|
|
Paul on John's Songs
PAUL ON JOHN'S SONGSThere has been some discussion over the years about how different a musician Paul McCartney was when playing on his own songs vs. playing on John's songs. In the Playboy interview, amongst the last of his life, John mentions that when it came time to record his songs a looser air came over the studio. He felt that he would be called paranoid for this, but there is no doubt that it's true and true right from the start of the Beatles Parlaphone recording career. Take a listen to various Beatles' recordings. On Paul's songs, his bass parts are controlled and (usually) perfected while on John's songs they are more inventive and spontaneous; his playing is more fun on John's (and George's) songs than on his own. In most cases where I've read this it is made out to be a purposeful thing on McCartney's part as if his aim were to sabotage Lennon's songs, but give it some more thought. McCartney himself has said that the Beatles did not rehearse before going into the studio. But they had gotten so good at playing with each other after so many hours of doing so in Germany and on tours that they didn't need to rehearse. There isn't much doubt about the type of songwriters McCartney and Lennon were. Paul would get a song and flesh it out in his head. He would hear musical parts and what sort of instruments should play those parts and how they should be played. It was an intellectual approach. John, by all (and I mean "all") accounts would bring his song and and let the boys work their parts out themselves. George and Ringo have both said that it was more fun playing John's songs and if you listen to the bass parts on Beatles albums from the earliest to the last (check out "I Want You" and "Come Together" from Abbey Road) I think it's safe to say that Paul joined in on that fun. His bass parts were more daring and less precise on John's songs. This is an interesting point to ponder as we go through the Beatles' catalog. In the early days, when John had most of the hits and more control of the group, the Beatles style was spontaneous and a lot of fun. In the days around Revolver and Sgt Pepper, when Paul had more control of the group, the style was intellectual, maybe a bit more controlled, but very nice sounding. Then in the later years, it was more of a mix of styles. You'd have a single like Hey Jude/Revolution; very Paul/John. In an interview with Tony Bacon, Paul discussed 1967, saying that being the bass player was "my only job". His point was that after some years of doing a million things a day, all they had to worry about now was recording music. By 1966, John and George wanted to take time off and stop being Beatles for a while. Paul knew that the Beatles could make their best music yet and '66 and '67 became his years as the chief motivator and songwriter of the band. By late 1966 until the time Brian Epstein died, being a recording artist for the Beatles was his job. He didn't have to worry about a whole lot else and so we have Revolver and Sgt. Pepper. A more controlled feel to the albums, but in my opinion some of the best music they ever made. When someone else is singing, I’d realise my role was to play a bass part to compliment what he’s singing...I would think it’s because someone else is singing, I see my role as the bass player and I’ll come up with something inventive. When I’m singing, I think, ‘Well, all you’ve gotta do is just play a bass part, mate’, and I might not think, ‘Ooh, I’ve gotta pull it out the bag’. Yeah, so what’s some good bass parts? ‘Taxman’ was good, that was George…‘Something’. That was good; that was George. ‘Come Together’ was good; that was John… Yeah, it’s probably true! -- Paul McCartney 12 My final point on this topic is that the Beatles, all four of them, were fantastic sidemen. They knew how to make a song work, didn't they. Paul was one of the best sidemen ever and if a song called for some wild and uninhibited bass playing, then he would be there making it happen in a big, big way. |
