|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 11, 2012 11:01:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 11, 2012 11:11:57 GMT -5
I just searched using Google and found the exact mp3 with the exact same file name as the one you provided at a Chinese website. John comments on the reason The Beatles dumped Pete, but NO WHERE IN THIS CLIP DOES HE SAY WHAT JOE IS CLAIMING. He makes absolutely no mention of Ringo yet alone Joe's claim that John says The Beatles were amatures before Ringo joined the group in August 1962. You're driving me crazy again. What the hell are you even talking about? You said something about Pete and Ringo being "equals" when they started out. I told you that Lennon said "We knew of Ringo, he was a professional, we were amateurs." That says John did not think that Pete and Ringo were on "an equal playing field" at all. And that's ALL I meant. You got it into your head that I was talking about August 1962, and I never was. Several posts ago now I clarified that you and I have been talking about the same thing: John was referring to the earlier HAMBURG days.... You need to come down to Earth and read and comprehend.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 11, 2012 11:30:37 GMT -5
He makes absolutely no mention of Ringo yet alone Joe's claim that John says The Beatles were amatures before Ringo joined the group in August 1962. You've really got this whole thing mixed up... I'm not saying that the "Ringo" comments are part of the same sound byte -- or even necessarily the same interview -!! -- as the clip about John tallking about "dumping lousy Pete". The sound byte clip here just talks about the Pete thing. Jeez. (The clip I provided was Snookeroo's link which I simply copied from the PETE BEST UNIVERSE thread down below, by the way.)
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 11, 2012 11:45:38 GMT -5
Your exact words were...
There may be some opinions out there to that effect, but it's pretty well established that Ringo Starr was considered the #1 DRUMMER at the time, in the biggest group, Rory Storm And The Hurricanes.
You like quoting John Lennon about "The Beatles were at their best in the early days" .... but how about Lennon's quotes: "Ringo was a professional, we were amateurs" [which includes Pete]...?
I responded by saying that you were were wrong that Starr was the #1 drummer at the time and that you were taking Lennon's comment out of proper time and context. My exact words were..
No, it is not established that Ringo was the #1 drummer in Liverpool at the time. He wasn't even The Beatles first choice to replace Best.
and...
As for Ringo being a professional & the others amatures. Yeah, I agree with that. Before Pete joined The Beatles, Ringo was a professional already playing with Rory. The Beatles were an out of work bum band. So yeah, what Lennon said was true.
you responded by saying...
Lennon was referring to The Beatles being "amateurs" with Pete Best included.
I then found Lennon's exact quote and provided it for you.
"They had brought Howie Casey over, with the Seniors - or maybe they were even there when we got there - anyway, they were playing here, at Bruno's other club. They were pretty competent. They had saxes; they were really a together group. They had a black singer [Derry Wilkie] who couldn't really sing, but was a real showman. So we had to compete with them at first, and we had to start putting on this show to get enough people into our club, even though they were owned by the same person. Then they moved us in - with Rory Storm and Ringo. They were professionals; we were still amateurs. They'd been going for years, and they'd been to Butlins, and God knows what, and they really knew how to put on a show."
I then added that...
Lennon is speaking about where The Beatles and Ringo were career wise at the time The Beatles added Best and went to Germany for the first time (two years before adding Ringo). He is not comparing The Beatles during the Pete Best years with how they sounded after adding Ringo. His comment was not an indictment of Best and his drumming as Best had just joined the band when they went to Germany. So once again you are mistating facts and taking quotes out of context.
You then said...
That written quote of John's which you just Google'd is not the same audio one I'm quoting from at all, where John spoke audibly. There was no "still" in his sentence in the one I was talking about: "He was a professional, we were amateurs" is what he said. I don't remember the entire paragraph but John also said "We knew of Ringo...", and that is not present in your quotation either. So they're probably not the same interviews.
I then said...
And yes, I would like you to do some Googling of your own. I would like to see the exact quote where John Lennon says that The Beatles were amatures before they added Ringo in August 1962.
I don't believe for a minute that he said any such thing.
You then said...
John was speaking of the Beatles while playing Hamburg. He said "we knew of Ringo", and added "he was a professional, we were amateurs". It's from an audio interview that is etched in my head. I also had the quote from my signature below in my head ("By then we were pretty sick of Pete Best") but was not able to find it online.
I then said..
I don't think the quote is etched in your head correctly.
He was speaking about when the Beatles first arrived in Hamburg. Pete had just joined the group at that point in time. He was NOT comparing The Beatles after two years of Pete playing to what the group was Ringo joined. You are misquoting John.
The Beatles WERE amatures when Pete first joined. I've repeatedly said that and more. John is confirming what I have been saying.
You then said..
I'm not infallible either; but I have a good track record for recalling audio statements pretty closely.
You were wrong about Ringo being the #1 drummer in Liverpool at the time (August 1960). Ringo wasn't even the #1 drummer in Liverpool two years later when he joined The Beatles. He wasn't even their first choice.
You were also wrong about your memory of the audio clip. It made no mention of the "Ringo was a professional, we were amateurs" [which includes Pete] comment that you claimed it did.
That simply isn't there.
And you ARE taking the quote I provided out of context. John is saying The Beatles were amateurs just as Pete joined. He is talking about the time when Pete was first HIRED, not comparing Ringo to The Beatles at the time when Pete was FIRED.
Pete had never played any gigs with the band before they first started in Germany. Ringo HAD been playing with Rory and other groups for 2 years at that point. So John is basically agreeing with my point that The Beatles were a bum band when they first added Pete. They were amatuers at that point. They caught up to Ringo and his band within a matter of months after adding Pete and never looked back.
By saying The Beatles got Ringo because he was the #1 drummer in Liverpool and The Beatles were amateurs with Pete, you are both misstating facts and also taking John's comments out of proper time and context.
You also are misquoting me by claiming that I said...
You said something about Pete and Ringo being "equals" when they started out.
I never said any such thing. What I actually said was...
In 1961/62, Ringo was about the same as Pete.
That's a year and a half after when Pete just started out and 3 and a half years after Ringo was just starting out.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 11, 2012 12:28:52 GMT -5
I think if I break it down this way you may understand...
My memory is NOT from that one audio clip! My memory of that John quote is of a radio documentary I'd heard way back in the '70s!!
Let me put it this way --
In the 1970's there was an all-day radio show I recorded. It was the complete history of THE BEATLES, but I do not have the tapes anymore. For years I recall several statements such as these:
1.) Mal Evans talking about him writing 50/50 with Paul on FIXING A HOLE and the SGT PEPPER title song.
2.) John talking about Ringo being a professional and they being amateurs (yes, meaning in the early Hamburg days).
3.) Paul talking about how the Beatles haircuts came to be.
4.) John talking about taking "Preladin" in Hamburg.
5.) Paul talking about how he used his tape loops for TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS.
6.) John talking about Pete Best and what a "lousy drummer he was".
Now, all these quotes (and many others) have been etched into my mind over the decades, but I have never known where each and every one of them originates. (They were just spliced in as part of the radio documentary).
A few months ago in 2012, Snookeroo discovered the "John talks about Pete Best" quote (#6) and posted an audio clip of it down in the PETE BEST IN THE BEATLES UNIVERSE thread.
All those other 5 quotes I recall clearly, but they have not yet shown up in sound bytes online that we know of.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Jun 11, 2012 14:04:28 GMT -5
Folks: There have been a couple of things in this thread I've had to delete. My question is do you want this thread to continue or not? I think there's a good topic here, but it keeps getting sidetracked by personal comments. I'm not going to keep allowing these things to continue. This alert is for everyone. Pay attention to it. My usual calm is not going to last.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Jun 11, 2012 14:46:07 GMT -5
I do have to agree that, as beatlesattheirbest suggested, it'd be nice if Paul would deal with it with the type of project he suggests. Won't happen, though.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 11, 2012 15:16:21 GMT -5
No, it is not established that Ringo was the #1 drummer in Liverpool at the time. He wasn't even The Beatles first choice to replace Best. Who was the Beatles' first choice to replace Best?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 11, 2012 15:29:10 GMT -5
Pete had never played any gigs with the band before they first started in Germany. Ringo HAD been playing with Rory and other groups for 2 years at that point. So John is basically agreeing with my point that The Beatles were a bum band when they first added Pete. They were amatuers at that point. They caught up to Ringo and his band within a matter of months after adding Pete and never looked back. The Beatles were a "bum band" because they never had a steady drummer. Once they filled that empty seat with a body for their Hamburg gigs, they were able to improve a lot. That seat just happened to be filled by Pete Best, but it could have been filled by Tommy Moore or anyone else who played drums and the result would have been the same --- perhaps even better. They had tried to get other drummers before Pete. They even put out ads in local music papers and responded to some (which Paul's recently discovered letter proves). But at the last second they had no choice but to use Pete Best. I think evidence proves they did not think much of Best. If the Beatles already were so close with Pete and The Casbah or if they liked his drumming so much, then wouldn't it have been a natural thing for them to choose him months earlier BEFORE Hamburg?
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Jun 11, 2012 19:36:59 GMT -5
I do have to agree that, as beatlesattheirbest suggested, it'd be nice if Paul would deal with it with the type of project he suggests. Won't happen, though. This could spur deabate and arguement, but I would bet Lennon would have been most likely of all four to pull Pete into some kind of Anthology project had he lived. Pure speculation but I can't see Paul and certainly not Ringo ever agreeing to any kind of music project. It is not unprecedented as we can see with the current Beach Boy line-up.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Jun 11, 2012 22:49:19 GMT -5
I do have to agree that, as beatlesattheirbest suggested, it'd be nice if Paul would deal with it with the type of project he suggests. Won't happen, though. This could spur deabate and arguement, but I would bet Lennon would have been most likely of all four to pull Pete into some kind of Anthology project had he lived. Pure speculation but I can't see Paul and certainly not Ringo ever agreeing to any kind of music project. It is not unprecedented as we can see with the current Beach Boy line-up. Not to get too far off topic, but I just can't accept the "reunion." I didn't think the album was that great. And the whole thing is manufactured, far as I'm concerned. I don't think the Beatles would have done that. I'd like to think if what you're suggesting was to happen, it would have been because they really wanted to.
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 12, 2012 6:03:27 GMT -5
This quote is from the 1988 book "The Beatles Recording Sessions"
I just thought it was interesting what Paul had to say about how they felt about Pete as a drummer in June 1962 just before George Martin told them he would prefer to use a studio drummer for the session.
"When we first came down in June 1962, with Pete Best, George took us aside and said "I'm not happy about the drummer. And we all went, 'Oh God, well I'm not going to tell him. You tell him...Oh god!' and it was quite a blow. He said 'Can you change your drummer?' and we said 'We're quite happy with him, he works great in the clubs.'
Hmmmmm?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 6:58:24 GMT -5
No, it is not established that Ringo was the #1 drummer in Liverpool at the time. He wasn't even The Beatles first choice to replace Best. Who was the Beatles' first choice to replace Best?
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 12, 2012 7:42:00 GMT -5
No, it is not established that Ringo was the #1 drummer in Liverpool at the time. He wasn't even The Beatles first choice to replace Best. Who was the Beatles' first choice to replace Best? In the two months between the June 1962 session with Best and his August firing, The Beatles asked several Liverpool drummers before settling for Best. It is well documented. I am done doing all of your research for you Joe. If I had the time I would, but I don't. I also seem to remember answering this same question for you several months ago. There is this thing called Google. It is a search engine for finding things on the internet. Try spending some time using it instead of always asking me. I am not a search engine. If you do decide to try your luck with Google, you might want to begin your search with... ringo was not the beatles first choice to replace peteThen see what comes up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2012 8:37:49 GMT -5
There is a poster on the Steve Hoffman board who had the following to say about Pete Best... Pete Best drummed like an amateur practicing a hobby. The word that best describes his "technique" is annoying. I have heard pretty much everything he cut with the Beatles and there is little to no variation between songs. He had one pattern and he played it to death. And those paradiddle turnarounds after every musical phrase..... AIGGGGGHH! Not to be mean, but Best was still learning how to play, and would eventually get better. It would take far too long for his playing to stand alongside the rest of the boys. Remember that the only reason Pete was even IN the band was because he had a new drum kit and his Mom had a place they could rehearse. It was not his sterling ability and talent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2012 8:43:34 GMT -5
Who was the Beatles' first choice to replace Best? In the two months between the June 1962 session with Best and his August firing, The Beatles asked several Liverpool drummers before settling for Best. It is well documented. I am done doing all of your research for you Joe. If I had the time I would, but I don't. I also seem to remember answering this same question for you several months ago. There is this thing called Google. It is a search engine for finding things on the internet. Try spending some time using it instead of always asking me. I am not a search engine. If you do decide to try your luck with Google, you might want to begin your search with... ringo was not the beatles first choice to replace peteThen see what comes up. Who was Bobby Graham
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 12, 2012 10:17:07 GMT -5
Thank you fabfour. Thank you. Please continue...
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 10:27:17 GMT -5
Remember that the only reason Pete was even IN the band was because he had a new drum kit and his Mom had a place they could rehearse. It was not his sterling ability and talent. Besides, The Beatles did not even think of using Pete for Hamburg until the very last moment. I doubt Pete played with The Beatles much before Hamburg. Why wouldn't he have been in their band much earlier and ready to go to Germany with them? Paul placed ads looking for drummers to go with them to Hamburg right up to the deadline.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 10:30:38 GMT -5
In the two months between the June 1962 session with Best and his August firing, The Beatles asked several Liverpool drummers before settling for Best. It is well documented. I am done doing all of your research for you Joe. If I had the time I would, but I don't. I also seem to remember answering this same question for you several months ago. There is this thing called Google. It is a search engine for finding things on the internet. Try spending some time using it instead of always asking me. I am not a search engine. If you do decide to try your luck with Google, you might want to begin your search with... ringo was not the beatles first choice to replace peteThen see what comes up. I don't need you to do my research; I do my own, and I already know about The Beatles. Don't lecture me about Google --- as I told you before, you can't believe everything you see through Google, and also I could find just as many "facts" to support that Pete Best was actually Pete Worst.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 10:35:46 GMT -5
Good ol' Google! Looks like I know my stuff after all! Here's some Google results:
George Martin, after hearing their demo tape and listening to them live in studio was "less than impressed" with Pete's drumming abilities. He told Brian Epstein that while he wouldn't interfere with their live shows, he wanted to do what was done quite often in those days: replace a so-called "lesser" player in a band with a studio musician when recording. According to The Beatles Anthology book, this was the proverbial last straw for Pete in the eyes of John, Paul, and George - George Harrison mentions that Pete was starting to "...not turn up for gigs,,," and Paul McCartney said that the rest of the band was growing a "...bit disillusioned..." with Pete's playing.
The irony of this was that whenever Pete wasn't available or didn't turn up, they would get their mate Ringo to sit in (Ringo was in the Liverpool band Rory Storm and the Hurricanes and knew the Beatles from both bands playing in Hamburg in the early 60's).
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 10:40:28 GMT -5
Here is a hilarious Google search on Bobby Graham:
In an article about the final concert of retiring drummer Bobby Graham (68) in Hertfordshire Mercury, the well known session man gets a couple of his anecdotes retold:
In 1962 he was asked by The Beatles manager Brian Epstein to replace original drummer Pete Best in the pop group, but Bobby had a hit record with his band Joe Brown and The Bruvvers at the time and had doubts about joining a then unknown band. Here's the quote from Bobby himself: "We were on tour in June I962 and played at Cavern and Litherland Town Hall. After the show we went to a club called the Blue Angel with Brain Epstein. Brian offered me the job with the Beatles. They wanted to get rid of Pete Best, they were having problems with Pete's mother. Brian didn't like her, so he decided to out Pete, and asked me if I was interested in joining the band, I said 'why would want to join a band in Liverpool that nobody's ever heard of?".
A couple of years later, Bobby was approached again to stand in for Ringo Starr, who had tonsillitis, but this time he had too much session work to do.
He said: "I don't think it would have worked anyway. That was very much a Liverpool-based band. I thought they were great though!"
Bobby has been called the most recorded drummer in British '60s pop, and has a biography out, "The Session Man".
Source: Hertfordshire Mercury Wikipedia on Bobby Graham Bobby's Official Website
Funny stuff! So we are to believe all of this as "100% true" because it is reported here? LOL! That's why I never bothered looking this nonsense up... you can find anything on the Internet... does not mean it's true.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 10:44:27 GMT -5
Another funny thing... BATB, you keep telling us that Google is true and it is how we "learn facts". Well, also in the above item was the following line:
BOBBY GRAHAM: "I said 'why would I want to join a band in Liverpool that nobody's ever heard of?".
So wait a minute -- I thought Pete Best And The Beatles were a "phenomenon"? Nobody heard of them? Looks like Bobby Graham did not share Bob Wooler's opinion!
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 12, 2012 10:45:34 GMT -5
Google itself is not a source.
Google is a search engine that helps you find sources.
After using Google to find a source, you should then credit the actual source.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 10:47:00 GMT -5
Oh, now you're trying to discredit Google after boosting them forever? The source(s) were listed right at the bottom of the Bobby Graham item there...
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 10:50:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 10:53:28 GMT -5
Hey, BATB ... are you the one who wrote that item on this "Wog Blog"...?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 12, 2012 10:57:17 GMT -5
Just found this on Google. So Pete really did sue Ringo. (Which is what Ringo said on TV interviews):
So on August 23, 1962, poor Pete found out that he was no longer a Beatle; and although he later sued Ringo for libel, he received nothing for his early years with the band.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2012 4:49:30 GMT -5
Interesting, but not surprising that we were finding the same sites via a Google search
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 13, 2012 7:48:36 GMT -5
Just found this on Google. So Pete really did sue Ringo. (Which is what Ringo said on TV interviews): So on August 23, 1962, poor Pete found out that he was no longer a Beatle; and although he later sued Ringo for libel, he received nothing for his early years with the band.
Pete only sued to stop The Beatles from speading lies about him in the international media. How would you like it if someone started giving magazine articles saying YOU were an unreliable worker because you took drugs all the time to make you ill. Pete never took drugs (unlike his accusers who took them all the time). That was a horrible and shameful thing for The Beatles to do to him. Pete rightly sued to clear his name. He did clear his name and did receive a small settlement for the damage they caused his reputaion. Pete's never spread any lies about them. He usually has nice things to say about them and about the time he spent in the group. There is no defending what they did to him. It was wrong.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Jun 13, 2012 10:51:08 GMT -5
That's interesting. Would love to see the evidence for that.
|
|