The Last Ever Beatles Song

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moodybluebird

It's definitely Gilmour singing.

---

I thought as much

A superb song

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

The Smiths were one of my favourite 80s bands and if you’re talking about influential acts, they were at the forefront for their time, but comparing them to the Beatles, it’s like the EuropeanConference and the Champions League. The Smiths influenced music, the Beatles influenced life. In a way, I’d like to have been born ten years earlier, so I could have a better memory of what life was like before the Beatles - there were plenty of other reasons why the sixties were such a momentous decade, but the Beatles were right there in the front and centre of it.

Because of this, I can understand the desire fo get the absolute maximum of Beatles product out there, but I’m with Sludge about the track released yesterday - it’s pretty insipid and, in my view, undeserving of all of the hype.

---

I don't think it's possible to say The Beatles were THE best band ever as they were not to everybody's taste

I prefer the kinks and the who really rather the beatles early work , the teeny bopper stuff no thanks

But in terms of versatility, melodies and sound once they hit the ground they were incredible

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I don't think it's possible to say The Beatles were THE best band ever as they were not to everybody's taste

I prefer the kinks and the who really rather the beatles early work , the teeny bopper stuff no thanks

But in terms of versatility, melodies and sound once they hit the ground they were incredible

---

If that was the case, you need to be to everyone's taste, there would be nowhere close to any band who could be considered that.

So either there is none and there's no way to differentiate between the Beatles and a pub band, or there is. And it has to be the Beatles. There's no other band whose music has appeal to young children, teenagers, young adults, middle aged people, retired people, and so consistently over so many decades.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NinianOpinion1927

Isn't Lennon's voice largely computer generated? Not a fan of that at all

---

No it's not.

Thet are all shyte, maybe OK for people in their 90's 100's?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

If that was the case, you need to be to everyone's taste, there would be nowhere close to any band who could be considered that.

So either there is none and there's no way to differentiate between the Beatles and a pub band, or there is. And it has to be the Beatles. There's no other band whose music has appeal to young children, teenagers, young adults, middle aged people, retired people, and so consistently over so many decades.

---

It is unique to The Beatles that at any family gathering, party, pub, works radio etc a Beatles song comes on and it seems that nigh on everyone is singing along, regardless of age. Some even unconsciously singing, they just know the words and can’t help themselves. No doubt The Fab Four are the greatest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NinianOpinion1927

Isn't Lennon's voice largely computer generated? Not a fan of that at all

---

The original demo has been 'public' for quite a few years and the vocals are identical I'd say (but much cleaner obviously) :
https://youtu.be/zO3ox_DlAyE?feature=shared

It does depend on what you mean by 'computer generated' though. My understanding is that the AI that Peter Jackson's team use (MAL) is trained to recognise one part of a recording (developed to enhance/isolate background sounds for the Get Back documentary but now used to isolate Lennon's vocals from the demo) and it then 'recreates' those. It might be getting philosophical but is a perfect recreated copy the same thing as the original? Either way there is a fair amount of digital trickery going on but probably no more than what has always happened in musical studios.

Going back to the demo I think it's a slight shame that they lost the middle 8 ('I don't want to lose you') but the vocal isn't great on the tape for that section and McCartney probably doesn't have the range nowadays.

I found it very boring and a typical, middle of the road BBC Two song.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caerkid

The original demo has been 'public' for quite a few years and the vocals are identical I'd say (but much cleaner obviously) :
https://youtu.be/zO3ox_DlAyE?feature=shared

It does depend on what you mean by 'computer generated' though. My understanding is that the AI that Peter Jackson's team use (MAL) is trained to recognise one part of a recording (developed to enhance/isolate background sounds for the Get Back documentary but now used to isolate Lennon's vocals from the demo) and it then 'recreates' those. It might be getting philosophical but is a perfect recreated copy the same thing as the original? Either way there is a fair amount of digital trickery going on but probably no more than what has always happened in musical studios.

Going back to the demo I think it's a slight shame that they lost the middle 8 ('I don't want to lose you') but the vocal isn't great on the tape for that section and McCartney probably doesn't have the range nowadays.

---

Your last paragraph is interesting because while listening to the song for the first time the other day I was waiting for a middle 8 to take it in another direction but it never happened. Now I understand why. Thanks for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B. Oddie

I found it very boring and a typical, middle of the road BBC Two song.

---

Yes that's what I thought

There was a load of fuss over the airwaves and on the TV and social media and I thought it was nondescript coffee table music

I thought that about the previous post beatles release too

It all seems completely pointless

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B. Oddie

I found it very boring and a typical, middle of the road BBC Two song.

---

20mph dodderers music.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MOZZER2

can't comment on this Beatles track as its not my bag but hopefully the smiths don't go down this route


millions of dollars have been offered to the smiths to reform over the years and think it was the right decision not too although the band are more popular now more than ever !

there legacy still remains intact thankfully

---

I was devastated (until The Smiths came along) when Weller finished The Jam, couldn’t understand it. Of course, I get it now with his changing musical direction which he’d never do if he continued flogging the same horse. Similarly to The Smiths, Weller, Foxton and Buckler would make a fortune for some one-off gigs…I hope they don’t.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

Yes that's what I thought

There was a load of fuss over the airwaves and on the TV and social media and I thought it was nondescript coffee table music

I thought that about the previous post beatles release too

It all seems completely pointless

---

I think you're underestimating the influence and importance the Beatles have had over people's lives and continue to have. Just hearing Lennon's voice again is enough for many people to get dewy eyed, so judging the song to be good, bad or indifferent is missing the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caerkid

The original demo has been 'public' for quite a few years and the vocals are identical I'd say (but much cleaner obviously) :
https://youtu.be/zO3ox_DlAyE?feature=shared

It does depend on what you mean by 'computer generated' though. My understanding is that the AI that Peter Jackson's team use (MAL) is trained to recognise one part of a recording (developed to enhance/isolate background sounds for the Get Back documentary but now used to isolate Lennon's vocals from the demo) and it then 'recreates' those. It might be getting philosophical but is a perfect recreated copy the same thing as the original? Either way there is a fair amount of digital trickery going on but probably no more than what has always happened in musical studios.

---

I saw somewhere a comment or quote that the process is a bit like taking a cake and ending up with separate portions of flour, eggs, sugar, butter and milk.

I mentioned the Revolver album, which was deconstructed using AI and then remixed using all of the separate band parts. I've heard bits that I've never heard in the original, but gone back and realised they were there. The scope this AI separation has is immense and it's just another trick available in the recording world. I wonder what will be next, as I find things like this quite exciting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North Cardiff Blue

20mph dodderers music.

---

Fish not biting today it seems.

This could be off a Sean lennon album.Track 9.
I just listened to a Lou Reed interview from 82.He basically said the British invasion was crap and the only two bands that mattered to him were The Stones and The Kinks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Fish not biting today it seems.

---

:hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dandywarhol

This could be off a Sean lennon album.Track 9.
I just listened to a Lou Reed interview from 82.He basically said the British invasion was crap and the only two bands that mattered to him were The Stones and The Kinks.

---

I certainly agree it's a moribund song

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moodybluebird

I think you're underestimating the influence and importance the Beatles have had over people's lives and continue to have. Just hearing Lennon's voice again is enough for many people to get dewy eyed, so judging the song to be good, bad or indifferent is missing the point.

---

Bigger than Jesus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MOZZER2

can't comment on this Beatles track as its not my bag but hopefully the smiths don't go down this route


millions of dollars have been offered to the smiths to reform over the years and think it was the right decision not too although the band are more popular now more than ever !

there legacy still remains intact thankfully

---

I don't think Johnny Marr would do it now that Andy Rourke is gone. Not that he was that interested in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYCBlue

I don't think Johnny Marr would do it now that Andy Rourke is gone. Not that he was that interested in the first place.

---

Do you still stick with waters singing breathe on dsotm ?

I can't find any evidence that it was him

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dandywarhol

This could be off a Sean lennon album.Track 9.
I just listened to a Lou Reed interview from 82.He basically said the British invasion was crap and the only two bands that mattered to him were The Stones and The Kinks.

---

Lou Reed is in a minority then. Many, many Americans of the time, even later, were mesmerised by the British Invasion, led by The Beatles. Like Ali, they shook up the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

Do you still stick with waters singing breathe on dsotm ?

I can't find any evidence that it was him

---

I think you're rubbing salt into the wound Sludge.....and why not heh heh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

No it's not.

---

Yes it is, they used AI to fill in the gaps. Or perhaps you know better than a BBC music correspondent lardy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moodybluebird

I think you're rubbing salt into the wound Sludge.....and why not heh heh

---

I just genuinely want to know where the idea came from

I do know that waters being a bit of a prat rerecorded dsotm with him singing everything but I never listened to it

Maybe this is where NYC heard it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I just genuinely want to know where the idea came from

I do know that waters being a bit of a prat rerecorded dsotm with him singing everything but I never listened to it

Maybe this is where NYC heard it

---

Maybe but as soon as you typed the words to the Floyd song, I could hear Gilmour's voice singing it. I never even knew Waters re-recorded the album.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

Do you still stick with waters singing breathe on dsotm ?

I can't find any evidence that it was him

---

No. I read that Waters wrote the lyrics and assumed he sang it. I've read elsewhere that it was Dave Gilmore on vocals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fingers

I was devastated (until The Smiths came along) when Weller finished The Jam, couldn’t understand it. Of course, I get it now with his changing musical direction which he’d never do if he continued flogging the same horse. Similarly to The Smiths, Weller, Foxton and Buckler would make a fortune for some one-off gigs…I hope they don’t.

---

talking of the jam 45 years to the day All Mod Cons was released

there best effort in my opinion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MOZZER2

talking of the jam 45 years to the day All Mod Cons was released

there best effort in my opinion

---

Without doubt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MOZZER2

talking of the jam 45 years to the day All Mod Cons was released

there best effort in my opinion

---

Agree

The Kinks bowed out with this.
https://youtu.be/A_Ym7RsCDvQ?si=KVNdxsrRYv6x8VR3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NYCBlue

No. I read that Waters wrote the lyrics and assumed he sang it. I've read elsewhere that it was Dave Gilmore on vocals.

---

Tidy

Waters is a silly old git

Old rockers never die etc etc

I've only just heard the Beatles song.
As a self confessed Beatles fanatic, there is no doubt it's pretty average but I don't think that's the point of the song. It was about the band, reforming, one last time.
I suspect McCartney In particular wanted to tie up loose ends after an unsatisfactory break up a band that at its peak, was far and away the best the world had seen.
Whether or not he has succeeded only he can tell us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

Also Paul & Ringo are practically on their uppers. Who can knock them for trying to squeeze a last few bob out of the punters. They’re pensioners y’know.

---

But Shirley the triple lock will get them over the line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NinianOpinion1927

Yes it is, they used AI to fill in the gaps. Or perhaps you know better than a BBC music correspondent lardy

---

To me, "largely" isn't the same as filling the gaps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Former Labour leader

I've only just heard the Beatles song.
As a self confessed Beatles fanatic, there is no doubt it's pretty average but I don't think that's the point of the song. It was about the band, reforming, one last time.
I suspect McCartney In particular wanted to tie up loose ends after an unsatisfactory break up a band that at its peak, was far and away the best the world had seen.
Whether or not he has succeeded only he can tell us.

---

I think if that was the last we were to hear it was a bit of a damp squid 🦑

Even now the Beatles back catalogue is still being analysed worldwide so I don't think the tracks released after they split up will have any bearing on how they're viewed by future generations.

It is testament to their popularity that 50 years after they split up, the public still want to squeeze every last ounce out of the Beatles phenomenon, so who cares if the 'new' stuff is not up there with Penny Lane or Strawberry Fields.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moodybluebird

Even now the Beatles back catalogue is still being analysed worldwide so I don't think the tracks released after they split up will have any bearing on how they're viewed by future generations.

It is testament to their popularity that 50 years after they split up, the public still want to squeeze every last ounce out of the Beatles phenomenon, so who cares if the 'new' stuff is not up there with Penny Lane or Strawberry Fields.

---

Loads of Beatles songs are as fresh as the day they were released, only one I can think of where I go ‘Oh no, not this again’ is the repeat at the end of Hey Jude (rest of the song is great though)

Just watched Beatles at the BBC on IPlayer which featured a very unusual edition of Grandstand. Lou Reed may not have rated the British invasion, but when the Beatles returned from launching it on the Ed Sullivan show watched by 73 million, the BBC packed David Coleman, the presenter of Grandstand, off to Heathrow to interview them. Just think about that, the BBC’s main weekend sports programme being disrupted in such a way to present live coverage of a band returning from a trip abroad. That’s what I meant when I said the Beatles didn’t just influence music, they influenced life. They were lucky that they came to fame at a time when the country was crying out for something different, but we won’t see their like again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Just watched Beatles at the BBC on IPlayer which featured a very unusual edition of Grandstand. Lou Reed may not have rated the British invasion, but when the Beatles returned from launching it on the Ed Sullivan show watched by 73 million, the BBC packed David Coleman, the presenter of Grandstand, off to Heathrow to interview them. Just think about that, the BBC’s main weekend sports programme being disrupted in such a way to present live coverage of a band returning from a trip abroad. That’s what I meant when I said the Beatles didn’t just influence music, they influenced life. They were lucky that they came to fame at a time when the country was crying out for something different, but we won’t see their like again.

---

One of the reasons why we won't see the like of them was the emergence of mass media

Wether or not they were the greatest ever band is open to debate but they were all over the news , tv , papers and radio at exactly the right time to exploit it all