Log In
Register
Read the original blog post
4.29pm
31 March 2008
Offline
Written by: Lennon-McCartney
Recorded: 27 February 1964
Producer: George Martin
Engineer: Norman Smith
Released: 10 July 1964 (UK), 26 June 1964 (US)
John Lennon: lead vocals, rhythm guitar
Paul McCartney: harmony vocals, bass
George Harrison: harmony vocals, lead guitar
Ringo Starr: drums
George Martin: piano
Available on:
A Hard Day’s Night
One of the more uptempo rockers…
Can 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!
1.55pm
15 October 2015
Offline So what is it that they sing in falsetto, and why did it make it to vinyl when the words are mostly garbled?
I’m also curious, does falsetto singing grate on anyone else as much as me? Other than its use in background harmonies, which are great.
... and in her eyes, U.C. Nothing ...
2.05pm
8 January 2015
Offline
They’re singing Is there anything I can do?, and I’ve never had any trouble making that out 😀 One of the things about earlier Beatles songs (and boy bands in general) that boys themselves don’t often understand, is that girls like the falsetto singing, particularly in emotive “drama” songs like this one; John had a fondness for writing them and they got edgier as time went on. This is completely premeditated, the Beatles knew exactly what they were doing and they were very very good at it.
So if it grates on you, I’m sorry but it really isn’t for your benefit. 😀
I'm like Necko only I'm a bassist ukulele guitar synthesizer kazoo penguin and also everyone. Or is everyone me? Now I'm a confused bassist ukulele guitar synthesizer kazoo penguin everyone who is definitely not @Joe. This has been true for 2016 & 2017 
but I may have to get more specific in the future.
4.36pm
5 February 2014
Offline ewe2 said
They’re singing Is there anything I can do?, and I’ve never had any trouble making that out 😀 One of the things about earlier Beatles songs (and boy bands in general) that boys themselves don’t often understand, is that girls like the falsetto singing, particularly in emotive “drama” songs like this one; John had a fondness for writing them and they got edgier as time went on. This is completely premeditated, the Beatles knew exactly what they were doing and they were very very good at it.So if it grates on you, I’m sorry but it really isn’t for your benefit. 😀
That grates.
The following people thank C.R.A. for this post:
Beatlebug, SaxonMothersSon5.33pm
Moderators
15 February 2015
Offline I had trouble understanding it as well when I first heard it, until my dad said, ‘If there’s anything I can dooooo’ and it made perfect sense after that. Actually I find that to be much less garbled than a lot of the other lines.
([{BRACKETS!}])
New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here.
If you love The Beatles Bible, and you have adblock, don't forget to white-list this site! 
6.07pm
8 January 2015
Offline C.R.A. said
That grates.
True nonetheless, they were the original boy band. At least, that’s how the industry reacted. Obviously the Beatles moved on, but the industry is still entranced by the idea. Screaming girls = shifting units.
I'm like Necko only I'm a bassist ukulele guitar synthesizer kazoo penguin and also everyone. Or is everyone me? Now I'm a confused bassist ukulele guitar synthesizer kazoo penguin everyone who is definitely not @Joe. This has been true for 2016 & 2017 but I may have to get more specific in the future.
6.12pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline The Beatles weren’t a boy band.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
Beatlebug, Zig, C.R.A., Paul Prole"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
7.47pm
22 September 2014
Offline I think ewe2 is referring to a very broad descriptive category, like Wiklpedia’s:
A boy band (or boyband) is loosely defined as a vocal group consisting of young male singers, usually in their teenage years or in their twenties at the time of formation,[1] singing love songs marketed towards young females.
mmm is thinking more in line with the Urban Dictionary view:
A group(usually 4 or 5) sissy boys who do NOT play instruments. sing crappy pop music; stupid gay love songs that they didn’t even write themselves. only pre-teens and teenie boopers like them.
The following people thank georgiewood for this post:
Beatlebug, Ahhh Girl, ewe2I say in speeches that a plausible mission of artists is to make people appreciate being alive at least a little bit. I am then asked if I know of any artists who pulled that off. I reply, 'The Beatles did'.
Kurt Vonnegut, Timequake, 1997
7.51pm
1 November 2013
Offline meanmistermustard said
The Beatles weren’t a boy band.
So they were a girl band?
The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:
Little Piggy Dragonguy
1.44am
8 January 2015
Offline georgiewood said
I think ewe2 is referring to a very broad descriptive category, like Wiklpedia’s:
Precisely, it’s an industry description, not an opinion. It’s what we’d call it now, but at the time there was no precedent, certainly not on that scale. You have to understand the industry mindset: they want to do the easy cheap thing that works, they’re not original, and they tried for years to figure out how to replicate the Beatles success. The ironic thing is that you really do need a talented, charismatic group of guys, it’s akin to finding a really good ensemble of actors. The further irony is that some of these guys are good enough to have their own career, not that the industry cares, that’s just a bonus. There’s only ever been a few really good boy bands and a ton of lame ones.
The following people thank ewe2 for this post:
BeatlebugI'm like Necko only I'm a bassist ukulele guitar synthesizer kazoo penguin and also everyone. Or is everyone me? Now I'm a confused bassist ukulele guitar synthesizer kazoo penguin everyone who is definitely not @Joe. This has been true for 2016 & 2017 but I may have to get more specific in the future.
9.31am
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline ewe2 said
Precisely, it’s an industry description, not an opinion. It’s what we’d call it now, but at the time there was no precedent, certainly not on that scale. You have to understand the industry mindset: they want to do the easy cheap thing that works, they’re not original, and they tried for years to figure out how to replicate the Beatles success. The ironic thing is that you really do need a talented, charismatic group of guys, it’s akin to finding a really good ensemble of actors. The further irony is that some of these guys are good enough to have their own career, not that the industry cares, that’s just a bonus. There’s only ever been a few really good boy bands and a ton of lame ones.
I recently read an interesting take on “boy band” criteria – it may have been from Bono, love him or hate him. He said something along the lines that members of most great rock bands meet as friends over time – either through school, or clubs or what have you. Boy band members meet at the audition.
It irks me more than most when I hear the label “boy band” being thrust on The Beatles.
The following people thank Zig for this post:
C.R.A., BeatlebugTo the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
9.37am
1 November 2013
Offline I don’t think the term boy band is a bad thing.
9.41am
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline In a vacuum, I agree. Millions of people spend money on the music – I get that they are popular. But when someone foolishly tries to cram The Beatles into that category, it is laughable.
The following people thank Zig for this post:
C.R.A., BeatlebugTo the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
9.44am
1 November 2013
Offline So are they a man band 
The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:
Zig, Beatlebug9.47am
Moderators
Members
Reviewers
20 August 2013
Offline They are The Beatles. Period.
And to answer U.C.Nothing’s question, nope the falsetto doesn’t bother me at all. I quite enjoy it on this song.
The following people thank Ahhh Girl for this post:
C.R.A., BeatlebugCan buy Joe love! Amazon | iTunes
Check here for "how do I do this" guide to the forum. 
(2017) 
(2018)
9.52am
1 November 2013
Offline Ahhh Girl said
They are The Beatles. Period.And to answer U.C.Nothing’s question, nope the falsetto doesn’t bother me at all. I quite enjoy it on this song.
The Beatles. Period. has a nice ring to it.
I’m fine with falsettos sometimes if it gets to high and lasts for the whole song then I don’t like it.
The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:
Ahhh Girl10.04am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline 
Annadog40 said
meanmistermustard said
The Beatles weren’t a boy band.So they were a girl band?
They were neither.
They were never a boyband as, like Zig explained, they werent formed by anyone to meet any requirements, a gap in the market or manipulate a fan group(s) (tho all existed and all did happen in time). Record companies didnt want to touch the Beatles even when they were cleaned up and they got in the door thru a hell of a lot of hard work, massive talent, charisma, loyal fans who pushed hard to get them thru, others who pushed the group because they were damn good and different, because Brain had a good reputation thru his business, worked his backside off and wasn’t a creep like most others, and a hell of a lot of luck and good timing.
Most boybands have zero or little say in what they do or their image, they generally tow the line and do what they are told; yes Brian helped shape the Beatles image but he never got them to be what they weren’t or dress in a way they didn’t want to be or release material they didnt like; ‘How Do You Do It ‘ was the only track they professionally recorded that they despised but it was never released.
The Monkees were the first boyband, created in the mold of the Beatles, and they weren’t cissies or sang crap songs.
Annadog40 said
I don’t think the term boy band is a bad thing.
It certainly doesnt have to be, their reputation and legacy should be based on their output not how they were formed or where. However most acts that do come thu nowadays are off the conveyor belt of badly written songs that sound like they were recorded in 5 minutes on a computer before having autotune applied to hopefully cover up the flaws.
Back on topic, i really like the song and the falsetto line. A nice touch to bring something different to the track. As with ‘When I Get Home ‘ its pure pop filler that blisters along full speed for just over two minutes with me hanging on for dear life loving the ride.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
C.R.A., Beatlebug, Zig"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
5.08pm
15 October 2015
Offline Well, this song doesn’t grate on me either, but I couldn’t understand the short use of falsetto.
The falsettos that I was referring to as grating was the stuff that groups like the BeeGees were doing after the music died (the Beatles’ folding) back in the 70s.
I take exception and don’t believe that girls really like that.
I also can’t stand whatever that falsetto-screaming thing is that Led Zeppelin started and other groups emulated, either.
So my opinion differs from others here… but I got a conversation going. 🙂
... and in her eyes, U.C. Nothing ...
5.33pm
17 October 2013
Offline I think most simply misunderstood because you carnt spel ‘great’.
The following people thank Wigwam for this post:
U.C.Nothing, georgiewood, ewe2, Beatlebug7.38pm
22 September 2014
Offline I don’t mind a quality falsetto. Look at the weird and wonderful thing that Frankie Valli did to Dylan:
I say in speeches that a plausible mission of artists is to make people appreciate being alive at least a little bit. I am then asked if I know of any artists who pulled that off. I reply, 'The Beatles did'.
Kurt Vonnegut, Timequake, 1997
1 Guest(s)