McCartney and the Beatles' Apple Era

Paul really shined during the pre-Apple era of 1966-1967. Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, and Magical Mystery Tour are all dominated by Paul. And he controlled their A-Sides, 2-to-1 over John.

He was writing great stuff. Not only hits like 'Paperback Writer', 'Eleanor Rigby', 'Penny Lane' and 'Hello Goodbye', but strong album cuts, too. I won't list them all here, but just take some of his slower/non-rocker tunes from that time: 'For No One', 'Fool on the Hill', 'She's Leaving Home' and 'Here There and Everywhere' . He had jumped a level from pop-song tune smith to being a legitimate composer.

He even did the award winning symphonic soundtrack for The Family Way. The guy was on fire.

But then Apple happened. The 'White Album' definitely feels more like a 'John album' than a 'Paul album'. And while McCartney shines on the Abbey Road medley (Side Two), his only complete, great number is 'Oh! Darling'. John and George are much stronger on Abbey. Even Yellow Submarine, which is barely an album, boast only one new Paul number, the silly 'All Together Now'.

And it's well documented that two McCartney numbers from the Apple-era, 'Ob-La-Di Ob-La-Da' and 'Maxwell's Silver Hammer' were intended as singles (or hits) and rejected by the others as being unworthy. And I agree. So why did Paul's work take a step backward during the Apple era?

I think the reason is because other Beatles quickly lost interest in running the company (Ringo never had any interest in the first place) and the bulk of managing Apple Corps fell to our favorite workaholic, Paul. He was too busy being Apple's overseer and promoting the likes of Mary Hopkins and Badfinger.

But that's not the whole story. Apple's first single was Paul's 'Hey Jude', the Beatles' biggest hit ever. A great launch for the label. And when things got especially dicey during the Let it be sessions, guess who rose to the occasion? Yep. Our Paul. 'Let it Be', 'The Long and Winding Road' and 'Get Back' are some of his best Apple-era songs. And his half of 'I Got A Feeling' ain't bad, either.

It kind of proves that, towards the end, Paul really wanted the Beatles to succeed more than the others. He pulled out his biggest hit to kick-off Apple and sacrificed time he should have been spending composing to being the chief-Beatle (essentially doing a lot of the things that both John and Brian Epstein used to do). Then, when the ship was sinking on Let it be, he resurfaced to make an otherwise lackluster album into another success for them.

Blackberry 'All You Need Is Love' Ad

I'm not sure what having a Blackberry has to do with the slogan 'Do What You Love'? They have various ads. A struggling rock band, a mountain climber, two woman designing clothes, a date with a couple arguing (and getting back together by texting!?), and a woman break-dancer.

The only one that kind of makes sense is the last one. It shows the woman using her Blackberry to film a dance troupe she wants to join, she goes home and practices the steps, and voila, she's in the group!

But how does having a Blackberry make your band or dress designs better? And how does having a Blackberry make 'doing what you love' easier? Are they assuming that I'd have to cancel that mountain climbing deal if I couldn't 'text' while I scale Mount Everest?

It's like the CreditReport.com ads where they equate having a lousy job with having bad credit. I assume they are saying that during the job screening process some companies check your credit report, and if you have a bad one, it could cost you the job. But the type of person they depict in the ad probably aren't aware that having 'bad credit' could have that kind of sideways affect. Besides, the characters in the ad are in a grungey rock band...shouldn't they have shitty jobs and be driving a beater? That's how my life was when I was a punk rocker.

But back to the Blackberry ad...I like their cover of 'All You Need Is Love', though. Never one of my favorite Beatles songs and I think I actually like this one better than the original.

Paul's Concert Material

A buddy and I were discussing Paul's choice of material for his live shows. It's funny, cuz back when Paul first started playing live in the early 70's, he wouldn't do any Beatles' songs. It was either old standards or new Wings' material.

He eventually began to incorporate a few Beatles' numbers, but stuck to mostly 'new' stuff. I remember thinking at the time (mid-70's) that while it's fun to hear him do 'Lady Madonna' or whatever, I'd rather hear the original Beatles' version. I'm wasn't really interested in hearing Wings do Beatles songs. Denny Laine, Joe English and Jimmy McCollough were poor substitutes for John, Ringo and George. The Beatles were a great, tight, little band. And no matter how 'good' Joe English's drumming was, it wasn't the same. Bands have a chemistry that has little to do with their musicianship. And the Beatles had that. Just watch the Let it be rooftop gig. Plus, John, Paul and George were all great singers and their voices really fit together.

In his recent shows, Paul seems to just want to please the crowd. He does mostly hits and has even said in interviews that the audience expects 'Hey Jude' and he's got to deliver. Again, I'd rather hear the Beatles' 1968 version.

But discussing with my buddy, I realized that what I really want to hear is more obscure solo and Wings stuff. How about some Ram or Red Rose Speedway numbers? You never hear that stuff (except for 'My Love'). My pal said that Bruce Springsteen sometimes does whole albums (or close to it) live. I wouldn't know cuz I've never been a Springsteen fan, but what a great idea! How cool would it be to hear Ram live, or Band on the Run? You might have to cut the numbers that Denny or the others did, but that's okay. I'd even dig Wild Life. Much better than hearing a half-assed version of 'Drive My Car' again.

Paul's 'Good Evening New York' and John Lennon

The name and cover of Paul's new album is weird on all kinds of levels. The title contains the name of the the city where John Lennon was murdered. I know New York has a lot of other connotations and Beatle connections ('The Ed Sullivan Show', 'Shea Stadium'), but I think if you ask most life-long Beatles' fans over the age of 45, 'What Beatle memories do you have in regards to New York City', I think Lennon's murder is high on the list.

The cover is also odd.

I know it's supposed to convey a sense of Paul greeting the audience, or taking in their applause. But it's a very Christlike pose, and John has a lot of associations with Christ; the 'we're more popular than Jesus' remark, the 'Christ, you know it ain't easy' line in 'The Ballad of John and Yoko', and the fact that, like Jesus, Lennon was a peacenik who was murdered.

The cover also reminds me of the poster for Platoon where Willem Defoe emerges from the jungle, his armed stretched out, after being shot by a fellow soldier. Maybe I'm just being oversensitive, but did any of this stuff I'm talking about even occur to Paul or anyone involved in the artwork and title?

What's so great about John Lennon!?

A neighbor dropped in the other day. I was showing her my record collection and as we perused my Lennon LPs, she asked me, 'What's so great about John Lennon?'. She didn't mean it as a 'dig' at Lennon. She's actually a big music fan and pretty knowledgeable. She was simply, and innocently, asking me to explain something that I take for granted.

For a few moments, I didn't know what to say. Finally, I said 'Well, the Beatles were his band. So it's kind of like asking what's so great about the Beatles? He was their leader, the best singer and best writer, and all around the most interesting.'

And while 'singer' and 'writer' are things we can analyze and discuss using a combination of facts and personal tastes, the 'interesting' part is more complicated. But let's just say he was the funniest, the smartest and the most rebellious. And whereas Paul McCartney has always craved the love and accolades, Lennon didn't really give a damn. He knew he was genius and said so.

The 'Lost' Cassette 3-Pack

Back in 1969 Capitol planned on releasing this little item. Cassettes had been around for a year or so, and this was probably an attempt to promote them. An 8-track version was planned as well.

Somebody objected and it never was released, but a dozen or so copies are known to exist.

The selection of albums is smart. It covers three distinct periods and provides a lot of good stuff:

Meet the Beatles (their hugely popular 'first' LP ), and two albums that are chock full of hits; 'Yesterday'...and Today and Magical Mystery Tour.

The cover is a weird choice, though. It looks like you're buying the White Album.

Mono Box, Stereo Box...is Apple ripping us off?

There are now six versions of the Help! CD.

1) The 1987 mix
2) The new 2009 remastered stereo version of the '87 disc
3) The Capitol stereo mix
4) The Capitol mono mix (on the same CD as the Capitol stereo )
5) The new 2009 mono
6) The '1965' stereo version, included as a bonus on the new mono CD

So which one is my 'go to' Help!? I'd have to say the new remastered 2009 stereo (#2). I would probably give the nod to the new mono, but I don't want to hear back-to-back mono and stereo versions of Help!.

Some people are suggesting that Apple is 'ripping us off' by not putting both new mono and stereo on the same disc for all of the remastered CDs (it's only done on Help! because the 1987 stereo version is not considered 'true' to the 1965 mix. And it's different from the new remastered stereo CD. In other words, there are three 'new' Help! mixes. Confusing, I know).

But I disagree with this 'mono/stereo on the same disc' nonsense. That's 'fan-boy' talk. The vast majority of these CDs are being sold to people who know squat about the Beatles, much less the intricacies of mono versus stereo. It would just be confusing to them.

It's an okay format for the Capitol CDs, which are a novelty for North America baby-boomer fanatics who grew up with those versions. It's not the official canon. I think we're lucky they gave us the Capitol versions and had the insight to know we'd want both mono and stereo. They would've made just as much money and sold as many copies had they just released one version. I don't imagine the powers-that-be sitting around and saying 'We can charge more money if we give them both versions!' No. I think it was more like 'We have to release both because that's what the hardcore fans want.' And putting them on one disc was the most efficient way to do it!

I think Apple did exactly the right thing with this new release: Stereo for the masses and a Mono Box Set for the hardcore loonies like me.

But you know, after all is said and done, my real 'go to' Help! is still my vinyl stereo Capitol album. Because that's the one I had back 'in the day'. I like the 'instrumental' stuff, even though the Beatles hated it and so do most fans. And I like opening the gate-fold and even the lousy graphics on the cover.