One of The Beatles’ earliest original compositions, ‘Cayenne’ was recorded at Paul McCartney’s family home in Liverpool in 1960.
‘Cayenne’ was written by McCartney alone, although his songwriting partnership with John Lennon had already begun. An instrumental, the tune shows the clear influence of The Shadows on the group’s early songwriting,
The Beatles recorded themselves rehearsing at McCartney’s home at 20 Forthlin Road, Liverpool, in the spring or early summer of 1960. At the time they rarely played live, and kept the momentum in the group by writing and recording demos, one of which was ‘Cayenne’.
‘Cayenne’ was released in 1995 on Anthology 1, along with two other songs from the Forthlin Road recording – ‘Hallelujah, I Love Her So’ and ‘You’ll Be Mine’.
The tune had existed on bootlegs for some time prior to its official release, in a version lasting 2’30”. The Anthology 1 version was slightly sped up and faded out prematurely, with a running time of just 1:14.
It says this song was recorded in 1960 but the articles for Hallelujah and You’ll Be Mine say 1961.
Were they calling themselves the Beatles at this point? Just curious.
Thanks for pointing that out. It was a mistake on the other two articles. I’ve corrected the pages now.
Nothing about the other title “Looking Glass”? What you think about CD “The Beatles at home”?
If it’s a bootleg, I’ve heard various ones but not that one. Cayenne is the official title, as that’s how it’s listed on Anthology 1. If bootleggers made up titles before the album was released then that’s up to them.
If you listen to this and the other songs from the recording you will hear that there are only two electric guitars audible and a bass. Mark Lewisohn suggests that George could have been at work as you never hear three guitars or his voice.
Possible, although it sounds like McCartney and Harrison took turns with the solo in this song. 0:24-1:03 sounds like Harrison.
Yes – I have just noticed that too. I can also hear Stuart Sutcliffe playing bass (can you believe that he died 60 years ago today?) and he sounds like he’s playing just fine.
How was it recorded at Paul’s home.? People didn’t have tape recorders back then because the compact cassette hadn’t been invented. If they had a tape recorder I would have thought it would have been a very expensive piece of kit in 1960-61.
It’s called “reel-to-reel”, and there were plenty of them of various quality available. Apparently Paul or his dad owned one, or he borrowed one. Both scenarios are not only highly plausible but obviously the case.
Well, my question is FIVE questions actually – reagrding ‘Cayenne’:
1) Has anyone ever put words to it?
2) If they did, would that be illgal without Paul Mc.Cartney’s permission?
3) Or would it be perfectly permissible – so long as the lyricist credited Mc.Cartney with writing the music?
4) Would Mc. Cartney then be enttitled to claim any royalties on its performance and/or publishing/recording as a song with lyrics?
3) Who owns the rights on the piece now?
To my knowledge:
01. No. Not yet, at least
02. No, it would be legal as long McCartney’s name as composer is credited
03. As per answer 02
04. This can very much be the case, or not. Surely Paul owns the publishing rights of the piece by now, so, so to speak, its music. If someone else puts words onto the music, he might release the song as a joint publishing with MPL Communications (Paul’s publishing company) and the company admistering his part (Words) on the song. Normally this is the case, but Paul, especially publishing-wise, is sort of a control freak, so maybe he can ask to own the song completely, still sharing the credit and the profits of the song with the co-author.
05. As per answer 04, MPL Communications Inc./Ltd., so Paul McCartney
I have a theory that one day in 1966, Paul listened to this tape, and reworked this song into Eleanor Rigby. Think about it, it has pretty much the same chord progression!!!
I never heard of a piece called ‘Looking Glass’. If it ever existed at all, my guess would be that it was never finished or properly worked up into a number.
But then .. I wonder if ‘Glass Onion’ from the ‘White Album’ took the inpisration for its title (or any of its idea conent) from that (‘Looking Glass’ – if such a peice ever exsted?)… or was all that latter just another product of John Lennnon’s ever ferile, and offbeat imgination (hidden pun there too, of course!). Cf. the “plaseticne porters with looking glass ties” of ‘Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds’ (and Paul referenced that, in turn, in ‘Lady Madonna’ – along with a lyric ‘snatch’ from Lennon’s ‘I Am the Walrus’ (“see how they run”))… whixh song some say was also a rehash of an old half-finihsed song of yore as well).
”Glass Onion’ says, does it not that “the Walrus was Paul; we’re as close as can be” (Hence: “I am he as you are me and we are all together”)…
We do know that when it came to late 1968 and The Bealtes had no offerings planned as such, they had had nothing of scale out since ‘Magical Mystery Tour’ double EP (of late 1967), and the recieved widsom is that they then had (in late 1968) enough semi-worked mateiral ‘lying around’ to put together a double album. As far as can be established that’s all that the ‘White Album’ was really – a sort of ‘scoop-up’ or ’round up’ of much of this material. Maybe that explains why – according to the critics, and I have to agree – it was a real mixed bag assortment of stuff; a few brilliant numbers, and sone utter rubbish… and quite a it that was in between!
However, we have no way of knowing – at this remove of time, with Sutcliffe, Lennon and Harrison all passed away, as well as Epstein and George Martin – we have no way of knowing how OLD any of this material was by first origin. And maybe Ringo (who was not even wiith them in thier early days) and Paul himself, prefer not to recall – or don’t recall (unlikely!)
Thier press agent, DEREK TAYOR – who wrote the intriguiing sleeve notes to ‘Bealtes for Sale’ (the last album from their active days to have sleeve notes at all): Taylor opined there that, even then (at the end of 1964) The Beatles already had enough origianl material written to keep up a steady rate of output of wholly self-penned creations until the year 1975! (Check out those sleeve notes!).
We do know that they did revive and rework old numbers that had been ‘on the back burner’ unfinished for years – like ‘When I’m 64’ (which was originally one of their early ‘half-serious’ novelty pieces back in the days of The Cavern). Anyone else conur such a theory? Any other suggestions??
Why the comments about a “Shadows Influence” on the Beatles. The Beatles have always been clear, including in the Hunter Davies bio, the did not like the Shadows or Cliff Richard and saw them as pap music.
Absolutely agree E. Lopez. More than one biographer has opined that the rash of Shadows instrumentals in the early 60s (to quote one source – whose name escpaes me for the moment) “all this would have made the Bealtes puke”. Just because it’s an instrumental – that’s not enough reason for such a comparison.
Come on, even the name implies it’s a Shadows homage/spoof! Cayenne – Apache- Comanche… all pre-colombian indians. Another one is Cry for a Shadow… do you think it’s a coincidence? Maybe they didn’t dig the surf-instrumental scene too much, but for sure they capitalised on it for the gigs. They were still looking for a style, so they explored many. For sure they were a lot more eclectic than the average band back then.
I think you’re referring to the Cheyenne, not Cayenne, people of the American Great Plains. As far as I know, Cayenne is a capital city in French Guiana and also a type of pepper…aaahchoo!