at least I am aware that John Lennon did not see Yoko's presence on a Beatles album as "a novelty".]
BTW, for someone who does not care about my opinion you spend a lot of time tellimg me I am wrong! Why bother?
wzevonrip 3 years ago
Yoko being on the White Album was a novelty. As was Eric Clapton's presence on the album. There's nothing necessarily negative about the term "novelty", perhaps you should look up the term and learn about it. You're learning a lot today; I'm glad that you're having a chance to experience this phenomenon.
I don't care about your opinion, I'm responding to your inane responses to mine. I don't need some sententious novice to smear what I'm saying, and present it as if I'm insulting Linda M.
lombard34 3 years ago
A novelty usually does refer to something less deserving of respect. I doubt many other people have descibed Eric Clapton's guitar work on "While..." as "a novelty". But, indeed, you are right, it CAN also mean something new/exciting, like Linda's presence on a Beatless album would have been, if she had been allowed to partake by rabid Beatle groupies.
You still haven't pointed out exactly what this "novice" didn't know...
Thanks for clearing up my daft idea that you cared about my opinion.
wzevonrip 3 years ago
Yes, but it is clear that I did not mean it in that context, so you're simply playing with words in an effort to prolong an argument that you've already lost. What exactly are you trying to accomplish in this exchange? Would Linda McCartney have been the main back up singer on Paul's Beatles songs or would it have been the other Beatles, as it always had been, and was on Let it Be where Paul and Linda were already married? Clearly it would be the other Beatles, so you're wasting my time.
lombard34 3 years ago
I am not aware that arguing on YouTube is a competition that one can win or lose. Thank you for even more enlightenment! It seems unfair, though, that one adversary is allowed to decide the loser.
As I have already asked twice, exactly what is it at this "novice" did not know about The Beatles, that you did.
BTW, Let It Be was recorded (not mixed) just before P&L married!
Don't backtrack: you suggested Linda would not be on a Beatles album AT ALL. I disagreed. That IS allowed!
wzevonrip 3 years ago
I'm glad you had wikipedia handy. Yes, the songs on Let it Be had been recorded earlier, so they were not yet married. Fine, Abbey Road would be a better example.
What I said was that Paul's songs on Ram would not be appropriate for a Beatles album because she would be on most of his songs. You implied that this would somehow not be a problem. Again, you don't know enough about this band to be conversing about it.
lombard34 3 years ago
You, the self-styled expert, have had to bow to a novice re something that a REAL expert would have known. Any idea just how ridiculous you look now?
You have missed a few "negatives" - may a well do them all. Sad.
As for what you said - we can all see it above: "she would not be present on a Beatles album" - AT ALL! You have since agreed she would have been, on "a couple". Thank you.
It's late here - 0305 hrs and you don't seem to "know" any more than me, so I am off. Have fun replying!
wzevonrip 3 years ago
When did I call myself an expert? What I said is that I know more about the Beatles, I didn't say that I know the date that Paul and Linda were married. Nor did I need to look up when their albums came out, as you likely did.
Elvis would not be present on a Beatles album. Could they invite him in as a guest? Sure. But its unlikely. Its unlikely Linda would be on a Beatles album, and if she did it would not be for all of Paul's songs, which was my point.
lombard34 3 years ago