|
|
#600131 - 11/09/08 06:37 PM
Re: Beatles Geek Alert
[Re: scarborough]
|
Danhedonia
Diamond Member
Registered: 03/07/01
Posts: 3652
Loc: ABQ
|
Offline
|
|
Scarborough, here's the tab for what the article claims:
X 0 0 0 1 X, with strong assertion of doubling on piano, adding crucial F's to the mix.
OK, time to geek-overboard on this. I have some serious disagreement with some of the articles premises, though I think some of the conclusions are valid.
First huge disagreement is that nowhere is consideration given to potential alternate tunings! If Harrison was playing a 12 string, there's no reason he wouldn't (for hoots n' laughs) tweak a string up a step -- why not? I did this when I was his age, and boy, am I no George Harrison.
Dismissed premise #1: all guitars are perpetually played in standard tuning.
I also disagree with his analysis of data - by simply choosing the amplitude of some sounds as criteria for whether or not a note was struck, or was a naturally-occurring harmonic shows ignorance of the post-production process, George Martin's work habits, and perhaps the nature of amplified guitar sound itself.
Casually inserting the phrase "there is no evidence of multitracking" is just poor research. Think back to the stories of Lennon wanting to add a tone to the end of Sergeant Pepper audible only to dogs; clearly the Beatles used the studio very creatively. I have NOT done the research, but unless there's a definitive statement somewhere, I would disagree. The most relevant quote seems to be Martin's, which contradicts the article's spirit (i.e., "don't assume what you think you hear ...").
The final premise that I thought was faulty was refusing to consider the possibility of either a blown or missed note. Great as Harrison was (and I worship his playing intensely), we can't be sure the take was perfect -- for him, or any of the other players.
However, I find the article's conclusion to be far more audibly believable than some of the other suggestions. I fretted out all of the suggested chords in this thread, as well as that suggested by the article, and found the article's suggested chord to be much more believable to my ear.
In fact, using the data from the article, here's a suggested alternative for what GH and the others played to get 'that sound':
GH (on Ric 12-string):
XX 00 00 00 11 11, with one of the 1st and 2nd string pairs tuned up a step, so that the note-pairs would be C-D and F-G. Or perhaps the strings were open tuned to an equivalent array of notes to get the ring we all hear and love.
JL (probably on Casino):
X X 0 0 1 3
PM:
X X 0 X
George Martin on piano:
D3 F3 D5 G5 E6
Geek over and out.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#600173 - 11/09/08 10:04 PM
Re: Beatles Geek Alert
[Re: Danhedonia]
|
scarborough
Bronze Member
Registered: 05/09/06
Posts: 134
Loc: Toronto
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thanks Dan ... something to try on the 12 string soon
you're input definitely shows no one Beatle could have achived the chord individually. Sort of an orchestration
_________________________
Hello There Ladies and Gentlemen ... Are you READY TO ROCK !!!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#600200 - 11/10/08 01:06 AM
Re: Beatles Geek Alert
[Re: scarborough]
|
rockingtheboat
Gold Member
Registered: 08/24/03
Posts: 646
|
|
Offline
|
|
Here kiddies..take your pointer finger and bar it across all strings at the third fret and strum.
_________________________
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#600271 - 11/10/08 12:58 PM
Re: Beatles Geek Alert
[Re: rockingtheboat]
|
Danhedonia
Diamond Member
Registered: 03/07/01
Posts: 3652
Loc: ABQ
|
|
Offline
|
|
<Here kiddies> - (uh oh, insecure twat alert)
<take your pointer finger and bar it across all strings at the third fret and strum.>
A barred Gm7 played like that doesn't sound right, on a 12 string or 6. Further, if you'd read the pdf (which you might want to do -- it's not that long, and though it has some big words, even a 'kiddie' like me found it readable), you'd realize that your suggested chord phrasing is completely off. Perhaps you can't hear the difference (though I'd consider it obvious), it's simply mathematically not possible: there are a great many more notes present, even after you account for GH playing a 12-string.
I'm sure that you have some sort of record of accomplishment that may account for taking a snotty tone, but you may wish to toss that tone aside in order to have your point taken more seriously. Snotty one-liners suggesting fake-book playalongs is tough for me to respect from either a musical or personal POV.
For me, I find this thread fascinating not because of intense Beatle-worship, but for the following reasons:
* Trying to replicate the sound one hears in one's mind, as so many here know, is both the zenith of the creative process, and the curse of the imaginative. The Beatles seemed to be terrific at it - and so their methodology has interest.
* No matter how well-known or 'done to death,' most guitarists are always interested in the relationship between phrasing and tone.
* It's a fucking cool sound - "how'd they do that?"
* Also, the methodology used has a great many other very, very interesting applications (from solving other musical mysteries to criminal justice).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: JGFlash
|
|
