Pete Best and Neil Aspinall repaired to the Grapes pub on Mathew Street to take in the shocking news.
’All I want to do is try to get my thoughts together,’ I told him. He was really upset and as disgusted as I was at this sudden, stupefying blow. He began to talk about quitting his job as road manager.‘There’s no need for that,’ I told him. ‘Don’t be a fool – The Beatles are going places.’ …
Once I was home at Hayman’s Green, I broke down and wept. My mother already knew what had happened that morning in Brian’s office, as unknown to me Neil had slipped away at some stage to telephone her. She had been trying in vain to contact Epstein only to find that he was ‘Not available’.
When I was sufficiently recovered from the initial shock, I realised that I had promised to carry on as a Beatle until Ringo’s arrival and that we were due to play Chester that night. Now I knew I could never face it. I had been betrayed and sitting up there on stage with the three people who had done it would be like having salt rubbed into a very deep wound. If they didn’t want me, they would have to get along without me from this moment on and find another drummer..
Beatle! The Pete Best Story, by Pete Best and Patrick Doncaster
John Lennon later said of the dismissal, “We were cowards. We got Epstein to do the dirty work for us.”
News of Best’s sacking from The Beatles was greeted with surprise by many in Liverpool.
I remember seeing Ringo, we called him Ritchie then, outside a chemist’s and he said that he was going to join The Beatles. I said, ‘There was no way they will sack Pete Best, man, He’s a moody guy but all the girls would go waah!’ It was a shock when Ritchie got the job. The next time that I saw Pete he was managing the job centre in Green Lane. I signed on and gave him my dole card and he said, ‘Is this your name and address?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Sign here.’ I don’t think he wanted to acknowledge me.
The Cavern, Spencer Leigh
A fan of the group later headbutted George Harrison at the Cavern, giving him a black eye, and for weeks the band were subjected to chants of “Ringo never, Pete Best forever!”
The decision caused ructions within The Beatles’ camp too. Their assistant and road manager Neil Aspinall was reportedly furious, but was told by the group: “It’s got nothing to do with you – you’re only the driver”.
Also on this day...
- 2019: Ringo Starr and his All-Starr Band live: Bethel Woods Center for the Arts, Bethel
- 2003: Ringo Starr and his All-Starr Band live: Mahaffey Theater, St Petersburg
- 2001: Ringo Starr and his All-Starr Band live: Horseshoe Casino Tunica, Robinsonville
- 1998: Ringo Starr and his All-Starr Band live: Marktrock, Leuven
- 1995: Ringo Starr and his All-Starr Band live: Humphreys Concerts By The Bay, San Diego
- 1992: Ringo Starr and his All-Starr Band live: Riverfest Amphitheater, Little Rock
- 1989: Ringo Starr and his All-Starr Band live: Kingston Fairgrounds, Kingston
- 1973: Recording: One Day (At A Time), Bring On The Lucie (Freeda Peeple), Out The Blue, Only People, You Are Here by John Lennon
- 1972: Wings live: Rheinhalle, Düsseldorf
- 1968: Recording: While My Guitar Gently Weeps
- 1966: The Beatles live: John F Kennedy Stadium, Philadelphia
- 1965: John Lennon’s Mellotron is delivered to Weybridge
- 1965: Day off in New York
- 1964: The Beatles live: Opera House, Blackpool
- 1963: The Beatles live: Odeon Cinema, Llandudno
- 1962: The Beatles live: Riverpark Ballroom, Chester
- 1961: The Beatles live: Cavern Club, Liverpool (evening)
- 1960: Travel: Liverpool to Hamburg
Want more? Visit the Beatles history section.
I suppose I should make an effort to find an original recording with Pete (I suppose the Love Me Do from the Decca session might be a candidate). If Pete had chops and was let go despite this, one might think there was something a bit under-handed about the change. He’d been in the trenches with the band for some time, and perhaps this was forgotten. Hard to dispute GM’s judgement though, and Ringo definitely fit musically.
He’s on several of the Anthology 1 tracks. IMO he wasn’t by any means a terrible drummer, and it was probably mainly his personality that made The Beatles want rid of him.
I read somewhere that his success with female fans led to some conflicts with the other band members, though it may be a bit more complicated than that. I can imagine Pete’s awful predicament as he witnessed their rise to fame and fortune while he sat on the sidlines. At least John admits to feeling bad about their inability to face him personally and do the deed themselves.
Respectfully, but strongly, disagree. Pete wasn’t a terrible drummer- but he clearly wasn’t good enough, either. Compare the three recorded versions of “Love Me Do”- Pete’s drumming is pretty plainly not as good as either Ringo’s, or Andy White’s. His reserved personality, and lack of emotional cohesion with the rest of the band didn’t help- but it was his limited drumming skills that got him fired.
(Mark Lewisohn goes into a lot of detail on this in vol. 1 of his Beatles bio. Lewisohn is pretty hard on Pete in this, maybe too hard- I didn’t think that Pete’s work on “My Bonnie” was all that bad. But I can’t imagine Pete being as good as Ringo on tracks like “Rain”, or “A Day In The Life”.)
That’s right, Pete wasn’t a bad drummer but he was pretty one dimensional. Look at the creativity in the drums on “Tomorrow Never Knows” and the intro on “Ticket to Ride”.
In the former, the drums are really the instrument that creates the entire mood of the song.
Could Pete Best come up with that?
The three guitar-playing Beatles really developed their skills in the long hours of boozing Hamburg halls. And the drums were a dimension that wasn’t keeping up–particularly as the John and Paul started introducing their own songs into the act.
Ringo brought was significantly more accomplished skill set and after he joined, the others noted that the Beatle sound was now complete.
The decision to fire Pete Best was not based on how good of drummer he could be in the future. Given the right set of circumstance Pete Best could have played as good or better or even different on those Beatles songs (“Tomorrow Never Knows” and “Ticket to Ride”).
I believe it was personal, nothing to do with his drumming. He was a quiet introvert guy and did not mix with the other group members socially after gigs etc.
Ringo at best is at best an average drummer they should never have stabbed him in the back and let him carry on i can bet it was jealousy best was the one most of the fans went for and could have brought there band greater fame
That’s not very nice to say about Ringo. He is a very talented and influential drummer whose skills were suitable for The Beatles’ music.
If you listen to the recording of “Love Me Do” with Pete Best on the drums, it sounds like he’s not putting much, if any, effort into playing correctly.
John denied the accusations that Paul was jealous and he said that they only recruited Pete, because they needed a drummer to go to Hamburg with the understanding that they would always discard him once they got a decent drummer, who turned out to be Ringo.
There was 2.5 months from the on day recording session at Abbey Rd to Best being fired. If Harrison (the hawk), McCartney and Lennon had approached Best of his drumming and talked about it and Epstein approached George Martin, Best would have remained the drummer. They had been turned down by all record companies and were on a knife edge. They clearly panicked. Naivety is the word.
BTW,the contract between Epstein and The Beatles was signed in Best’s house.
Saying all that. Best was too shy. He always held his head down and turned his eyes upwards, as if he didn’t want to be in the public eye. He never said much. Imagine him in the Press interviews in the USA that made the Beatles stand out as personalities. He was not outwards and witty like Starr. Starr was in the end the perfect man for the job.
It was either contract or Best. And he was — in total contrast to the others — non-social.
The Beatles had got to know Ringo in Hamburg. And they increasingly hung out together. And in jam sessions, he’d sat in. He had the personality. And his drumming was perfectly suited.
Nail on the head. THAT interview is what cemented the bands image and personality in the eyes of the American public. This was the reason Martin signed them. Listen to him in his own words. He states that tbe tape Epstein brought to him was frankly ‘pretty awful’ there was nothing about their music which made them stand out. He further states that if he had known that they had been rejected by every record company in London , he would have told Brian thanks but no thanks. However he didnt know this and as Epstein was being so persistent he agreed to meet the band in person and see if he would reconsider. Reconsider he did and the reason again was NOT their music but their personalities. His impression was that after he had met them they had made him feel good and he thought if they can have that effect on me they can have it on the public. Thats the reason they got signed and thats the reason Pete got ditched.
Martin was forced to sign the Beatles by his boss L. G. Wood at EMI. Martin was having an affair with his secretary. Wood hated that fact. He was also antagonizing Wood when it came to signing a new contract. His boss didn’t like his attitude, so he saddled him with the Beatles. (Luckily for Martin, this turn of events ended up being incredibly beneficial to him and all parties concerned.) When the Beatles recorded at EMI Studios on June 6, 1962, they’d already been signed. He hadn’t met them prior to this session, showing up at Abbey Road most likely while they were recording “Love Me Do”.
I know you ever notice how Best ALWAYS looks awkward in all of the pics? He looks like the odd man out for sure.
Best got done dirty, but eventually became a millionaire from the ‘Anthology’.
This was due to Neil Aspinall, who had a relationship and a child with Mona Best, Pete’s mom.
In Hamburg, Best didnt turn up to every gig (anthology) so they had to use no drummer, or Ringo when he was there with Rory storm…says it all..
That’s not entirely fair……he missed about 2 gigs the whole time they were in Hamburg. Either due to illness or some other important reason that was out of his control. George also missed a few gigs and John was nowhere to be found at one performance. You gotta remember they were young lads in a very “naughty” part of the world, god knows what they got up to. At least they had a great time doing it!!!!
John Lennon said that Pete Best was a good drummer but Ringo was a better Beatle.
Tony Barrow wrote that in his book, but it may not be true. John never once sanitized or toned down his low opinion of Pete’s drumming style, even dismissing him as a lousy drummer who never improved. Just listen to this interview – and John made no effort to sugarcoat his words once.
He was absolutely correct about Pete’s drumming vs. Ringo’s drumming: Pete tended to drum in one style, no matter the song, whereas Ringo was much more inventive with his own personalized style of never playing the same thing twice.
I have never heard any statements or comments from John where he praised Pete as a drummer.
51 years ago today, Pete Best was sacked from The Beatles. 36 years ago today, Elvis Presley died. Interesting to see how the same calendar day was very significant in 2 of the biggest acts in rock & roll history. Nobody was bigger than Elvis & The Beatles, & it’s likely that no one ever will be…
ELVIS is the bigger
I have read that Paul used to get Pete to try to do anything different with the kick drum instead of just the 1-2-3-4 beat he layed down for all songs. I have been drumming for close to 40 years and can say from the little drumming available to hear of Best, he is not very good at all. While Ringo is not technically good, he is light-years ahead of Pete in terms of driving a song.
There are literally HUNDREDS of Videos on YouTube, both vintage and contemporary of Pete Best drumming…….all over the world. I saw him performing with his band at The Casbah in 2010 and he’s a great drummer, certainly good enough to have played and recorded with The Beatles in 1963 and beyond. To know most of the TRUE STORY behind Pete’s sacking u should watch a video called:
Pete Best Of The Beatles – The Greatest Rock ‘n’ Roll Story Never Told -DVD NEW. It has interviews with the major players of the era including DECCA & Parlophone executives. The whole George Martin “reason” given that he wasn’t good enough was blown out of proportion and has been used out of context for many years. It was just the “excuse” they used to kick him out. The video tells 90% of the story and that’s only b’coz Pete was never given a/the real reason(s) for his dismissal.
There’s two sides to every story
Three sides, his, theirs and the cold hard truth 🙂
It was George Martin’s critical comment that (finally) brought the issue to a head.
Best recorded with the Beatles in Germany and at EMI Abbey Road. Bert Kaemphert and George Martin and associates all thought he was a lousy drummer. The Beatles sacked him because he wasn’t a very good drummer and the fact that he was more of a loner type and didn’t fit in.
Are you saying that you’re better than ringo?
No.I’m saying that i’m better than Ringo!
Imagine a group called the Beatles featuring 2 drummers. Light years ahead of other groups like say the Allman Brothers in the 70s. Just IMAGINE. There was room for Pete. This was obviously a group shafting.I’ve always believed cream will rise to the top no matter, and any fear of not getting”signed” to a label was lame at Best. No pun intended. Just a thought. … loved the guys but feel this was horribly inexcusable. Can only chalk it up to their gullibility from above. The whole music business was obviously getting to John the way he criticized everything later on. Carry on…….
“I know we went about saying we were going to be ‘bigger than Elvis’, but I didn’t believe it and I don’t think the others did either.”
THAT’s why they sacked you Pete. They DID believe.
Also, he was a boring drummer with no feel. Listen to the Decca auditon from New Years 1962 and then listen to Live @ Star Club recorded less then a year later. Tell me that isn’t a MASSIVE improvement in energy.
I hear there was somehow a debate over who actually played drums on it but to anyone that’s a musician or has played drums… it’s very obviously a completely different person with a completely different style.
Also, I gotta chuckle at the whole “they were jealous of his looks and attention from girls” myth that he started. For the record, I don’t think he was particularly more attractive then the rest. Looks like he plucked his eyebrows to perfection though. Stu was much better looking then Pete without trying. 😛
The truth is Pete was damn lucky to have been able to play with them at all, which is more then the rest of us ever will. He was at the right place at the right time and was there when they were desperate… and his mum had money and influence in the neighborhood.
How many of us have accepted subpar musicians starting out cause you got gigs to do and there’s no one else available? lol
Interesting debate by all. Personally I think it was both the mediocre drumming and inability to fit in that made a change necessary. And Ringo developed into the perfect fit.
If Pete was interested in succeeding, he would have been more compliant with Brian’s wishes for their direction as well as lose the ‘moody’ cloak.
It was an act of backstabbing. But that was history. Nothing can be done to change this. In retrospect: The Beatles without Ringo is unthinkable. Joh, Paul, George and Ringo are the Fab Four (gladly).
the reality is this; they needed a drummer to go with them to Hamburg. Best was the only guy they could grab at the last minute to go with them. He could barely keep a beat, but they were just happy to have someone, anyone to fill the spot. He was never very good, and of course it showed when it came to recording. They needed a real drummer, so they could progress as band. And that’s the cold hard truth. People get fired all the time from jobs. Just so happened that the Beatles became the biggest band in history. I don’t know why this is so hard for people to accept.
This ‘Pete Best could hardly hold a beat, he was only hired because he owned a kit’ argument might have worked, if they’d kept him for one gig – or even one tour of Hamburg. They actually kept him for over 2 years and HUNDREDS of gigs…
I don’t doubt Ringo was a better drummer, Best was a bit old fashioned and not nearly so imaginative, but he must have been at least ‘adequate’ live. The truth is they treated Pete Best very shabbily. In order to justify their treatment, they then bad mouth his drumming after the event. Nasty.
Short and sweet at last someone with common sense he was a good drummer .
But fell from grace with the rest of the band
Ringo was more fun going with the band which fitted in with the rest he was no better a drummer and no worse right place right time the rest is history
Pete’s playing was generic for the time…..it was sufficient, but, not distinctive and different, like Ringo’s was. Don’t forget…George Martin didn’t like Ringo EITHER and he brought in Andy White…thank-you very much!
The three Beatles instinctively knew that Ringo’s style and sound fit them a lot better…he was left handed playing a right handed kit … that led Ringo into producing different, and sometimes awkward beats on the drums which Lennon and McCartney just hammered along with LOUDLY, actually creating the true “Rock and Roll” genre we know today. Best NEVER would have done that ! Ringo ROCKED !!…BEFORE ANYONE ELSE !! The other 3 NEVER would have played as well as they did without Ringo driving them to a new level.
Regardless of the real reason why Pete Best was fired it was completely spineless and despicable of them not to have honestly told him face to face rather than deciding and arranging things behind his back.
As an 11year old in 1962, I started drumming and loved it. In 1963 I discovered the Beatles, and taught myself to play following Ringo. Then I learned about the story of Pete Best. I think myself and most drummers from that day became very vulnerable, and worked double hard to become so good that they Couldn’t be sacked. I also learned to write songs play piano and guitar as a backup (just in case) . I was always heartbroken for Pete, but thankful that he made me work hard.Ironically, I was sacked from my first group…..but I didn’t let that happen again? thank you Pete Best. Paul
By late 1962, the Beatles were a business, not just a fun band with an avid following. They had a business manager whose job it was to do the business. Hence, Brian fired Pete. Pretty low to ask if he would play three more gigs; don’t fire someone until they are no longer useful to you. That part should have been handled better.
John, Paul and George did later regret the way that Pete’s dismissal was handled.
A point that George Martin himself made: he never told Epstein to fire Pete. Even if Martin used a session drummer in the studio, Epstein was free to continue using Pete in concert; in fact Martin assumed that he would. It was not unusual for record companies to replace band members with session musicians in the studio (I attended a Beatle convention in the 1980s where Andy White was a guest. He was asked “What else have you played on that we would know?” He answered “I drummed on the Dave Clark Five records. [Gasps from the audience.] They never played in the studio.”)
I saw a documentary on the Wrecking Crew, in which a producer explained why he preferred working with session musicians; it wasn’t that the stars couldn’t play in the studio, it was that they took several takes to get it right, while session musicians could get it in one take. To a producer, it was simply more efficient to use session musicians.
In the documentary The Compleat Beatles, Martin said that when he told Epstein about using another drummer, Epstein indicated that he had been thinking the same thing. So the Beatles didn’t need to dump Pete to record with EMI. They wanted him out before that. So why wait until then to replace him? This is just a guess on my part, but I suspect they were waiting until they had a recording contract to use as bait to get Ringo to join.