Why was Sgt. Peppers such a huge album?

[hookstownbrown]

My point exactly, my statement has been reaffirmed... Not only by y'all, but George Martin, himself once admitted during an interview that were it not for his assiciation with the Beatles, he would not be doing many interviews...

[mani]

I agree and disagree with all of the above! Without George Martin the Beatles would have been just another Merseybeat band. They would have remained underdeveloped without his mentoring. Martin had tons of hit records before the Beatles both as a producer and in his own right. To this day, he makes it quite clear (in his own genteel way) that as good as the early Beatles were, they more or less bored him to tears. I always found that sentiment hard to understand until I actually checked out what he was doing beforehand. The stuff he was doing was quite radical and it must have nearly killed him to go work with a silly pop group. Like going back to kintergarden at the age of 20!. The happy accident was that this silly pop goup turned out to be very talented. But George Martin was a musical genius too. Probably moreso than anyone in the band. He was not the engineer. Geoff Emerick was the engineer.Besides music, Martin was responsible for producing the legendary Goons show. This was the most influential comedy group ever to come out of Britain (Monty Python were one of their offspring). Spike Milligan of the Goons was quite possibly the biggest single influence on Lennon's approach to nonsense lyric writing.John, George and Ringo had feck all input into the production. Paul had ideas but hadn't the tools to be that effective. Martin was the man. Jacques Brel and plenty of others sang with quartets way before the Beatles.The Moody Blues used mellotrons before they did.The Monkees and others used Moogs before 'em.Lead Belly is just one who used 12 strings before the Fabs.On top of that, there probably isn't a recording technique that wasn't used by the Radiophonic Workshop way before the Beatles!The Beatles never invented a musical style a la Giorgio Moroder. They were wonderful but they were never revolutionary as a musical group. Did they have a revolutionary impact on mass popular culture? Of course. They were in a position where they could take a lot of obscure ideas and popularize them. But that's not the same thing.

[booker]

I heard a rumor about something John (probably sky high) said to G.Martin. He said: "George...I want this song to sound more...orange!" I think George just said "Uh Huh, got it." That John....what a character.

[booker]

One thing I was thinking about is how many artists attribute their start by hearing the Beatles. Heck, Even the great Drew (Ringo) and myself. Possibly it's because that the early days of rock were calling to wannabe musicians with easy chord structures and melodies which made fame and wealth accessable to a modest musician. Not like the more complex Classical and jazz greats. IMHO(I know that's suppose to mean "In my humble opinion", but it sure looks like "I'M a HO"

[hookstownbrown]

IMHO... That sounds a little orange to me... Yep, for me, Lennon's writing had the most profound effect. He had talent that we probably won't see again for a hundred years... JM2

[drew]

IMaHO too!When we would be writing or working on songs as youngsters and someone would start getting too technical or anal about how to structure a song we'd say "Remember the Beatles, you don't have to get fancy to make a good song". They also taught me to be inventive with the progressions, that the simplest accents can define a song and that music can sound great with just a foursome (no keys). I don't remember an earlier band that was all electric, I'm sure there were plenty out there but they didn't make an impact on me as a kid. I feel they are the band that spawned the massive and abundant rock band generation, and showed the ladies it was alright to appreciate the musicians (just a side benefit... no - more than that).I am one of the many who think they are probably the greatest band ever for rock music (I don't think of them as a pop band). I base that on influence, productivity, range of melody, market evolution (always gave the public what they wanted next) and more stuff I can't think of right now. A good buddy of mine thinks the Beach Boys are the greatest ever. He dislikes the Beatles the way a Chevy owner dislikes Fords, but he can play most everything the Beatles ever recorded.My mother always played Duane Eddy LPs when I was very young, as I got more interested in the guitar and started paying more attention to Eddy and learning a new appreciation for what could be done on it I'd have to say that I never would have been inspired to pick up a guitar and play it like that because you CAN'T. At least not until after years of playing Beatles style of music.Everybody could be a Beatle in their bedroom with an old acoustic guitar.Ringo (a/k/a: Drew the Great)

[ernstinen]

Fact check! Quote:Jacques Brel and plenty of others sang with quartets way before the Beatles.Of course, but what rock & roll band did before the Beatles?Quote:The Moody Blues used mellotrons before they did.Wrong. Lennon bought his first Mellotron in 1965. "Strawberry Fields" was recorded in 1966.Quote:The Monkees and others used Moogs before 'em.True. Surprised me!Quote:Lead Belly is just one who used 12 strings before the Fabs.Not Rickenbackers. Lennon bought his '58 Capri 325 in 1960 in Hamburg. And of course, George's '63 Rick 360/12C63 12-string was a revolutionary sound that was stolen by the Byrds and others.The point is, the Beatles pioneered and employed WAY more sounds and techniques as a band than any other rock group before them. There's no contest! (I don't think that Mickey Dolenz will be remembered by historians as owning one of the first Moogs!) BTW, I sure wish I had stock in the Vox Amplifier Co. back then!Ern

[mani]

Come on Ern,Yesterday was hardly a rock and roll song. Mark Pinder actually worked for the Mellotron company and as far as I'm aware, 'Love and Beauty' was released before 'Strawberry Fields'. Pinder's job was to play and fine tune the instrument before shipping it off so it's a good bet he played Lennon's Mellotron before Lennon did!A 12string is a 12string is a 12 string is a .... you get the idea! Anyway, none of the above are revolutionary. And again, most of their recording techniques were borrowed from true pioneers! The Beatles were great synthesists, taking bits from here, there and everywhere to make their records. But revolutionary? I still say 'no'.Btw, don't know why you're so surprised about the Monkees' Moog. Dolenz, Tork and Nesmith were great songwriters and the band made some excellent records that belie the manufactured origin of the group. On top of that Dolenz has got to be one of the most underrated rock and roll singers ever. That guy could sing his ass off!

[Casey H]

HeyRegarding the Monkees, only Mike Nesmith was a songwriter- and a good one at that. Mickey, Davey, and Peter didn't write much at all. Mike wrote some great tunes including "Differrent Drum" which was a hit by Linda Ronstadt... He also wrote Monkees classics including "The Girl I Knew Somewhere", which Mickey sang lead on... One of my all time fav Monkees tunes.The Monkees success was largely due to having some of the best outside writers of the day including Goffin/King, Boyce/Hart, etc... Neil Diamond wrote "I'm a Beleiver" and "A Little Bit Me, A Little Bit You"...I am also a Monkees trivia nut having grown up worshiping them along with the Beatles... I learned to play guitar when I was 13 so I could play Monkees songs!! The first song I ever played on the guitar was "Last Train To Clarksville"...An interesting side note about the Beatles is that early on, either John or Paul said they only wish they could write great songs like Goffin and King... I think they did it! LOL... Casey

[Casey H]

Godzooks!!! I think we've created a monster!!! (This thread) Do you realize that almost all the TAXI-board posts the past week have been on this thread?Godzooks!!! Casey