In the studio
The Beatles began recording ‘A Day In The Life’ on 19 January 1967, initially with the working title ‘In The Life Of…’ Four takes were attempted of the rhythm track – bongos, maracas, piano and guitar. Onto the fourth take were added three vocal overdubs by John Lennon, with high levels of tape echo.There was so much echo on ‘A Day In The Life’. We’d send a feed from John’s vocal mike into a mono tape machine and then tape the output – because they had separate record and replay heads – and then feed that back in again. Then we’d turn up the record level until it started to feed back on itself and give a twittery sort of vocal sound. John was hearing that echo in his cans as he was singing. It wasn’t put on after. He used his own echo as a rhythmic feel for many of the songs he sang, phrasing his voice around the echo.
On that first day Mal Evans counted out the bars in the instrumental sections, and sounded the alarm clock. Paul McCartney had yet to write the words for the middle passage, so it was left as an instrumental at this point.
The next day ‘A Day In The Life’, as it was then known, received more overdubs: another Lennon vocal, plus bass from McCartney and drums from Ringo Starr. McCartney also added a vocal for the middle section. This was re-recorded on 3 February, but can be heard on Anthology 2.
Along with McCartney’s new vocals, 3 February also saw the re-recording of the drum and bass parts, all originally taped on 20 January. It was at this point that Starr’s distinctive tom-tom fills were added.
We persuaded Ringo to play tom-toms. It’s sensational. He normally didn’t like to play lead drums, as it were, but we coached him through it. We said, ‘Come on, you’re fantastic, this will be really beautiful,’ and indeed it was.
Anthology
10 February was the day the orchestra recorded the climactic instrumental passages. The day’s recording was filmed, but the resulting footage remained unseen until a short passage appeared in the Anthology series.
The musicians wore evening dress, and fancy dress items including red noses, bald wigs and novelty glasses. Erich Guenberg, leader of the violins, wore a gorilla paw on his bow hand. Friends of The Beatles, including Mick Jagger, Marianne Faithfull, Keith Richards, Mike Nesmith and Donovan, were also present for what was intended as an event.
The song was finally completed on 22 February, when the final crashing piano chord was recorded. This took nine attempts to get right, and was overdubbed three times with more pianos and a harmonium played by George Martin.
Geoff Emerick was in charge of recording the instruments. To capture every last droplet of sound – including the rustling of paper and a squeaking chair – he used heavy compression and careful manipulation of the faders.
By the end the attenuation was enormous. You could have heard a pin drop.
The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions, Mark Lewisohn
The BBC ban
I had this sequence that fitted, ‘Woke up, fell out of bed’, and we had to link them. This was the time of Tim Leary’s ‘Turn on, tune in, drop out’ and we wrote, ‘I’d love to turn you on.’ John and I gave each other a knowing look: ‘Uh-huh, it’s a drug song. You know that, don’t you?’
Many Years From Now, Barry Miles
A week before the release of Sgt Pepper, the BBC’s director of sound broadcasting, Frank Gillard, wrote to EMI head Sir Joseph Lockwood with the news that the corporation was banning ‘A Day In The Life’ due to the refrain “I’d love to turn you on”.
Gillard’s letter, dated 23 May 1967, read:
I never thought the day would come when we would have to put a ban on an EMI record, but sadly, that is what has happened over this track. We have listened to it over and over again with great care, and we cannot avoid coming to the conclusion that the words “I’d love to turn you on”, followed by that mounting montage of sound, could have a rather sinister meaning.The recording may have been made in innocence and good faith, but we must take account of the interpretation that many young people would inevitably put upon it. “Turned on” is a phrase which can be used in many different circumstances, but it is currently much in vogue in the jargon of the drug-addicts. We do not feel that we can take the responsibility of appearing to favour or encourage those unfortunate habits, and that is why we shall not be playing the recording in any of our programmes, Radio or Television.
I expect we shall meet with some embarrassment over this decision, which has already been noted by the Press. We will do our best not to appear to be criticising your people, but as you will realise, we do find ourselves in a very difficult position. I thought you would like to know why we have, most reluctantly, taken this decision.
The Beatles hit back at the decision, with Paul McCartney telling reporters: “The BBC have misinterpreted the song. It has nothing to do with drug taking. It’s only about a dream.” John Lennon added: “The laugh is that Paul and I wrote this song from a headline in a newspaper. It’s about a crash and its victim. How can anyone read drugs into it is beyond me. Everyone seems to be falling overboard to see the word drug in the most innocent of phrases.”
My Aunt gave me a copy of Sgt Pepper when I was 7 and I got to know it inside out during my formative years as a gifted air guitarist. I was always fascinated how the album ended with this song, it was so jarring. Like the ending of the Planet of the Apes (1968). A few years later I was a paperboy and delivered the news of Lennon’s assassination. For several days I listened to this song and stared at his picture on the cover, and read over the lyrics in disbelief.
Awesome album/song, like EVERY album/song The Beatles wrote. RIP John and George !!
George plays guitar, at least on the first take. You can clearly hear John Lennon say, “my maracas” in the Anthology version. Geoff Emerick is known to overlook George’s contribution to the Beatles’ songs.
Geoff Emerick says in an interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5caf6mAACA that it is John who siings the “Ahhhhhhhh, ahhhhh, ah-ah-ahhhhhh;…” melody that links the middle section back to the last verse, but it is obvious to me when I listen to it that it is Paul´s voice.
Giles Martin says the basic track reveals John sings the main melody and Paul does a falsetto harmony. So they are both on it.
PLEASE give me a direct Giles Martin-quote and a source of that, James, because that would surprise me a LOT.
It would also cost GM a LOT of credibility, but I don’t expect it to be true, anyway.
James, I found a long interview with Giles Martin and he says it’s PAUL doing the “aaaahs” (Sorry, this is the German version):
“Pauls Main-Vocal-Spur ist stereo, weil wir ihr mit dem Waves S1 Stereo Imaging Plug-in etwas Spannweite gegeben haben, daher klingt sie anders als Johns Lead-Stimme. Wir haben auch zwei kleine Stückchen abgespalten, um die Möglichkeit zu haben, sie links und rechts zu pannen. Seine vierte Vocal-Spur ist die ›Aaah‹-Sektion, und darunter ist eine ›Aaah‹-Delay-Aux-Spur.«
Source: https://www.soundandrecording.de/stories/neu-gemischt-beatles-meisterwerk-sgt-peppers-lonely-hearts-club-band/
Yes there’s everyone that works with the Beatles has a different opinion on that(Geoff Emerick said it was John). It’s clear though that anyone who knows the Beatles voices says that it sounds like John. John had a rustic, rasping quality almost going to a whine in the upper register. It’s what sets his voice apart in general and from Paul. The voice does not sound like Paul one bit. The sad thing is all the things Paul has claimed after John’s death when John wasn’t there to explain his side.
The sad thing is that John had plenty of time to mouth off about credits before he died. Typical Lennon fan to exploit John’s death to keep Paul’s mouth shut. Paul didn’t ask for John to be killed and he wasn’t responsible for it either. Lesson learned: be careful with what you say as you’ll never know if they will be your last words. As for the aahhs, sorry, but it’s subjective. I hear both voices and similar to those in Lovely Rita.
Find it hard to believe that so many people who were not there know the answers. I would also like to say in response to the comment “Lennon had plenty to mouth off credits” WHY!!! Also Geoff Emerick and Giles who both had access to the original tapes are a poor source of truth. I presume they might know a little! Maybe someone is a Lennon hater. As far a sources go listen to the Youtube Lennon and McCartney tapes of them speaking over I think five recordings where Lennon lists Paul’s masterpieces vey generously.
“Yes there’s everyone that works with the Beatles has a different opinion on that(Geoff Emerick said it was John). ”
In fact, I misread that interview and it was mixer Sam Okell who explained how this is Paul’s vocal track. He did the actual intense work on the tracks, so he should know what he’s talking about. Giles obviously doesn’t have a clue.
Emerick himself didn’t even remember who was playing the piano on ADITL – he thought it was probably John in an interview from 1979. Ken Scott called out his fairy-tale book. Emerick’s account is not one to be trusted, sadly.
“It’s clear though that anyone who knows the Beatles voices says that it sounds like John. ”
On the contrary: practically every respected and well known Beatles-expert confirms it’s Paul.
“John had a rustic, rasping quality almost going to a whine in the upper register. It’s what sets his voice apart in general and from Paul.”
That’s totally correct, and you can clearly hear that “whine” in the background, where John does his unmistakable nasal falsetto. The lead “aaah” is done by Paul, though, in a smooth chest-voice that would have been too high for John.
“The voice does not sound like Paul one bit. ”
That’s funny, because it IS Paul, and it DOES sound quite similar to what he does on “Lovely Rita”, the way he bends the notes and everything. It is also his part, his dream, John had no business singing lead here. AND he’s in the background, so he can’t be singing lead at the same time.
“The sad thing is all the things Paul has claimed after John’s death when John wasn’t there to explain his side.”
Yeah, this is a popular taking point among concerned “John”-fans. Anyone daring them to actually list “all the things Paul has claimed” usually receive VERY short replies! 😀
If you read “Many years from now” with a open mind you’ll find Paul very humble and respectful in giving credit to John, in some cases in a – for me – surprisingly high amount!
I used to think that was Paul too but although this section of the song hasn’t been discussed much it really is Johns handiwork. Albeit with some distortion.
sounds like john to me
per: Thanks for that video. I just WISH someone had played Geoff the actual record right there – so instead of repeating his (fabricated) story from the book he’d heard Paul singing! That would have made him scratch his head! 😉
Everyone believing that Geoff – God bless him, great man! – actually did remember all these little details about the sessions told in “his” book should check that infamous interview of his from several decades earlier where he remembered less than Jon Snow!
That bit is 100% John! C’mon, John’s voice-sound is unmistakeable! A great part of an amazing track!
It sounds like John. But it’s Paul. It’s the distortion that confuses.
It COULD be both though.
Surprisingly this is subject of the most heated discussions, especially here, so I’m surprised your comment passed the moderation…
Sadly Paul missed the chance to put an end to it when he failed to give a definitive answer on REDDIT. Instead he said “I seem to remember we all did it”. It IS correct, though, since there are four voices: Paul’s lead aah, John’s unmistakable falsetto, George’s lower oooh and maybe Ringo doing the low octave of the aaah at some point.
Indeed most historians confirm that they recorded the vocals for bridge and transition in one take on February 3rd, meaning Paul must be the lead singer.
That’s supported by the fact that there is NO CUT between the “dream” and the aah, proving Emerick’s story about a non-existing punch-in to be false.
Giles Martin said it was John several times – but was embarrassingly contradicted by his own mixer Sam Okell, who explained in detail how it’s one of Paul’s vocal tracks.
John’s typically nasal falsetto is clearly audible in the background in the isolated vocal track, so it’s impossible for him to do the lead at the same time (it’s on the same track).
It’s also still Paul’s part, it’s his dream, why would John sing lead here?
Funny enough, despite most of the evidence pointing towards Paul there’s still a great number of people who are simply fooled by the echo-effect into believing it’s John.
Rational discussions about this prove to be quite difficult – so I’m not sure if my comment will be posted.
But since that other comment was made public I think it’s fair to hear both sides.
Anyone ever intrigued that there’s no demo of this song by John.
The reason it intrigues me is that it makes me wonder if Paul fleshed out the chords , sort of like
Lucy In The Sky where John I think had more of a vocal melody/lyric .
Obviously there’s a difference cause John is credited with rhythm guitar on Day In The LIfe so I suspect he probably had some sense of the chords , if not exactly for this part of the song.
Anyone else wonder about this? Lucy In The Sky I think the main instrumentation was the bass and keyboard line by Paul.
There are demo’s of ADITL, look for them. It’s Lennon’s song. But apparently total sycophants want to disagree because they want everything to be done by Macca. Let them w**k on …
this is Pauls section so paul is scatting ahhhh yes ofcourse.
Sgt. Pepper is the Beatles evolutionary breakthrough LP. There music and sound changed so much between 1963 and 1967. There ability to play so many different instruments were amazing. They practically altered the musical direction of Rock and Roll in those few short years.
I have heard the outtakes of the basic track and there are actually two acoustic guitars, so logically, this would mean that George and John would’ve played them while somebody else may have been on maracas.
Don’t take Geoff Emerick seriously – he stated in a 1979 interview that he remembered virtually no precise details on his sessions with The Beatles and he showed signs of a poor memory by incorrectly saying that two-track tape was used until “Help!”.
I could actually hear the dog whistle, the 15 kilocycle tone after the E chord on piano faded out, when I was younger.
I could too, very clearly, and always wondered why people referred to it as only audible to dogs (and other animals). Now I’m 41, and my hearing’s not as sharp, and I can’t hear it unless I crank up the volume (plus my tinnitus gives me a constant high-pitched ringing anyway!).
I have always heard the high tone only dogs are supposed to be able to hear.
I am 61 now and can still hear it.
I could never hear it while playing the LP through speakers, but I COULD easily hear it through headphones.
A whistling dog, that´s quite someting.
The “Ahhhhhhhh, ahhhhh, ah-ah-ahhhhhh;…” it is John. I wasn’t there, but it sounds like him. No doubt about it.
Correct!! Definitely John
I agree it sounds like John. But it’s Paul.
I’ve read all the reasons why it can’t possibly be John due to the way it was recorded and the fact that the middle section is Paul’s, but that’s JOHN SINGING THE AAAAHs!
its paul.
Finally the drumming sound of Ringo is maybe the most incredible thing on this track !
When I was in college, during the school year from ’72 to ’73 my two roommates and I would play Sgt. Peppers every day at 4:30. It never got old (and hasn’t yet!) There were, of course, endless discussions about ADITL (including some of the PID variety.) And, as was mentioned above, about why ADITL ended the album instead of the SPLHCB reprise. Why didn’t SPLHCB and the reprise bookend the album?, etc. Of course, with no internet and none of the books having been written yet there were a lot of “facts” that later proved wrong. Although I do remember one friend who knew somebody that was associated with Abbey Road studio who told him the bit about how John was referring to a$$holes with the line “holes to fill the Albert Hall.” Anyway, thank you to everyone for the links, book mentions, and tidbits to listen for.
I’ve just learned about this gem of a historical document — the response by the chief executive of the Royal Albert Hall to the allegation that their venue was afflicted with 4,000 holes!
That was an April Fools post, but nicely done by the RAH. Check the publication date.
Ah well… and as a professional historian, I shouldn’t have been so gullible! A masterful hoax, though, one I imagine John would have enjoyed. (Although — and this should have been the tip-off — his own response would surely have reached greater heights of wit and hilarity!)
Geoge did nothing more than shake maracas? Seriously?
I don’t think George’s mind was on the album at that time because he was still pining for India, which he had visited the previous autumn. George admitted in Anthology that he had few memories of the making of SPLHCB.
Other than contributing one great solo song, George barely seems to feature on the album.
Perhaps the conspiracy theorists got it wrong, and rather than Paul dying in 1966 it was actually George that died, and he was replaces by Forge LOL
George plays the guitar solo on Fixing A Hole.
Lead guitar on Sgt Pepper Reprise.
Guitar through a Leslie speaker on Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds.
He also plays 1 of the 2 guitars with John on Lovely Rita.
That narrative of George barely featuring on “Sgt. Pepper” is a myth and can be disproven via session photos, audio from session tapes and outtakes from basic tracks.
It wasn’t like he was living in India for a year as a tax exile, let alone in the hospital after a serious car crash.
I have read somewhere that Paul’s part in the song, «made the bus in seconds flat. Found my way upstairs and had a smoke» also could be a drug reference. This song was written in 1967, and at that time smoking was legal on the upper deck on double decker buses in the UK.
I always thought “had a smoke” referred to lighting up a joint, because he then “went into a dream”.
‘ John and I gave each other a knowing look: ‘Uh-huh, it’s a drug song. You know that, don’t you?’
Then later:
” It’s about a crash and its victim. How can anyone read drugs into it is beyond me. ”
So, were you lying before, or were you lying after?
Just stop. Geez….
You want a list of the times John contradicted himself? Or Ringo? Or anybody recounting a past experience from years ago at several years-separated junctures? With quotes taken out of context?
Just stop being silly (I’m being kind here).
Geez, it’s MikeP- the Paul policeman bullying Beatle fans yet again from freely speculating on inconsistencies that might portray the almighty Macca in a bad light. You are just an angry biased defender of all things Paul ( and I’m being kind here). All bow to MikeP and beware of speaking your mind about a rock n roll band in his presence; for he may not like it and rain Paul McCartney down on your head.
Oh, untwist your panties and get over it. I’m allowed MY opinions and the right to say them.
Putting your own biases and unfounded twists on your “opinion” makes it not opinion, but your own fantasy. I will always point that out if I wish. Get over it.
Does it really have to be like this? There are just as many, probably a good deal more, pro-John and pro-George sentiments found in sites and forums such as this. If people want to bat in Paul’s corner then they’re allowed to, aren’t they? Lighten up and just enjoy the song in question. It’s one of the best.
” It’s about a crash and its victim. How can anyone read drugs into it is beyond me. ”
That’s actually John’s quote.
Yes, several sources site this as John’s. Shows why all the “John vs. Paul” people might just stop all the sillyness. The Beatles ended 50 years ago….the story has been told, mis-told, interpreted, and reinterpreted hundreds of times.
Paul is talking about Paul’s bit and John is talking about John’s bit. That really shouldn’t be controversial nor is it especially surprising
The track gets better + better with age, after starting off very good when I first heard it as a 12 year old… Paul’s sprightly-presence part in the middle there only enhances the strength and strange-depth-solidity of John’s main role and presence…
All these are excellent: the sound of the acoustic -and also of John’s voice, Paul’s bass, Ringo’s drumming, and the arrangement of the song…
Then,,,: the aliveness and amazing-ability-of-brining-you-in of Paul’s bit, his voice -contrastingly – wholly without reverb – with excellent bass (again) and piano sound/chords (some jazzy), and then John with so much echo makes that vocal sound for the subsequent bit…
And of course the brass and strings crescendos, both of them…
It is the joint-top of my Fave Beatles’ songs; it HAS to be!
George was with the vibe of the whole album, even if he apparently did not feature much on the music of most tracks… As Eppie said apparently in 1963 ‘George is the Soul (of the Beatles)
Julian, I was 12 years old when this came out, too and I agree with your assessment of it. I always liked how the Reprise was like the end of the show and the it fades into this fantastic encore. I remember how my mother (still with us at age 100!) remarked how the only good lyric was Paul dragging a comb across his head ?. A Day In The Life definitely ranks up there as one of the best.
Once again, that narrative of George barely featuring in the music on “Sgt. Pepper” is untrue.
His contributions to the album were actually very diverse: electric guitar, acoustic guitar, backing & harmony vocals, lead vocals, comb and paper, sitar, tanpura, Hammond organ, percussion and harmonica.
The narrative is absolutely true and confirmed by George and Paul.
And it shows, since while not being COMPLETELY absent his contribution to their most important song is reduced to maracas (and some inaudible low falsettos ooohs on the “aaah”) and Paul is playing EVERY SINGLE lead guitar solo on the album, on Sgt. Pepper’s, Good morning, Mr. Kite and most probably even Fixing a hole.
George Martin says different in his book, but it just doesn’t sound like George’s strat but much more like Paul’s Epiphone.
Just because these things are said many years later, it doesn’t always mean they’re true.
In 2017, Ringo said in this interview that he and Paul were listening to “Sgt. Pepper” and they realized how important George’s guitar work was to that album.
Virtually every source confirms that it was George playing the solo on “Fixing a Hole”.
Check out Marcus Phelan’s work, he’s on youtube and an extremely proficient Beatles guitar expert.
He has tried anything to accomplish that guitar sound from Fixing a hole with George’s equipment – it didn’t work. What DID sound like that was Paul’s Epiphone, and easily so.
He claims that the main source for it being George is George Martin’s book – and that part seems to be a mistake, simple as that.
The fact remains that there’s hardly ANY memorable guitar part from George on the whole Pepper’s album – Ringo was only being nice.
I like what he does on “With a little help from my friends”, but that’s about it, really.
And it remains a fact that all he contributed to one of their most epic and creative and impactful songs was some maracas…
Michael, I know of Marcus Phelan and we can agree to disagree. 1, 2, 3.
Listening to take 2 of “A Day in the Life”, there are clearly two acoustic guitars, so like I say, this would imply that John and George are playing them, while obviously Paul is on piano and Ringo is on maracas, so I guess it might be Mal Evans on maracas.
Does anyone know for sure if the I love to turn you on part by Paul was A lyric or also had a melody because I read on Wikipedia that Lennon wrote the entire verse Melody and most of the words
I had always been of the impression that the I’d love to turn you on by Paul was a melody and the lyric together but it was odd the Wikipedia of all places a pretty reliable source I said what they said about it
Just because A Day in the Life starts with John’s verses, people seem tempted to think of it as his song, and that somehow Paul only helped him with it. They’ve both said it often enough it was a 50/50 effort unless everyone thinks they’re liars. John and Paul had song fragments written independently that mused upon everyday life. The words of the title do not even appear anywhere in the song. Paul did not specifically write a bridge for John’s verses. He had his own verses that fitted. It’s sad that some people, not only on this site but others as well, try to revise ADITL for their own purposes by wanting to omit Paul’s verses because they don’t like them. Their arrogance (under the guise of Beatles ‘discussion’) to think their version preferable to the Beatles is laughable. Millions of others beg to disagree. You can’t pick and choose in my opinion – take those out and you take the orchestral glissando out as well. After all, that was Paul’s part too, he wrote it (and before anyone says it was George Martin, it wasn’t), and it was HIS dream sequence. Bad form too in my opinion for Yoko Ono to use Paul’s composition in the closing sequences on John’s life in the film Imagine in an attempt to cement ADITL as Lennon’s.
What truly baffles me with all of the arguing, squabbling and disagreeing on who sang the ahh’s and who sang this verse, and who sang that verse, who said “maracas, who played a certain guitar riff within a certain part of the Beatles’ “A Day In The Life” song is. What difference does all of this make? Really? It was an incredibly amazing song by the Beatles for all of us to enjoy. Why be childish by nitpicking who sang what part, or who played a particular instrument of that part of the song? So very trivial and meaningless in the grand scheme of the song itself. Why not just say positive things about this incredible song and just enjoy the damn song without all the childish arguments? Are we adults or malcontent grade schoolers? I don’t get all the childish and immature fuss over a damn great song.
Ramblings from an OldFartBassPlayer
I’ve had SO many preconceptions over who played what on what song that were later found maybe not to be correct. But you know what? I… DON’T… CARE…
I’m sitting securely in my mind, and I’ll think what I want, even if I’m not in agreement with the cognoscenti. EVEN IF I’m …wrong. Its a mystical music world that I create.
In my world, John sings the ahhs. Not even up for discussion. If I want to visualize George playing the lead on Ticket to Ride, I visualize it. Same for Taxman, mainly because that’s what I had imagined for the first 10 or so years after Revolver. And when I hear a song, I SEE them in my mind. Playing the instruments I select, because … it’s my vision.
“All these years, I’ve been wanderin’ around
Wonderin’ how come nobody told me”
but then I realized,
” there is a place Where I can go..
And that it’s my mind ….”
From the 2017 Forbes article by Kevin Murnane…
The orchestral crescendo…
With the alarm clock issue solved, the band was left with the problem of what to do with the 24-bar hole in the song. Lennon suggested something that started out small and grew into something huge. McCartney liked that idea and suggested doing it with a full orchestra. George Martin, Sgt. Pepper’s producer, said there was no way EMI, the company that owned the Abbey Road studio where the album was being made, would pay for a full orchestra to record 24 bars of music. Ringo solved the problem by suggesting they hire half an orchestra and have them play it twice…
While it may never be determined who did exactly what here, this blurb makes some interesting points. While I intend on finding further sources, I have read a few time that George Martin had spoken about John’s original vision as being to (repeating here from Murnane who sourced Walter Everett) “Build from nothing to the end of the earth.” Then, as stated above, Paul ran with that idea with the desire of orchestrating it. Eventually, as stated in George Martin’s book on the recording of Pepper, Paul attempted to conduct it but couldn’t get it fully there. So, George Martin took it over the finish line by writing out a more structured outline of this rather unstructured concept to the orchestra, and taking over the baton. I love how the strings begin by building off John’s oscillating enunciation of Paul’s line, “I’d love to turn you on.”
So the crescendo, or glissando, seems to be a classic collaboration with not one,
not two but three fathers: John, Paul and George Martin. Something not quite as inspired by John Cage as Paul has stated, but a reflection of three musical minds every bit as Avantgarde.
Funny how John would throw out these loose yet very effective concepts like,
“Build from nothing to the end of the earth”. Or his direction on how to record his Tomorrow Never Knows vocal, “It should sound as if it were chanted by a 1,000 Tibetan monks.” George Martin was so adept at translating these ethereal gems.
As for those intriguing “Ahhhhh’s….”
They are a mystery that perhaps AI will one day solve like McCartney’s late life assertation that he wrote the melody of “In My Life”. (A Stanford study mathematically gave that a probability of .018. Not likely at all.)
Paul thinks that he and John (and maybe even George) may done done them together. Maybe they did. I like to think so. Yet, if I had to bet my life on it, I’d say John. However, the Lovely Rita comparison that has been pointed out cannot be totally dismissed, nor at this time should it be awarded the certainty some give it. And let’s not forget that the “ahhh’s” in Eleanor Rigby stem from George Harrison. Did he suggest them again? Ok, that’s a stretch, if not a bit of mischievous fun to throw in.
Finally… the last chord…
We know who played on it (John, Paul, Ringo, Mal & George Martin), but whose idea was it? Simple and resonant, it didn’t fulfill Pepper’s conceit of a concert,
but it’s perfect.
So much of what made the Beatles so great is the interplay of John & Paul. That is definitely evident on this song. In the opinion of many, their finest hour. Or at least their finest five minutes and 35 seconds.
Would love to know your thoughts!
Something else I’d like to add. Paul the melody man, John the eccentric. Oh, come on. Your biases are truly showing. Honestly, what shallow stereotypes and they’re as old as the ark. That is purely your subjective opinion. Such ‘eccentricity’ was nowhere apparent in his Beatles early work.
Yet Yesterday pushed the boundaries in 1965, and even without strings it was considered innovative for a rock and roll band at the time. John freely admitted that his copious use of LSD from 1966 and later heroin made a difference to his creativity. Which is not to say he shouldn’t have taken them, otherwise we wouldn’t have had such great songs. But get real.
Any thoughts? Firstly, the Forbes article in it’s choice of quotes is likely no more reliable than any other account written decades after the fact. ‘Let’s not forget that the “ahhhs” in Eleanor Rigby stem from George Harrison.’ Unfortunately, in repeating this old chestnut, you’ve managed to dismantle the whole of your argument. There is no evidence that George contributed that line and if you can find a direct source then you should provide it. Paul tended to be the ahhh man not only in his songs but how he spoke conversationally at that time. Secondly, the reference to dreams and dreaming is a significant theme throughout McCartney’s work in the Beatles, less so in Lennon’s. Another misconception that’s bandied around is Paul’s “late life” assertion over In My Life. No, he didn’t. He first disputed it in the early seventies after John wrote Lennon Remembers. The computer analysis is meaningless. Paul could write in a Lennon style if he wanted to, as Let Me Roll It demonstrates. Conducting the orchestra had nothing to do with Martin’s notation of Paul’s composition of the glissando. It was written to enable the orchestra to play it, as you would expect of any piece. George Martin, bless him, has unfortunately at times made claims for himself and disputed by others. Regardless of who suggested what is pointless – you either know how to do it yourself or you don’t. So no, the glissando did not have one, two, or three fathers. I’m getting the impression that you, amongst others, are minimizing Paul’s part in the ‘great’ interplay between John and Paul in making this great song (he went with, he liked it, ie. he followed) in favour of George Martin. And for Tomorrow Never Knows in which Paul, and to a lesser extent George (Harrison) as well, played a big part in how this song evolved.
Thanks for your response.
Or should I say reaction?
Because it’s a very emotional reaction that seems biased by your fandom for Paul.
Funny, because at least I had the decency to refer to Paul as a genius.
But not so much of a genius that when it comes to determining who wrote the music on In My Life that I trust his memory over a mathematical computer study by Harvard that gives McCartney less than a 1% probability of having done so.
Meanwhile, you’re convinced that because Paul could write a John-like song like “Let Me Roll It” that Paul’s genius overrides this in-depth study of musical DNA. Sorry, I have to go with math and science on this one over your unsubstantiated opinion or Paul’s memory. Anyone else’s memory for that matter.
To call a substantiated study “meaningless” seriously calls into question your respect for facts and neutrality, while painting you as someone with the blind zeal and bias of a fanboy/fangirl. It nearly dismantles the whole of your credibility. You’re smarter than that.
And that said, thank you for correcting my reference to Paul’s later-in-life claims.
The first claim I found that he made on “In My Life” was from 1973. If so, that’s still 9 years after the penning of the song. And I believe that it would mark the only time where one wrote all the words and the other all the melody. Odd, but not impossible. You would think John had at least some idea of the musical direction his words might take.
Ironically, John thought that Paul may have helped on the bridge, which means that he gave Paul too much credit.
And yes, when it comes to the Beatles, the various accounts can vary as much as those in a Faulkner novel. Amazingly, factually there’s not that much in dispute. The two sticking points being the lyrics to Eleanor Rigby and the music of In My Life. Not bad for all the songs in play and all the time and hallucinations in between!
John definitely overstated his contribution to Eleanor Rigby. Granted, Paul understates the contributions by John, George, Ringo and Pete Shotten. That said, at this time, it can be confidently stated that the lyrics are substantially Paul’s.
As for the “Ahhhhh’s” in the song, you misinterpreted my line. It was meant as a joke. As a poke that there may be yet another potential angle to the dispute around “A Day in the Life”. I wasn’t serious. In fact, I called it a “stretch” and “a bit of mischievous fun”. Again, I think you’re filtering through your emotions. However, to move forward, let’s deem that a weak attempt at humor on my part and I’ll take the blame for further confusing the matter.
But apart from “A Day in the Life”, why do you say that George didn’t contribute the “lonely people line & ahhh’s” to Eleanor Rigby? Even the reverential Paul McCartney Project credits George with what you dismiss as that false “old chestnut”. Would love to see support for any other POV. See, I’m here for the truth, not to defend my favorite Beatle.
My frustration with Paul is this late in life obsession with making sure he gets all the credit he deserves. The “John was the man” narrative after his death has long subsisted. The pendulum has swung to the point that there’s a plethora of “John was a lucky hack and a horrible human being”.
Perhaps the worst case of this was wanting to reverse the Lennon/McCartney credits. Besides supposedly Paul, is there any other proof? It just came across as so convenient and petty. Even Paul came to regret it. Like most geniuses, both John and Paul could be rather sensitive and sometimes silly about legacy issues.
After all that, let’s agree that while Paul is a genius and certainly not dead, his memory is not perfect. He’s not even 100% sure how he came up with the title for Eleanor Rigby. Also, no one needs to call into question poor George Martin with a condescending and dismissive, “Bless him”. Certainly, like the rest of this amazing cast of characters, most of his version of the Beatles story is accurate, but not all of it.
Which finally brings us to “A Day in the Life”.
Let’s start with the glissando.
Concerning the The Forbes article…
The George Martin account was sourced from Philip Norman who has written a book on John and one on Paul. Norman interviewed Martin in 1979. I like to think that at that time George wasn’t the dottering old man you make him out to be.
Until proven otherwise, if John’s original vision of “a tremendous build-up from nothing to the end of the world”, required nothing more than Paul telling the orchestra to start from the lowest note and end on the highest, why did George Martin have to step in to make this make sense? And why did he end up conducting the the take on the record? What in the end is a simple solution to the effect John conceived of and shared. Hardly “pointless”. Without any intent to demean or downgrade Paul’s contribution, calling the glissando the child of 3 fathers still seems to be the most accurate way to credit it.
Or are you still implying that John and George Martin and everyone else were either frequently mistaken or opportunistic liars? And that only you and Paul McCartney know the truth?
Like Paul claiming credit on “In My Life”, honest mistakes were made by all parties. At least I’m giving Paul the benefit of the doubt.
As for the “ahhhhhhh’s”.
So Paul was the “Ahhhhh guy”?
I thought he was the Walrus, until he wasn’t, of course.
Sorry, that’s a stretch. Almost as much as a stretch as Paul was the “dream guy”.
Arguments so thin that it would be a waste of space to address them.
One listen tells you that John was already exploring dreamlike themes and tunes such as “I’m Only Sleeping” and “Strawberry Fields”. A theme he also took beyond the Beatles with songs like #9 Dream.
You seem absolutely 100% percent positive that it’s all Paul on the “ahhhh’s,” when even Paul isn’t sure and believes it may have been all of them together! So, are you saying that Paul is a liar or a dottering old man like George Martin? You may believe in Paul more than he believes in himself.
Ironically, like AI solved the mystery of “In My Life”, it may be able to pinpoint the origin of the ahhhhh’s. But if it is indeed Paul you won’t be able to claim it, because to use your word, it would be “meaningless”!
As for “Tomorrow Never Knows”, no one has belittled anyone’s contribution.
Everyone acknowledges that Ringo coined its title. Everyone acknowledges the role Paul had in the tape loops. But he didn’t make all of them. The band made 30. The most distinguishable one we’re confident is Paul’s laugh in reverse.
Plenty more credit to go around, but the main credit on the Beatles most innovative songs almost always go to John: Strawberry Fields, Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, I am the Walrus, Revolution #9, Rain, I Feel Fine, Happiness is a Warm Gun…. John was happy to collaborate and include the contributions of others but he laid out the general blueprint that without none of those flourishes would find a sound garden to breathe and grow.
That’s not a knock on Paul. That’s just their working styles. Paul almost always knew what he wanted, John had more impressionistic visions that the team filled out together. When you want a pure melody, no one tops Paul. When you want something eccentric, John’s your guy. Not always either way, but in general, yes.
I go to these lengths because I’m looking for unbiased facts and insights that help solve the yet unsolved mysteries of the Beatles. Not to prop up any individual Beatle. Unfortunately, discussing the Beatles is like discussing politics. Too many people starting with a side as opposed to seeking honest answers. With that, I’ll keep pushing through my own subconscious biases and false beliefs and enjoy the ideas and proof of other seeking a more complete understanding of this most inspiring collaboration called the Beatles.
Oh my gosh, seriously grow up. Nothing in your emotional tirade (the irony, lol) is based on facts either- about A Day in the Life, Eleanor Rigby (the ‘referential’ Paul McCartney Project doesn’t get everything right) or Tomorrow Never Knows. Speaking of Pete Shotten, did John ever give Pete credit for helping out on the lyrics for I Am The Walrus? At least try and be consistent. ‘All the lonely people’ were Paul’s words from his first verse already written. That’s just plain fact unless you think Paul is lying again, which you probably do. The ahhs in The Day in the Life – presumably you’d interpret this very differently if ahh had figured prominently in two of John’s other songs or two of George’s other songs. Right? I never said or implied John wasn’t a genius. He is. The glissando was Paul’s, not Martin’s, not Lennon’s. Paul did not exist to simply foster or translate or mind read John’s genius which you seem more than happy to imply. And instead of dismissing Paul as some petty old man regarding song credits, the songwriting order did actually start off as McCartney/Lennon as you surely would have (or should have) known. Your notions of fandom are puerile. Insidious undermining of McCartney’s work and character have gone on for decades. Any pushback or correcting meets with grudging resentment. Do me a favour and take your own advice.
Hear, hear.
As great as this song is, I can only imagine how this song would sound with the Abbey Road Album treatment. With songs like “Something” and “Because”, there is a welcoming breezy feeling under the wings of these songs that would have been perfect for “A Day In a Life”. I feel the drums and Paul’s bass get a little too heavy for this song. As an example, listen to Jeff’s Beck’s cover. Its more relaxed. Maybe a future project for Niles Martin … Beatle songs if produced under different Albums.
There should be a Grammy category for whatever Ringo’s doing on the drums here.