Log In
Register
Read the original blog post
3.03pm
20 January 2012
Offline
You know I love that woman of mine
And I need her all of the time
Now I'm telling you
That woman, the woman don't make me blue
I can’t understand why the part above , was splitted in original version
...They've forgotten all about God
He's the only reason we exist...
3.22pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline I think George was right to omit them in the final recording as they seem to jar the song. It flows better without them, going from the solo straight to the final verse.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
Beatlebug"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
8.40pm
5 November 2011
Offline I think it makes the song seem a bit more profesionals without those ones, and I don't think that the song would flow as nice as it does had he left them in.
The following people thank Little Piggy Dragonguy for this post:
BeatlebugAll living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
10.36pm
4 December 2010
Offline The lyrics to that section are quite weak and forced, even though George sings them very well.
The following people thank The Walrus for this post:
BeatlebugI told her I didn’t
4.04am
9 February 2012
Offline Undoubtedly one of the all-time greatest songs.
"'I Dig a Pygmy', by Charles Hawtrey and the Deaf Aids... Phase One, in which Doris gets her oats!"
5.19am
11 September 2011
Offline Honestly, I don't think George was ever that consistent of a lyricist and I'm sure he scrapped a lot of lyrics like that which were just obviously low quality like that verse. As for the song itself, I have to dissent for the popular opinion–I think it is a very well-recorded and well-performed song on the album, but the song itself is kind of weak and boring compositionally. It's why no one has ever done a decent cover it (I think Frank Sinatra's version plenty much killed the song for me for all eternity). A well-written song should be able to be performed by many different musicians and hold up. George wrote plenty of songs of that quality–WMGGW, I Me Mine , My Sweet Lord to name a few–but this one just don't hold up being performed beyond the original recording. That makes it a classic recording, but not much else.
The following people thank Happiness is a warm gun for this post:
RobGeurtsenI'm not a girl who misses much.
3.39pm
31 March 2008
Offline
I’m trying to find a quote about Something which I remember reading recently. Can anyone help? If I remember correctly, Harrison mentions how he recorded the solo when he was drunk, then forgot all about it until he came to hear it back another time. When he did he was pleasantly surprised at how it sounded.
Does that sound familiar? Can anyone provide the actual quote? I thought I’d have put it in the Something article, but for some reason I didn’t.
The following people thank Joe for this post:
Shamrock WomlbsCan buy me love! Please consider supporting the Beatles Bible on Amazon
Or buy my paperback/ebook! Riding So High – The Beatles and Drugs
Don't miss The Bowie Bible – now live!
2.11am
8 January 2014
Offline Why did the Beatles release Something as a double-A side rather than give it its own 45?
I’ve always wondered about that. It’s so great. As I recall, Come Together was more played, shouldn’t have been.
3.38am
9 January 2014
Offline It is great. I agree. However, it never occurred to me that they were giving Something short shrift by pairing it up with Come Together . Several Beatles singles were double-A’s. I don’t Day Tripper or Eleanor Rigby or Strawberry Fields suffered particularly because they were double A’s. And while I prefer Something myself, I do think that Come Together deserved to be an A-side too.
5.19am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
It is important to remember that Something /Come Together was not so much a Beatles single as an Allen Klein single. Its release saw, for the first time in the group’s history, UK product released to make money. While there was the occasion (Eleanor Rigby /Yellow Submarine and Revolver ) when material included on an album was released as a single on the same day as the album, there was not one example in their run of UK singles of one being released featuring album material after the album had been released.
The fact that Klein was restricted to choosing material from Abbey Road limited his choices. He had no unreleased track that he could get approval to use as a b-side, and choosing a song by each of his most important supporters in the group was a good political move. Giving George his first a-side would strengthen his influence with George, but making the John song a b-side would not have gone down well with John. So you end up with a double a-side.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
Shamrock Womlbs, RobGeurtsen"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
8.13am
17 October 2013
Offline Excellent assessment mja.
5.32pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline Atlas said
Excellent assessment mja.
Thanks. It is just my view of it though, doesn’t mean someone else might not come up with a better explanation.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
5.38pm
16 September 2013
Offline mja6758 said
It is important to remember that Something /Come Together was not so much a Beatles single as an Allen Klein single. Its release saw, for the first time in the group’s history, UK product released to make money. While there was the occasion (Eleanor Rigby /Yellow Submarine and Revolver ) when material included on an album was released as a single on the same day as the album, there was not one example in their run of UK singles of one being released featuring album material after the album had been released.The fact that Klein was restricted to choosing material from Abbey Road limited his choices. He had no unreleased track that he could get approval to use as a b-side, and choosing a song by each of his most important supporters in the group was a good political move. Giving George his first a-side would strengthen his influence with George, but making the John song a b-side would not have gone down well with John. So you end up with a double a-side.
This is fascinating information, mja. Thanks for your insights into this. From a purely marketing, money-making angle, I wonder why the Beatles’ bean-counters weren’t able to insist on an unused track to occupy the b-side of the Something single. It seems to me that if they had put an abandoned leftover, like “What’s The New Mary Jane ” on the flipside, that the single would have sold more units just based on the many collectors’ desires for rarities. Maybe that thinking was too new for that era.
All this talk about the “double-A sided single” makes me think of how The Rutles would have crafted a comedy bit about the extremely rare “Double-B sided single.” 
6.22pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline Bungalow Bob said
From a purely marketing, money-making angle, I wonder why the Beatles’ bean-counters weren’t able to insist on an unused track to occupy the b-side of the Something single.
The simple answer to that is that The Beatles themselves had to say yes to UK releases. They themselves were not at all keen on seeing the single released in the UK, and it took lots of persuading and badgering from Klein (bean-counter #1 at the time) to get their agreement. That this argument was going on is shown by the time-lag of around three weeks between the US and UK release of the single.
Capitol had no need to worry about what The Beatles thought — as was constantly shown by their ’60s releases — but EMI, who believed they were still an active group, and their Golden Egg, did.
The bean-counters could insist on nothing in the UK that The Beatles themselves did not agree to.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
7.50pm
22 December 2013
Offline Bungalow Bob said
All this talk about the “double-A sided single” makes me think of how The Rutles would have crafted a comedy bit about the extremely rare “Double-B sided single.”
As comical as this idea may sound, it nearly did happen only months after the ‘Something /Come Together ‘ single appeared. There were stories of ‘You Know My Name (Look Up The Number)’ being targeted for the “A-Side” to ‘What’s The New Mary Jane ?’ before they decided on using the single version of ‘Let It Be ‘ instead, which differs from the album version, that would’ve been a “Double-B sided single” if there ever was one!..:-)
8.03pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline Billy Rhythm said
Bungalow Bob said
All this talk about the “double-A sided single” makes me think of how The Rutles would have crafted a comedy bit about the extremely rare “Double-B sided single.”
As comical as this idea may sound, it nearly did happen only months after the ‘Something /Come Together ‘ single appeared. There were stories of ‘You Know My Name (Look Up The Number)’ being targeted for the “A-Side” to ‘What’s The New Mary Jane ?’ before they decided on using the single version of ‘Let It Be ‘ instead, which differs from the album version, that would’ve been a “Double-B sided single” if there ever was one!..:-)
That was happening virtually parallel. The new mixes of Mary Jane were made a month before Something /Come Together on 11 September while the final work on it and You Know My Name happened a month after, on 26 November. John wanted them released as a Plastic Ono Band single (“[with instrumental backing from a group] of many of the greatest show business names of today”). A date was set, 5 December 1969, a catalogue number assigned, APPLES 1002, copies pressed, and then the others blocked Beatles recordings being released as Plastic Ono Band recordings.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
9.19pm
8 January 2014
Offline They should’ve made Walrus a double A side. Meanwhile, even though Daytripper is listed as a double A-side, Cashbox Magazine and others did not include it in their chart listings.
9.24pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline Day Tripper did make #5 on the Billboard chart however, which is the chart used for US chart statistics nowadays.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
5.08pm
22 December 2013
Offline mja6758 said
Billy Rhythm said
Bungalow Bob said
All this talk about the “double-A sided single” makes me think of how The Rutles would have crafted a comedy bit about the extremely rare “Double-B sided single.”
As comical as this idea may sound, it nearly did happen only months after the ‘Something /Come Together ‘ single appeared. There were stories of ‘You Know My Name (Look Up The Number)’ being targeted for the “A-Side” to ‘What’s The New Mary Jane ?’ before they decided on using the single version of ‘Let It Be ‘ instead, which differs from the album version, that would’ve been a “Double-B sided single” if there ever was one!..:-)
That was happening virtually parallel. The new mixes of Mary Jane were made a month before Something /Come Together on 11 September while the final work on it and You Know My Name happened a month after, on 26 November. John wanted them released as a Plastic Ono Band single (“[with instrumental backing from a group] of many of the greatest show business names of today”). A date was set, 5 December 1969, a catalogue number assigned, APPLES 1002, copies pressed, and then the others blocked Beatles recordings being released as Plastic Ono Band recordings.
I wonder how many “copies pressed” there were, they’d be worth their weight in gold today, it would have been most interesting to see just how well that single would’ve performed on the charts of the day…:-)
9.05pm
25 October 2014
Offline Hello everyone,
I am currently in an intro to music class. We have been asked to do a musical analysis of a favorite song and I have chosen “Something .”
We have had to answer questions about the form, dynamics, etc.
I’m just confused on the tempo. Not sure if I am counting it right, but I think it is 66 or 67 BPM. We have to the describe the tempo in an Italian term…so the song is in Adagio tempo.
Anyways, we also have the explain the mood, story, and the intended audience of this song.
In my opinion, this is hard to answer as we can all have certain attachments to songs and hear them differently than others. Therefore it is hard to take a favorite song and break it down with music terminology. :/
So, looking at all aspects of this song from the lyrics to the tempo and dynamics…
It’s the inner dialogue of the idea of loving a woman. He is troubled, he may want to move on, but he can’t because there is something about her.
She knows this too “Something in her smile she knows.”
And this thus creates a conflict that we get to hear in the bridge of the song:
“Your asking me if my love will grow.
I don’t know, I don’t know.
You stick around now it may show.
I don’t know, I don’t know.”
The change in rhythm, dynamic and lyrics tell us that:
She is asking him if his love for her will grow, but he doesn’t know. He tells her if she sticks around it may show, but he can’t be sure.
This is, in general, about every relationship. Will a couple, in a relationship, still love each other down the road, but no one knows for sure unless both people wait it out.
He is agitated by the question, because truthfully life doesn’t work this way. We can’t make promises because life can change abruptly in many ways and so can our feelings.
I feel as if this song is for anyone who is in love, whether it be a new love or a love that has been going on for years.
I would love to know anyone else’s idea of the meaning of this song.
The following people thank ieatglitter for this post:
RobGeurtsen
1 Guest(s)