|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 24, 2012 16:07:24 GMT -5
There's no question that Pete Best has taken it on the chin (not surprisingly given the chain of events) in Beatle history. I remember his "I've Got a Secret" appearance in 1964 when he still appeared a bit in shock.
I've seen and met Pete. He's a good drummer, but if you compare his style with Ringo, there's no contest. Ringo is better technically, IMO. But was that the only reason Pete was dumped? No. I suspect there's more to the story. There's been mention in at least one Beatle book that his mother was part of the reason. That makes sense.
But as far as being a drummer goes, I don't think his drumming was that inferior to Ringo's to cause him to be dumped. It's been said that's the case, but I don't believe that.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Feb 24, 2012 16:17:09 GMT -5
As far as I'm concerned a band knows when it's got the right drummer and as George said "when Ringo played with the band (before he joined officially) it just felt right".
But as you say Steve there may well be more to it than has been alluded to by the chaps themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 24, 2012 16:21:29 GMT -5
Since this is something like a new and "official" thread dedicated to Pete, it's important to note that John Lennon went so far in the '70s to say this in a recorded interview:
"Pete was a harmless guy but he was not quick, and all of us were quick minds." He went on: "He was a lousy drummer. He never improved. We needed a drummer to go to Hamburg and we knew about this guy who had a club in his mother's basement, and he could keep a stick going for long enough, and we were always gonna dump him when we could find a decent drummer". Addressing the issue of Pete's popularity, I can hear Lennon on the tape saying: "I know there were rumors that Paul was jealous of him because he was pretty, and all that crap".
Personally, I'm no musician and I don't know anything about music technically; I just know what sounds good to me. I don't like Pete's drumming on the Decca Auditions, and I think he's particularly poor on his LOVE ME DO tryout. To my ears , he seems to speed up faster and slow down at other times, rather irregularly. Sometimes seems to "overplay" as well. I've noticed that on some recent gigs of his posted at YouTube.
|
|
|
Post by Snookeroo on Feb 24, 2012 16:23:24 GMT -5
Speaking as a drummer myself:
Pete was a very good time-keeper. He was right on the beat and never wavered from it. Many drummer in bands have had long careers doing just that behind a lead singer. Ringo brought a much larger package to the band. He was more noticeable as a drummer, and a personality. Plus, he sang. It's well documented that he had his "Satrr Time" spot during the Hurricane shows. By the time the Beatles asked Ringo to join, they considered him a seasoned pro - even more so than they tenselves were. He was an upgrade. Drumming wise, as I said, Pete kept a good beat. The recording I have heard don't show him "feeling" the music so much as just trying to keep that beat. Nothing wrong with that until a guy comes along that throws his all into the songs. When you do that the energy tranfers into the other players and the whole thing fell so much better. I don't know if Pete would have developed more as time went on, but Ringo had that power back then. You can hear it in the Hamburg recordings.
If anyone has Pete Best recording that maybe a lot of us have not heard I would love to hear them. Did he do much recording after the early 60's?
|
|
|
Post by Snookeroo on Feb 24, 2012 16:28:15 GMT -5
Since this is something like a new and "official" thread dedicated to Pete, it's important to note that John Lennon went so far in the '70s to say this in a recorded interview: "Pete was a harmless guy but he was not quick, and all of us were quick minds." He went on: "He was a lousy drummer. He never improved. We needed a drummer to go to Hamburg and we knew about this guy and he could keep a stick going for long enough, and we were always gonna dump him when we could find a decent drummer". Addressing the issue of Pete's popularity, I can hear Lennon on the tape saying: "I know there were rumors that Paul was jealous of him because he was pretty, and all that crap". Personally, I'm no musician and I don't know anything about music technically; I just know what sounds good to me. I don't like Pete's drumming on the Decca Auditions, and I think he's particularly poor on his LOVE ME DO tryout. I also think that the jealousy thing is crap. But this Lennon quote sound like John was in a bitchy mood. You have to take Lennon quotes carefully sometimes. I don't know if they actively planned to replace Pete at some point, but they sure didn't have any love for his place in the band because when the chance came to let him go they went right about doing it. They may have been relieved when George Martin citicized Pete's playing.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 24, 2012 16:39:05 GMT -5
I also think that the jealousy thing is crap. But this Lennon quote sound like John was in a bitchy mood. You have to take Lennon quotes carefully sometimes. I don't know if they actively planned to replace Pete at some point, but they sure didn't have any love for his place in the band because when the chance came to let him go they went right about doing it. They may have been relieved when George Martin citicized Pete's playing. The thing about the Lennon quote is this. I was living in Queens, NY at the time and there was an all-day radio show on The Beatles I'd guess around 1976 or 1977. I recorded a good portion of it, but couldn't get all of it. It was here that I heard all sorts of interview bits like this one, and others I haven't heard since (like Mal Evans saying how he and Paul actually wrote both "Sgt Pepper" and "Fixing A Hole" together). But I've long since lost these tapes, but much of the dialogue I can still hear etched in my memory, inflections and all. Back to the John comment -- not to disagree with you for the sake of it, Snookeroo -- but in later years fairly recently I recall listening to some John Lennon "lost radio interview". I canot recall the station - it may have been WNEW, but it wasn't the famous Denis Ellsis 1974 one, nor the 1975 Scott Muni ROCK N ROLL one.... but I was amazed when that old quote about Pete Best came back again -- and I thought to myself "ah-ha, so THIS was the interview!" But the thing is, John did not sound like he was in a bitchy mood. But I cannot recall what radio station it was, damn it.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Feb 24, 2012 16:42:32 GMT -5
Couldn't agree more Joe.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Feb 24, 2012 16:47:43 GMT -5
I also agree with Snookeroo.
It's only the version of Love Me Do that's really poor with the Decca audition being just dull and boring.
Ringo seems to power and groove them based on the evidence we have.
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Feb 24, 2012 17:00:27 GMT -5
John definatly said the "lousy drummer who didn't improve comment about Pete". Of course John could say lot of things that were harsh or not entirely true, especially if someone put him on the spot. Think of some of the ugly quotes you could find that he said about McCartney, Harrison & Starr as well. Although I have never heard it said, it wouldn't be suprising if Pete got a big head and didn't work as hard to improve during his second year in the band considering all of the attention he was getting at the time. There is that famous incident a few months before he was sacked where Paul McCartney's father ripped into Pete after a show for standing on stage before adoring fans and not calling the others up to join him. Also, it was said here that Ringo brought the added dimension of singing occasionally. So did Pete.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 24, 2012 17:02:30 GMT -5
Since this is something like a new and "official" thread dedicated to Pete, it's important to note that John Lennon went so far in the '70s to say this in a recorded interview: "Pete was a harmless guy but he was not quick, and all of us were quick minds." He went on: "He was a lousy drummer. He never improved. We needed a drummer to go to Hamburg and we knew about this guy who had a club in his mother's basement, and he could keep a stick going for long enough, and we were always gonna dump him when we could find a decent drummer". Addressing the issue of Pete's popularity, I can hear Lennon on the tape saying: "I know there were rumors that Paul was jealous of him because he was pretty, and all that crap". Personally, I'm no musician and I don't know anything about music technically; I just know what sounds good to me. I don't like Pete's drumming on the Decca Auditions, and I think he's particularly poor on his LOVE ME DO tryout. To my ears , he seems to speed up faster and slow down at other times, rather irregularly. Sometimes seems to "overplay" as well. I've noticed that on some recent gigs of his posted at YouTube. I think that recent letter in which the Beatles were looking for a drummer kind of puts a question on John's spin, assuming, of course, the letter was written to Pete. One of three stories I wrote about this: www.examiner.com/beatles-in-national/did-paul-mccartney-write-a-letter-for-beatles-drummer . Also there's this: www.examiner.com/beatles-in-national/exclusive-historic-1960-letter-from-paul-mccartney-excites-beatles-experts
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 24, 2012 17:10:47 GMT -5
John definatly said the "lousy drummer who didn't improve comment about Pete". Of course John could say lot of things that were harsh or not entirely true, especially if someone put him on the spot. Think of some of the ugly quotes you could find that he said about McCartney, Harrison & Starr as well. Although I have never heard it said, it wouldn't be suprising if Pete got a big head and didn't work as hard to improve during his second year in the band considering all of the attention he was getting at the time. There is that famous incident a few months before he was sacked where Paul McCartney's father ripped into Pete after a show for standing on stage before adoring fans and not calling the others up to join him. Also, it was said that Ringo brought the added dimension of singing occasionally. So did Pete. Was Pete's singing that good? I don't recall if he sang the time I saw the Pete Best Band. I will say, though, that group, not the same one he has now, put on a wonderful show.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Feb 24, 2012 17:15:56 GMT -5
I lost heart after 18 pages of going back.
Any chance of a better link?
I must have missed this letter.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Feb 24, 2012 17:17:39 GMT -5
John definatly said the "lousy drummer who didn't improve comment about Pete". Of course John could say lot of things that were harsh or not entirely true, especially if someone put him on the spot. Think of some of the ugly quotes you could find that he said about McCartney, Harrison & Starr as well. Although I have never heard it said, it wouldn't be suprising if Pete got a big head and didn't work as hard to improve during his second year in the band considering all of the attention he was getting at the time. There is that famous incident a few months before he was sacked where Paul McCartney's father ripped into Pete after a show for standing on stage before adoring fans and not calling the others up to join him. Also, it was said that Ringo brought the added dimension of singing occasionally. So did Pete. Was Pete's singing that good? I don't recall if he sang the time I saw the Pete Best Band. I will say, though, that group, not the same one he has now, put on a wonderful show. Of course it was! It was better than John, Paul and George's put together.
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Feb 24, 2012 17:31:00 GMT -5
Was Pete's singing that good? I don't recall if he sang the time I saw the Pete Best Band. I will say, though, that group, not the same one he has now, put on a wonderful show. Pete has said he felt uncomfortable singing and that he only did it at the insistance of the other Beatles who wanted to please the fans. Pete also used to solo dancing The Peppermint Twist. That's how he met the woman he married and is still married to 50 years later. Below is Pete dancing The Peppermint Twist at a Beatles concert.
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Feb 24, 2012 17:37:28 GMT -5
I also agree with Snookeroo. It's only the version of Love Me Do that's really poor with the Decca audition being just dull and boring. Ringo seems to power and groove them based on the evidence we have. All the Beatles performed below par on the Decca auditions. As for Love Me Do, it's really not fair to compare versions. You are comparing Pete's first and only take with Ringo's final take. From all accounts, Ringo's first take sounded about the same as Pete's. They both struggled with the timing. We will never know what Ringo's first take sounded like as it was considered so poor it was erased. 32 year old studio veteran Andy White was then brought in the following week to try and get it right.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Feb 24, 2012 17:47:56 GMT -5
Are you sure Pete only had one take at Love Me Do?
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Feb 24, 2012 17:56:21 GMT -5
Are you sure Pete only had one take at Love Me Do? It would seem reasonable to assume that they would have run through it more than 1 time that day. But then the same could be said for Ringo the first day he tried it in the studio too.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Feb 24, 2012 21:35:50 GMT -5
I wouldn't think that they would record a song they never played before for an audition tape.
Didn't Ringo try to play the moroccos and drums together when he played on Love Me Do? I remember hearing something weird like that.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Feb 24, 2012 22:51:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Snookeroo on Feb 25, 2012 0:09:48 GMT -5
I also agree with Snookeroo. It's only the version of Love Me Do that's really poor with the Decca audition being just dull and boring. Ringo seems to power and groove them based on the evidence we have. All the Beatles performed below par on the Decca auditions. As for Love Me Do, it's really not fair to compare versions. You are comparing Pete's first and only take with Ringo's final take. From all accounts, Ringo's first take sounded about the same as Pete's. They both struggled with the timing. We will never know what Ringo's first take sounded like as it was considered so poor it was erased. 32 year old studio veteran Andy White was then brought in the following week to try and get it right. It's absolutely fair to compare the two versions. You've got a recorded account of the very "thing" that made the greatest band in rock history make the most famous personnel change in rock history. C'mon man. I actually hate harping on Pete's firing and inability to impress big George Martin. He seems like a good guy and I'm sorry he was canned.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Feb 25, 2012 2:21:26 GMT -5
I also agree with Snookeroo. It's only the version of Love Me Do that's really poor with the Decca audition being just dull and boring. Ringo seems to power and groove them based on the evidence we have. All the Beatles performed below par on the Decca auditions. As for Love Me Do, it's really not fair to compare versions. You are comparing Pete's first and only take with Ringo's final take. From all accounts, Ringo's first take sounded about the same as Pete's. They both struggled with the timing. We will never know what Ringo's first take sounded like as it was considered so poor it was erased. 32 year old studio veteran Andy White was then brought in the following week to try and get it right. I guess you don't believe that Pete had many more opportunities to work on Love Me Do before they took it into the studio in June for the audition. Ringo was not familiar with the song as he had only been with the band for a week. But after being replaced by Andy White, he came right back after a couple of weeks to work on the song to lay down a take as good as Andy White's. And we have that track to listen to today. So that shows that Ringo was the better drummer. When he had time to work the song, it was damn good. Pete had the same opportunity prior to the June audition, but was not able to get it together. And you love to brag that Pete had so many more live gigs with The Beatles between 1960 and 1962 than Ringo ever had later....Well, he never got his drumming up to Ringo's level even with all those so-called hundreds of gigs.... This is so silly anyway. Just listen to Pete today with his band. He comes nowhere near the level that Ringo is at. He never was at Ringo's level, in 1962, or 50 years later in 2012. Why don't you just ask Pete yourself for your film project? I'm sure he'll be glad to tell you Ringo is and was the better drummer of the two. One thing about Pete. He doesn't BS about himself or his abilities. He's an honest guy who calls it like it is. I saw that in his own DVD and book accounts about his time in The Beatles. And that is the film (and book) I will go to when I want to know what happened in that period. I find nothing you have said on this board to change my view of Pete. I will trust the souce; Pete himself. I think he would be embarrassed or even possibly angry at some of the statements you make about him here. And as far as I am concerned, this is the last statement I will make on this thread and subject. The next time I express an opinion on it will be when Pete himself says something worth commenting on.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 25, 2012 7:06:47 GMT -5
And you love to brag that Pete had so many more live gigs with The Beatles between 1960 and 1962 than Ringo ever had later....Well, he never got his drumming up to Ringo's level even with all those so-called hundreds of gigs.... You're right, lowbasso. I've pointed this out for days now. Imagine that -- all those gigs and "he never improved". Oh nooooo! Now you've done it, lowbasso --! I have interviews with Pete, and I've heard him muster up the courage to flatly declare that he was the better drummer of the two! I was just watching a fan recorded Beatles convention apearance from New Haven with Pete, and he is asked if he thinks he's a better drummer than Ringo, and he says a flat-out "Yes". I think he's always believed he's a better drummer, or at least as good. Especially when Pete appeared on TV shows like OPRAH and makes it very clear that the "Beatles Phenomenon" did not begin until after he was fired. He says he got depressed and tried to gas himself "when I watched them start to become a phenomenon". It doesn't mean anything that one DJ used the word to express his own biased opinion on the band in 1960 for one hyped-up newspaper article.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 25, 2012 7:12:40 GMT -5
John definatly said the "lousy drummer who didn't improve comment about Pete". Of course John could say lot of things that were harsh or not entirely true, especially if someone put him on the spot. Think of some of the ugly quotes you could find that he said about McCartney, Harrison & Starr as well. Then it's also possible that when John tried to say [paraphrasing]: "The Beatles' best stuff was never recorded, and we were at our best in Hamburg, and the public never saw that", it's also a possibility that John was saying this just to "debunk the Beatles Myth" and to take down all the praise for their recorded material, isn't it? You can't have it both ways. You can't say that the John quotes you like were sincere but the ones you don't like were just John being outrageous. I can easily believe that Pete sang with The Beatles up front at times. But I have to ask you again - So What?
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Feb 25, 2012 7:15:19 GMT -5
All the Beatles performed below par on the Decca auditions. As for Love Me Do, it's really not fair to compare versions. You are comparing Pete's first and only take with Ringo's final take. From all accounts, Ringo's first take sounded about the same as Pete's. They both struggled with the timing. We will never know what Ringo's first take sounded like as it was considered so poor it was erased. 32 year old studio veteran Andy White was then brought in the following week to try and get it right. I guess you don't believe that Pete had many more opportunities to work on Love Me Do before they took it into the studio in June for the audition. Ringo was not familiar with the song as he had only been with the band for a week. But after being replaced by Andy White, he came right back after a couple of weeks to work on the song to lay down a take as good as Andy White's. And we have that track to listen to today. So that shows that Ringo was the better drummer. When he had time to work the song, it was damn good. Pete had the same opportunity prior to the June audition, but was not able to get it together. And you love to brag that Pete had so many more live gigs with The Beatles between 1960 and 1962 than Ringo ever had later....Well, he never got his drumming up to Ringo's level even with all those so-called hundreds of gigs.... This is so silly anyway. Just listen to Pete today with his band. He comes nowhere near the level that Ringo is at. He never was at Ringo's level, in 1962, or 50 years later in 2012. Why don't you just ask Pete yourself for your film project? I'm sure he'll be glad to tell you Ringo is and was the better drummer of the two. One thing about Pete. He doesn't BS about himself or his abilities. He's an honest guy who calls it like it is. I saw that in his own DVD and book accounts about his time in The Beatles. And that is the film (and book) I will go to when I want to know what happened in that period. I find nothing you have said on this board to change my view of Pete. I will trust the souce; Pete himself. I think he would be embarrassed or even possibly angry at some of the statements you make about him here. And as far as I am concerned, this is the last statement I will make on this thread and subject. The next time I express an opinion on it will be when Pete himself says something worth commenting on. I never said Pete was a better drummer than Ringo. Pete has never said that Ringo was a better drummer than Pete. What you just stated never happened.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 25, 2012 7:16:18 GMT -5
I actually hate harping on Pete's firing and inability to impress big George Martin. He seems like a good guy and I'm sorry he was canned. Me too, Snookeroo. I really like Pete and I think the beatles were relly heartless in the way they dismissed him. The problem is, when you have someone basically repeating revisionist untruths loudly from the hilltops without any let-up, it's difficult to restrain yourself from restoring balance.
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Feb 25, 2012 7:18:15 GMT -5
John definatly said the "lousy drummer who didn't improve comment about Pete". Of course John could say lot of things that were harsh or not entirely true, especially if someone put him on the spot. Think of some of the ugly quotes you could find that he said about McCartney, Harrison & Starr as well. Then it's also possible that when John tried to say [paraphrasing]: "The Beatles' best stuff was never recorded, and we were at our best in Hamburg, and the public never saw that", it's also a possibility that John was saying this just to "debunk the Beatles Myth" and to take down all the praise for their recorded material, isn't it? You can't have it both ways. You can't say that the John quotes you like were sincere but the ones you don't like were just John being outrageous. I can easily believe that Pete sang with The Beatles up front at times. But I have to ask you again - So What? Before you ask me again, you have to actually ask the first time. The reason I mentioned Pete singing is because another poster, when comparing Pete & Ringo mentioned that Ringo added the extra diimenion of being able to sing with The Beatles. I mentioned Pete sang with The Beatles too.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 25, 2012 7:23:08 GMT -5
Before you ask me again, you have to actually ask the first time. The reason I mentioned Pete singing is because another poster, when comparing Pete & Ringo mentioned that Ringo added the extra diimenion of being able to sing with The Beatles. I mentioned Pete sang with The Beatles too. But you also quoted my point where I mentioned that "you can't have it both ways and only believe the John Lennon quotes you want to believe and ignore the ones you don't like". You see, this is the problem. This discussion has not flowed because you keep stating your same few lines over and over, and whenever someone else proves otherwise or at least offers you something else to consider differently, you don't acknowledge it. So isn't it possible that if you say Lennon liked to tweak things, that he was also denouncing the Beatles' catalogue by saying they were their best in the early days, too...?
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Feb 25, 2012 7:23:33 GMT -5
I actually hate harping on Pete's firing and inability to impress big George Martin. He seems like a good guy and I'm sorry he was canned. Me too, Snookeroo. I really like Pete and I think the beatles were relly heartless in the way they dismissed him. The problem is, when you have someone basically repeating revisionist untruths loudly from the hilltops without any let-up, it's difficult to restrain yourself from restoring balance. How can you now say that you are also sorry Pete got canned when you've posted reply after reply showing how thrilled you were about his firing even to the point of gladly "rubbing it in"?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 25, 2012 7:25:18 GMT -5
I never said Pete was a better drummer than Ringo. Pete has never said that Ringo was a better drummer than Pete. What you just stated never happened. And here as well. Lowbasso offered up all sorts of points and questions, but you've disregarded those and just went back to "Pete said he was a better drummer". Now, how about addressing everything else lowbasso wrote..?
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Feb 25, 2012 7:27:41 GMT -5
Before you ask me again, you have to actually ask the first time. The reason I mentioned Pete singing is because another poster, when comparing Pete & Ringo mentioned that Ringo added the extra diimenion of being able to sing with The Beatles. I mentioned Pete sang with The Beatles too. But you also quoted my point where I mentioned that "you can't have it both ways and only believe the John Lennon quotes you want to believe and ignore the ones you don't like". You see, this is the problem. This discussion has not flowed because you keep stating your same few lines over and over, and whenever someone else proves otherwise or at least offers you something else to consider differently, you don't acknowledge it. So isn't it possible that if you say Lennon liked to tweak things, that he was also denouncing the Beatles' catalogue by saying they were their best in the early days, too...? In 1965, when asked at a press conference about Pete Best, John not only wouldn't admit Pete was in The Beatles, he didn't even admit to knowing him. Instead he dismissed him as a drunkard making crazy claims (like being in The Beatles).
|
|