|
Rocky Road From Classic Rock to Progessive to hip hop to today's hot new tunes! |
|
|
|
Rocky Road From Classic Rock to Progessive to hip hop to today's hot new tunes! |
|
In Reply to: Martin was genius. Compare how loud and real posted by Duilawyer on December 10, 2006 at 21:57:30:
I'm still not sure, based on your post, what role Martin actually played in the creation and development of the Beatles' music. He didn't twiddle knobs, he contributed little original material of his own, but his knowledge of "miking and equipment and classical music" made a good band sound better "than humanly imaginable"?What has Martin done post-Beatles? What did he do pre-Beatles? Were there any other groups on which he was able to work his "magic"? I don't deny that his professionalism "rubbed off" on the Beatles. I don't deny that they made matured under his "discipline." But when Martin met them, the Beatles were totally new to the world of professional studio recording. They had a lot to learn, and likely, they would have learned it under any number of competant record producers. Or perhaps I'm not missing some substantive issue here. Perhaps Martin was instrumental in some way I am not getting. And you may be totally correct. In fact, I find many of your post quite informative. But on this issue, at least so far, I am unconvinced. In fact, the example you cite (the "For No One" anectdote), seems to stengthen the idea that Martin's contribution was a subordinate one.
Also, with regard to the issue that the Beatles were deficient as musicians, or merely adequate, I think folks confuse achieving some or other technical benchmarks with musicianship. How fast the fingering is on the guitar solo, or how often the drummer changes time on the drum solo have little, in my mind, to do with musicianship. If they did, then Carl Lewis wouldn't have been just the world's fastest man, he would have been the world's best dancer, too. And I guess you'd have to take Van Gogh down a few notches on the ladder of artistic merit, since his paintings had fewer brush strokes than some of the other guys. Heck, let's take him off the list all together, since didn't use brushes that well anyway! By these metrics, Olivia Newton John is a better singer than Louis Armstrong. She could certainly hold a tune better than ole Satch. And if the Beatles' merit as musicians is "in the eye of the beholder," it's in a whole lot of eyes of a whole lot of beholders.
By the way, how about Paul's baseline in "Rain"? Or Ringo's drums on "Come Together"? Or George's guitar work on "Savoy Truffle"? Would you say these are just other examples of Martin egging them on in some mysterious way?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Martin was genius. Compare how loud and real - halfnote 12/11/0619:57:03 12/11/06 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
