lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 6, 2011 11:41:56 GMT -5
Well, even Elvis "said" he liked The Beatles, but we all know how he really felt about them.... Can we really trust Elvis fans when they say they are not anti-beatles????Hmmmmm..... ;D Sutcliffe wasn't a star in the Beatles either vocally or instrumentally, if the past stories are right. This vocal doesn't sound as awful as I figured it might, though. If that recording turns out to really be Stuart, he sang as good as Paul and John (and way better than George) did during the Hamburg period. Even if he played a crappy bass guitar. Also if true, I find it hard to understand that none of the others ever remarked anywhere that Stuart was an exceptional vocalist. That voice on the recording sounds trained musically. That bluesy note he adds on the "all my dreams come true" line is indicative of someone who understands major/minor modality shifts in music. Stuart should have dropped playing bass and been The Beatles front man vocally much like Jim Morrison was for The Doors. But would John and especially Paul have accepted Stuart in that role??? The exceptional vocalism and musicality in the track is what keeps me thinking Pete Best, Astrid, Klaus, and Tony Sheridan are right in saying they don't think it is Stuart. It still sounds remarkably like Lineberry's voice from Rain to me.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 6, 2011 12:20:38 GMT -5
And what if this is Stu's vocal? It is a one-trick pony and will amount to a very interesting footnote upon Stu's already footnote to history.
My home computer is down so I finally was able to remotely access my e-mail(with notices I get of Steve's Examiner articles) and I read with great interest Steve's October 24th Examiner article that Pauline Sutcliffe has started a "Stu Sutcliffe Fan Club."
That kind of tells me all I need to know. Even if this Elvis cover is Stu, what, is it anticipated it will be a "hit?" Will there be Stumania?
My theory is Stu knew his time as a Beatle was limited because of limited musical skill. Stu bowed out gracefully to save his dear friend John from having to stave off Paul and George criticisms or having to fire Stu himself. Unlike the Quarrymen who got fired before they knew what hit them or Pete Best who was oblivious to the growing estrangement between him and George and Paul(if not John), I believe Stu saw the writing on the wall and went out on his own terms and with dignity: to be with Astrid and focus on his art.
From what I have ever read on Stu Sutcliffe, I can't imagine he'd want a "Fan Club." He seemed too artistic, too existential for that.
The mystery here is going to prove being more fun than the final answer because once resolved there will be a collective, "Oh cool" and Beatles fans will move on and if this is Stu we have an interesting new footnote to history(another Elvis cover) and if it isn't Stu he is still a footnote to history although Pauline will be discredited.
I do love reading about this mystery and Steve has gathered statements from some biggies who were there. I just don't know where we go with this once the mystery is solved. I feel that the real story here is in authenticating claims made by Stu's family. I am glad that Steve is on this as Stu's Estate, with its track record of spectacular and disturbing claims, needs to put up or shut up and Steve is leaving no stone unturned. I like a good "Who done it?"
I think I'll join the Jim Keltner Fan Club! ;D
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Nov 6, 2011 14:11:00 GMT -5
I think I'll join the Jim Keltner Fan Club! ;D Yes, but do you have a self-addressed stamped elephant?
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Nov 6, 2011 14:11:53 GMT -5
I think I'll join the Jim Keltner Fan Club! ;D Yes, but do you have a self-addressed stamped elephant?
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Nov 6, 2011 15:06:20 GMT -5
I posted this on an Elvis forum just to see what they think since it IS an Elvis song and this smiley best describes what most the people who've responded to it thinks about it lol.. so maybe it would be a good thing if it wasn't really him singing and yes the board is usually positive towards the beatles so it's not an anti-beatles thing..it's just that people are simply not liking this recording and the way he sings it.. Well, even Elvis "said" he liked The Beatles, but we all know how he really felt about them.... Can we really trust Elvis fans when they say they are not anti-beatles????Hmmmmm..... ;D Then why did he sing Let It Be, Lady Madonna and Yesterday if he didn't like the group.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Nov 6, 2011 15:07:08 GMT -5
I think I'll join the Jim Keltner Fan Club! ;D Yes, but do you have a self-addressed stamped elephant? It was an undressed stamped elephant.
|
|
|
Post by joshferrell on Nov 6, 2011 15:57:26 GMT -5
Well, even Elvis "said" he liked The Beatles, but we all know how he really felt about them.... Can we really trust Elvis fans when they say they are not anti-beatles????Hmmmmm..... ;D Then why did he sing Let It Be, Lady Madonna and Yesterday if he didn't like the group. and "Hey Jude" and "Something"..
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Nov 6, 2011 16:31:30 GMT -5
Sutcliffe wasn't a star in the Beatles either vocally or instrumentally, if the past stories are right. This vocal doesn't sound as awful as I figured it might, though. If that recording turns out to really be Stuart, he sang as good as Paul and John (and way better than George) did during the Hamburg period. Even if he played a crappy bass guitar. Also if true, I find it hard to understand that none of the others ever remarked anywhere that Stuart was an exceptional vocalist. That voice on the recording sounds trained musically. That bluesy note he adds on the "all my dreams come true" line is indicative of someone who understands major/minor modality shifts in music. Stuart should have dropped playing bass and been The Beatles front man vocally much like Jim Morrison was for The Doors. But would John and especially Paul have accepted Stuart in that role??? The exceptional vocalism and musicality in the track is what keeps me thinking Pete Best, Astrid, Klaus, and Tony Sheridan are right in saying they don't think it is Stuart. It still sounds remarkably like Lineberry's voice from Rain to me. Excellent summary of the situation. I don't think it's Stu.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Nov 6, 2011 16:39:54 GMT -5
"The exceptional vocalism and musicality in the track is what keeps me thinking Pete Best, Astrid, Klaus, and Tony Sheridan are right in saying they don't think it is Stuart. It still sounds remarkably like Lineberry's voice from Rain to me."
I didn't think Astrid has commented yet.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 6, 2011 16:47:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Nov 6, 2011 17:00:57 GMT -5
I'm not sure everyone here is reading your articles, Steve. By the way, Rain is on NBC right now , with Figure Skating, A Tribute to the Beatles.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 6, 2011 18:28:59 GMT -5
I'm not sure everyone here is reading your articles, Steve. By the way, Rain is on NBC right now , with Figure Skating, A Tribute to the Beatles. Yeah, I realize that there are the same questions and few answers. But answering the Lineberry question is a big development.
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Nov 6, 2011 19:01:02 GMT -5
Yes, but do you have a self-addressed stamped elephant? It was an undressed stamped elephant. I stand corrected.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 6, 2011 19:10:24 GMT -5
OK, let me throw this out to you all: Is whether it's Stu interesting or not? There are things that can be in play here if it's not him -- Pauline got conned or, as many seem to believe, she's the one doing the conning. I don't think it's good to let it die. Am I chasing a dead issue? Maybe, but that happens sometimes. Hopefully, it'll resolve itself.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Nov 6, 2011 19:41:50 GMT -5
OK, let me throw this out to you all: Is whether it's Stu interesting or not? There are things that can be in play here if it's not him -- Pauline got conned or, as many seem to believe, she's the one doing the conning. I don't think it's good to let it die. Am I chasing a dead issue? Maybe, but that happens sometimes. Hopefully, it'll resolve itself. I'm following along, Steve. Just to be sure I wasn't misunderstood, my comment "I'm not sure everyone here is reading your articles" was directed at lowbasso, who was saying that Astrid, Pete, Klaus and Tony S. had said that they don't think it's Stu and that he still thought it was Lineberry. I know from reading your pages, Lineberry has said that it wasn't him and I haven't read anywhere that Astrid has commented (unless I missed one). To be honest though, I keep checking your page for a news flash on the Paul reissues.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Nov 6, 2011 20:15:29 GMT -5
I think Astrid has said that she doesn't think it's Stu but I can't dig up the source right now.
Steve, I'm interested in this controversy. Please continue your reports.
Pauline Sutcliffe may be Louise Harrison with a degree in social work.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Nov 6, 2011 20:37:45 GMT -5
OK, let me throw this out to you all: Is whether it's Stu interesting or not? There are things that can be in play here if it's not him -- Pauline got conned or, as many seem to believe, she's the one doing the conning. I don't think it's good to let it die. Am I chasing a dead issue? Maybe, but that happens sometimes. Hopefully, it'll resolve itself. It is absolutely a great story to follow if only because the source is from his family whether true or not. I think it is important enough for even Paul to weigh in.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 7, 2011 0:30:38 GMT -5
OK, let me throw this out to you all: Is whether it's Stu interesting or not? There are things that can be in play here if it's not him -- Pauline got conned or, as many seem to believe, she's the one doing the conning. I don't think it's good to let it die. Am I chasing a dead issue? Maybe, but that happens sometimes. Hopefully, it'll resolve itself. I'm following along, Steve. Just to be sure I wasn't misunderstood, my comment "I'm not sure everyone here is reading your articles" was directed at lowbasso, who was saying that Astrid, Pete, Klaus and Tony S. had said that they don't think it's Stu and that he still thought it was Lineberry. I know from reading your pages, Lineberry has said that it wasn't him and I haven't read anywhere that Astrid has commented (unless I missed one). Mr. Debjorgo; If you have read all of Steve's articles on the subject and the responses he has received, especially on his Examiner page, you will see Steve received a comment that said BOTH Klaus and Astrid had heard the recording and did not think it was Stuart, AND that Astrid had no interest in hearing the recording in the future. Steve pointed out that, as of today, there is no other confirmation that Astrid has heard it other than this gentleman's comment. And Steve apparently does not know if this gentleman's info is reliable. But it WAS on his site, so yes; you missed one... And yes, I believed Lineberry's voice was the most likely voice to be on the Stuart recording. Mr. Lineberry has now said it is not him. So if it isn't, and it is a genuine Stuart recording, the Mr. Lineberry did one helluva job getting his voice to sound practically identical to Stuart's. And with no reference whatsoever to guide him. Because the voice quality is uncannily almost identical. Could someone have taken Mr. Lineberry's recording and altered it slightly and added a new instrumental track? It's possible using today's technology. The unusual blues note sung in the Stuart version would have been created in the studio, but that effect is not impossible to manufacture. Still, if Mr. Lineberry says it isn't him, so be it. But I assure you Mr. Debjorgo, I AM reading Steve's articles. And yes Steve, please continue following this story as best you can. If it turns out to be an authentic recording, it is a very valuable piece of Beatles history.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 7, 2011 0:42:25 GMT -5
Then why did he sing Let It Be, Lady Madonna and Yesterday if he didn't like the group. and "Hey Jude" and "Something".. Maybe because they are good songs to cover?
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 7, 2011 0:52:19 GMT -5
Mr. Debjorgo,
Below I have pasted in a comment that followed Steve's Examiner article of 11/1/11 entitled "New Details Add To Debate On Unearthed Song by Former Beatle Stu Sutcliffe";
Frank D. Badenius
Both Astrid and Klaus have listened to it long ago and both have already stated that they don't think it is Stu. Astrid is not willing to listen to it yet again. Slightly slow down the BOTB-version and change the overall arrangement: there you are. We can well guess that they have tried different versions of the song for the movie, here we have one of them. Reply · Like
· Follow Post · November 1 at 3:17pm
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 7, 2011 1:11:44 GMT -5
OK, let me throw this out to you all: Is whether it's Stu interesting or not? There are things that can be in play here if it's not him -- Pauline got conned or, as many seem to believe, she's the one doing the conning. I don't think it's good to let it die. Am I chasing a dead issue? Maybe, but that happens sometimes. Hopefully, it'll resolve itself. Yes keep investigating this! There is a claim made by the family that this is Stu but many other people who knew Stu too seem to be telling you that they have doubts. If the family is trying to con us that is important to expose. If it is Stu then your investigation will vindicate a family clearly grasping at the past and it would be an interesting development although, as I wrote above, it being Stu might be more anti-climatic than exposing a fraud. One Elvis cover won't give Stu a post-humous music career but it is important to know if it is him or not. Getting to the truth is always important even if the truth turns out to be anti-climatic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2011 1:16:00 GMT -5
Stu sings the blues is an interesting thought... It's not the only developing item of interest though in this thread..
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 7, 2011 2:15:18 GMT -5
OK, let me throw this out to you all: Is whether it's Stu interesting or not? There are things that can be in play here if it's not him -- Pauline got conned or, as many seem to believe, she's the one doing the conning. I don't think it's good to let it die. Am I chasing a dead issue? Maybe, but that happens sometimes. Hopefully, it'll resolve itself. Yes keep investigating this! There is a claim made by the family that this is Stu but many other people who knew Stu too seem to be telling you that they have doubts. If the family is trying to con us that is important to expose. If it is Stu then your investigation will vindicate a family clearly grasping at the past and it would be an interesting development although, as I wrote above, it being Stu might be more anti-climatic than exposing a fraud. One Elvis cover won't give Stu a post-humous music career but it is important to know if it is him or not. Getting to the truth is always important even if the truth turns out to be anti-climatic. John: My thinking, too, though I think there are some who have dismissed it. We'll see...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2011 4:34:40 GMT -5
I do have The Birth of the Beatles on VHS tape but thanks to the wonders of the internet i now have a 700 meg avi file version of it on my computer.....
ps...i'm acquiring Rockshow as we speak...... ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 7, 2011 5:36:48 GMT -5
It was an undressed stamped elephant. I stand corrected. So does RTP, because it was a stabbed undressed elephant.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Nov 7, 2011 7:24:30 GMT -5
Mr. Debjorgo, Below I have pasted in a comment that followed Steve's Examiner article of 11/1/11 entitled "New Details Add To Debate On Unearthed Song by Former Beatle Stu Sutcliffe"; Frank D. Badenius Both Astrid and Klaus have listened to it long ago and both have already stated that they don't think it is Stu. Astrid is not willing to listen to it yet again. Slightly slow down the BOTB-version and change the overall arrangement: there you are. We can well guess that they have tried different versions of the song for the movie, here we have one of them. Reply · Like · Follow Post · November 1 at 3:17pm Okay, I did see that about Astrid. I guess I just forgot. To me Astrid's opinion would be the last word. He supposively recorded it for her. Steve had reposted the link to his article where Lineberry said it wasn't him and I said it looks like not everybody was reading his posts. I didn't use your name. I wasn't calling anyone out. But I think Steve might had misunderstood my comment and thought I was saying people didn't care enough to read his post. I used your name to explain my comment. Again, I wasn't trying to attack. If I were trying to say you missed a couple of facts, I could have just said it to you. I'm going to start a thread where I make appologies for my mis-speaks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2011 7:41:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Nov 7, 2011 11:46:50 GMT -5
Mr. Debjorgo, Below I have pasted in a comment that followed Steve's Examiner article of 11/1/11 entitled "New Details Add To Debate On Unearthed Song by Former Beatle Stu Sutcliffe"; Frank D. Badenius Both Astrid and Klaus have listened to it long ago and both have already stated that they don't think it is Stu. Astrid is not willing to listen to it yet again. Slightly slow down the BOTB-version and change the overall arrangement: there you are. We can well guess that they have tried different versions of the song for the movie, here we have one of them. Reply · Like · Follow Post · November 1 at 3:17pm Okay, I did see that about Astrid. I guess I just forgot. To me Astrid's opinion would be the last word. He supposively recorded it for her. Steve had reposted the link to his article where Lineberry said it wasn't him and I said it looks like not everybody was reading his posts. I didn't use your name. I wasn't calling anyone out. But I think Steve might had misunderstood my comment and thought I was saying people didn't care enough to read his post. I used your name to explain my comment. Again, I wasn't trying to attack. If I were trying to say you missed a couple of facts, I could have just said it to you. I'm going to start a thread where I make appologies for my mis-speaks. debjorgo: I did take your comments wrong. And I don't know who this Frank D. Badenius guy is, so I don't know where he gets his info. He just joined the FB group yesterday, so maybe he'll chime in.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 7, 2011 11:53:11 GMT -5
LOL, you always liked the Threads where there was some tension, you mixer you! ;D
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Nov 8, 2011 23:58:52 GMT -5
Steve,
Ok, I finally got a response from Frank D. Badenius, the guy who responded to your examiner article on the Stuart recording and said Astrid had heard the recording and did not think it was Stu. I wrote him through Facebook after he joined your new Facebook Beatles site and he responded to me. You can see my note to him below and his response. If you accept his response, then it appears Astrid has stated her opinion through Klaus. And things don't look good for this record being the geniune article Pauline says it is.
Lowbasso
Frank, Your comment above says Astrid has indeed heard this alleged Stuart recording. What was the source of that information? There is a lot of buzz about this issue, and so far, you are the only one who has information that Astrid has indeed heard and commented on the recording. So I was curious where that news on Astrid's opinion came from? Yesterday at 12:34pm · Like.
Frank D. Badenius I'm running a german Beatles-website, where we are also discussing this topic. One of us asked Klaus and he said he's sure that Astrid has also listened to that recording some time ago. They both don't think it's Stu.Case closed. I'm going with the ones who really should know. Also: If he had recorded that song for Astrid - as someone has already guessed - why did she never tell anybody? I can't believe that Astrid should deny any knowledge of a recording like that. I mean ...! And on the other hand, if it's a bloody fake, why should she refuse to listen one more time? Because she already knows. Closed case closed again. And again. Let's all look out for that Top Ten rehearsal that Frank Dostal has locked in his safe. Or "September Song". Or that infamous - and really boring - 26-minutes-version (it is NOT 27 minutes!) of "Helter Skelter".
;o)
Yesterday at 12:55pm · Like
|
|