this was mentioned as a reference source for the free coursera The Music of the Beatles course

http://www.andybabiuksfabgear.com/beatles-gear/beatles-gear/

may be available from your local library

That book was mentioned in this thread as well:

http://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads...true#Post237796


Great book - a must have for any gearhead and Beatles fan.

They used the gear that they were TOLD to use...

Guess you didn't read the book. In the beginning, they used what they could afford. Later, they used what they liked.

They liked what they were told to like.

Look, The Beatles were a seriously backed bidness endeavor to bring US dollars into Britain in a successful effort to create a good export industry at the time the country sorely needed same.

The book might just be more of same, actually.

The effect of the Marshall Plan was far reaching and also imitated by nations other than the ones that lost WWII.

Not that I'm knocking it, though, the "British Invasion" of popular music represented yet another way that we could share our largess with an important ally.

Maybe the kids got to make some choices, but judging from the brands they chose, I'm absolutely convinced that the choices had to come from products made in England. The two famous guitars notwithstanding, the brand-new-always Vox amps, even those funny little mics with the perspex "ring of saturn" around 'em...

The sad thing to me is that it appears that far too many think they know what happened merely from their experience as consumers viewing the situation from the outside.

HMG does not hand out titles for songwriting.

You get knighted for bringin' wealth to the realm.


--Mac

"They liked what they were told to like."


Really? By whom? Queen Elizabeth or George Marshall?



"Look, The Beatles were a seriously backed bidness endeavor to bring US dollars into Britain in a successful effort to create a good export industry at the time the country sorely needed same.

The book might just be more of same, actually."


It might be, but it isn't really. The book was published in 2001. That Marshall Plan really was long-lived, no?




"Maybe the kids got to make some choices, but judging from the brands they chose, I'm absolutely convinced that the choices had to come from products made in England. The two famous guitars notwithstanding, the brand-new-always Vox amps, even those funny little mics with the perspex "ring of saturn" around 'em..."


Yup. Hofner, Rickenbacker, Fender, Gibson, Epiphone, Hohner,Telefunken; all of those British brands. The Vox amps they played in the U.S. Were U.S. Made Vox amps, not the British ones. That's also in the book.


"The sad thing to me is that it appears that far too many think they know what happened merely from their experience as consumers viewing the situation from the outside."


Yes, sad indeed.

A book published in 2001.

About a subject that took place in the 60's.

As for Vox amps made in USA, surely you must know that the parent company was British.

Notice that up above I said that there were those who copied what the Marshall Plan put forth, it is part and parcel of business history that success gets copied. And copied.

Look, it is no big secret, we had the likes of Motown, Wrecking Crew, etc. and Britain followed suit.

As for being told what to use, the history of endorsement contracting in the music industry is as old as the instruments themselves and continues to this very day.

Again I say that this is not a bug, its a feature, part and parcel of good business practice IMO.


Frank Zappa is one who laid it all out in writing, a really good read IMO.

Speaking of FZ and Beatles, check this out about what took place the one time John and Yoko appeared with The Mothers - and the rather low thing John and Yoko pulled by releasing an album of it afterwards, in which the two claimed the songwriting credits:

http://suckmybeatles.com/2007/10/29/reason-1754-the-ballad-of-john-and-frank/



Be sure to listen to the audio of Frank on that link, "in his own words..."


--Mac

“A book published in 2001.

About a subject that took place in the 60's.”


What's your point? They're still writing books about Lincoln. He's been dead for 149 years.

To quote the publisher on the author:


“He is a staff consultant to the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame and consultant to major auction houses in London and New York. Babiuk is the foremost authority on the equipment used to create the Beatles' music. Andy perceived the need for a book about The Beatles' gear when he tried to emulate some of their recorded sounds for his own band, The Chesterfield Kings. Andy then embarked on six years of research for Beatles Gear, during which time he interviewed over 400 people who worked with or were closely associated with The Beatles, listened to hundreds of recordings, watched miles of film, and amassed a vast library of documents and photographic evidence of The Beatles using their instruments and equipment. The result is this most detailed account of The Beatles and the tools that they used, on-stage and in the studio.”


I found it a very comprehensive look at the gear the Beatles used on stage and in the studio, but then I actually read the book.



“As for Vox amps made in USA, surely you must know that the parent company was British.”


Quite rightly; but the amps they played on tour in the USA were made at the American Vox factory.
You neglected to comment on the Hofner, Rickenbacker, Fender, Gibson, Epiphone, Hohner,Telefunken gear they used. None of them are British companies.



“Notice that up above I said that there were those who copied what the Marshall Plan put forth, it is part and parcel of business history that success gets copied. And copied.”


I wasn't aware that Brian Epstein was 'copying' the Marshall Plan. Very edifying, albeit bizarre.



“Look, it is no big secret, we had the likes of Motown, Wrecking Crew, etc. and Britain followed suit.”

“As for being told what to use, the history of endorsement contracting in the music industry is as old as the instruments themselves and continues to this very day.

Again I say that this is not a bug, its a feature, part and parcel of good business practice IMO.


Frank Zappa is one who laid it all out in writing, a really good read IMO.

Speaking of FZ and Beatles, check this out about what took place the one time John and Yoko appeared with The Mothers - and the rather low thing John and Yoko pulled by releasing an album of it afterwards, in which the two claimed the songwriting credits”


And that is germane to the subject....somehow?

Since we're way out here in Left Field, I did happen to attend one of the Mother's debut concerts at the Cafe au Go Go in the Village. Great shows.

The only Telefunken "gear" that I know to have been associated with The Beatles is the mixing console at Abbey Road, which is not exactly gear "chosen" by the Beatles themselves, although the studio itself might have had some input from the fab four as to the one selected, or might not have been.

All the other brands are the guitars, of which fair Britain had few examples to offer, those gawdawful Vox creations that Paul Revere and the Raiders touted may or may not qualify.


--Mac

http://www.telefunken-elektroakustik.com/products/mics/show_product.php?item=19



the console at AR is a Neve 88RS.

Aw c'mon, they never used that mic onstage in live performance, did they.

And, it likely belonged to the recording company or studio owner, pulled from the mic locker.

The point is that there was plenty of marketing involved, as there is with any endeavor of that size and scope.

You keep talking about Vox amps being built stateside as if it did not help the British company's sales when thousands of young white kids who, for the first time in history, really, had access to amounts of money to spend hitherto never before seen.

Seeing the Beatles live with all Vox amps served as advertisement that did indeed effect the bottom line sales for the company here.

Even the few times the Beatles used a keyboard onstage, such as at Shea, they used a brit combo organ.


Look, I don't slight a guy for staying true to his nation's products. That's just good business practice.

And things like that don't happen by accident. It is a safe assumption that mfrs like Vox sent sales and marketing staff to the fab four acconmpanied by truckloads of dropoffs.


--Mac

“Aw c'mon, they never used that mic onstage in live performance, did they.”


Of course not. It's a studio condenser, not a live mic. Splitting hairs now?


“And, it likely belonged to the recording company or studio owner, pulled from the mic locker.”

Probably. Your point?

“The point is that there was plenty of marketing involved, as there is with any endeavor of that size and scope.”


Oh, I see.


“You keep talking about Vox amps being built stateside as if it did not help the British company's sales when thousands of young white kids......”


That statement speaks for itself.

Beatles Vox amps - its a matter of record (Dick Denney - Mr Vox)that the first Beatles amps, AC15s, were bought from a Music Shop in Liverpool (Hesseys) just like almost everyone else gets their gear.
It was Brian Epstein who later "persuaded" Vox (JMI) that giving them new AC30s would be to their mutual advantage. In the end they "traded in" their AC15s plus some small amount of cash for them. And Dick Denney should know.
The Beatles together and individually used Vox amps long after they had ceased to tour.
None were made in the USA for The Beatles. Thomas Organ, under a licence and develop agreement started to produce Vox branded transistor amps c1965 including the so-called "Super Beatle" which was never actually used by The Fab Four. They used the UK produced AC100/Beatle cabinet all-valve set up. However, later developments of Thomas designed "Vox" amps (Series4 and 7)were used in recording parts of "Revolver" and Sgt Pepper" as, whilst being a bland and uninspiring amp tone-wise, it had some effects, like Fuzz, that interested the Beatles at that time.
Ian

Ian,

That is all true. The entire story is in the book referenced by the OP. My actual statement was:


“...the amps they played on tour in the USA were made at the American Vox factory.”

Which is also true, according to the author. I will defer to his six years of exhaustive research to determine if it's a 'matter of record'. The point I was trying to make was that they also used gear from other than British manufacturers. They also used a Fender Bassman, Bandmaster, Silverface Twin, Deluxe, Deluxe Reverb, etc.

I did not mean to cast aspersions on Vox – I love their amps.


Regards,

Bob

Hi Bob
No aspertions taken, my friend.
Its just that the OPs info is at odds with the book written by Dick Denney, who of course, "invented" Vox. "The Vox Story" - Dick Denney and Davis Petersen.
AFAIC there was no VOX FACTORY in the USA. There was a Thomas Organ factory in the USA making their own design Vox amps, all transistor originally. According to my book, The Beatles didnt use the Thomas made "Super Beatle" in the USA, or anywhere else, they stuck with the all valve AC100.
Wouldnt it be great to have a selective Time MAchine and pop back and check WHO was right? lol!
I love Vox amps. I had one of the first AC30/6 Twin Top Boost amps in the early 60's and wish I had never sold it. I now have a Vox AD60VT for my gigging. Its till big but I dont need to wear Tenors Truss to lift it!!
Ian

Ian,

You are indeed correct. There are two different accounts in the “Gear” book. One states that they used Vox amps from the US factory, and the other states that they did in fact bring their AC's with them on the first US tour. I'll take Denney's word for that – he was there and a major player. I stand corrected.

Pity you sold that AC30/6 Twin Top Boost – it would be worth a fortune today!


Regards,


Bob

Don't see how it is "splitting hairs" when my point is still the same, that the concept that these young lads selected ALL of the equipments used to both record them and for them to use in live performance is not exactly the way things like that work in the real world.

Look, in that era the singers did not have much say in the type of microphone or brand of microphone that would be used to record them. That task invariably fell to the Recording Engineers for Tracking Sessions or perhaps in a few cases, the choice of the "hands on" Producer. Not very likely that any of those stodgy engineers would have accepted any demand to use a certain mic from what they certainly viewed as four young teenagers.



See the above answer.

The teenagers would not have been in a position to CHOOSE or use that Telefunken mic.





That statement speaks of the reality that is US history.

I heartily recommend you to find and read Frank Zappa's essay on the subject of the recording companies, rock and roll music, record distribution, and most importantly perhaps, the effects of the inherent racism of the United States and its impact on same. I can't find it readily online somewhere, but will keep looking for it in an effort to help the better understanding of the truth and the reality.

The 60s were not all that they were cracked up to be. Unfortunately.


--Mac

And don't I know it!
Bought c1964, I used it, often several times a week, for 11 years. It was terribly abused and never let me down. Sold it to a Dealer (I know! I know! :o) cos I wanted out of the G-Dd music business.
Today a "good" one of the same Vintage (if you can get one) is probably $3000 or thereabouts.
Don't even ask me how much I got for my 62 Fender Strat and Harmony H75 (see avatar). 20-20 Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Ian

Maybe I should start a new thread (S)-
"Gear we wish we'd kept" and
"Gear we were glad to get rid of"

Think I will
Ian

I find your reference to "white kids" inherently racist, and your blame shifting inherently disingenuous.

Well, being a black man who has dealt with the racism inherent in this country literally every day, I think I may know something about the subject.

Not my fault that the Truth bothers you, look within.


--Mac

Whether someone picked their equipment or had it picked for them, does it matter?

As a sort of interesting sidebar to this conversation, there's a BBC documentary called "Produced by George Martin" which is a very interesting look at his strange rise to fame at his record company largely due to what the Beatles brought to Abbey Road - which had been doing what seemed like mainly comedy albums up to that point in time. Martin and some of those artists go into depth on that discussion and how it helped him produce rock records.

Martin was a jazz pianist.

The 2-5 change in I Wanna Hold Your Hand simply wasn't something the average rock 'n roller kid would do, while at the same time being something that a jazz pianist would do and know well, inserting the Rhythm Changes into a rock song like that, and, of course the Intro 4-6-5 and Ending changes to me are but some of many evidences of Martin's handson work with the group.

Then came the London Symphony.

I don't think that any of four kids from Liverpool would speak up one day and say, "You know what would make this? - A Baroque Concert Piccolo Trumpet Descant!"

And who WROTE that part in Penny Lane that the London Symphony trumpet player played?

Great Arrangements don't just happen by themselves.


--Mac

Good points Mac. I have been reading up on Lennon a fascinating character warts and all.

Seems he even had a go at Martin,

http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/stop-the-pr...-192300104.html

A great songwriter no doubt, but I think him and Ono two of a kind, loved the publicity and attention "hiar in, bed in baggism"etc.

I like how the journalist and cartoonist, was is Al Capp cornered him at bedin, for once Lennon met his match, you can view it on youtube.

Musiclover

I see. You make a blatantly racist remark, and when called on it, you choose to impugn my character.
Your race does not immunize you from bigotry, any more than mine does.

Look within, indeed.

Again, all I have done is point out a fact concerning record sales in the United States during the 60's.

This is a matter of record and easily researched.

Guys like 90dB who are absolutely fascinated by the ancient news concerning that George Harrison lawsuit and the judgement concerning same surely must realize the race of the winning party.

In actuality, that one event represents only the tip of the iceberg.

You would do yourself some good by researching total record sales comparing Chubby Checker's Twist dance records as versus The Beatles' one Twist offering...

It is just fact approximately 14% of the population could not in any way compete with the buying power of the remaining ~86% - even though it is easily evident that the minority invented much of the genre to begin with.


--Mac

“Again, all I have done is point out a fact concerning record sales in the United States during the 60's.”

Actually, no – you didn't. You made a overtly racist remark, then in a cowardly manner impugned my character to deflect your own bigotry.


“You would do yourself some good by researching total record sales comparing Chubby Checker's Twist dance records as versus The Beatles' one Twist offering...”


I knew Chubby Checker. He used to work plucking chickens down in Camden before he got a record out. Used to shoot craps with him, as well as several of the Motown folks. Funny, none of them thought I was a racist.


“ Guys like 90dB...” who are absolutely fascinated by the ancient news concerning that George Harrison lawsuit and the judgement concerning same surely must realize the race of the winning party”


Yet another accusation. “Guys like” me? You don't know me at all, but then, that is the core of racism, isn't it? Hating people you don't even know because of their skin color?

Yup, guys like you.

I see that you are the only one resorting to the name calling here, the ad honminem.

All I've done is use one word, as a description of a fact, the word was, "white".

And it is indeed a fact that the white population was the dominant majority population during the 60s, so what is racist about mentioning an easily proven fact?

How many Monkees concerts was Jimi allowed to play before complaints from outraged white parents forced the parent company to pull the plug on him?


--Mac

Um, right. The old, "some of my best friends are..."


But you know, I have never called you a racist.


I wrote two words together in one sentence. "white kids" - and in description of the history of it, no less.

You have supplied everything else.

Methinks you doth protesteth too much.


--Mac

Man, you are something else.

“I see that you are the only one resorting to the name calling here, the ad honminem.”

A veiled ad hominem is no less odious.

“Yup, guys like you.”

“Um, right. The old, "some of my best friends are..."

“Methinks you doth protesteth too much.”


It's a wonder you can even stand up with that huge chip on your shoulder. You don't even have the backbone to stand behind your veiled accusations. Instead, you feign innocence as you imply that someone you don't even know is a racist. Pathetic.

I believe I can answer this definitively, at least to my satisfaction.

Within the last year, I saw this very subject (the creation of the piccolo trumpet part in "Penny Lane") addressed in a documentary.

I can't remember the exact subject of the documentary (George Martin, Paul McCartney, or the Beatles), nor the source of the documentary (it was likely British and shown on PBS).

But I remember the revelation very clearly.

I consider the source in this instance impeccable.

Paul McCartney, in the recording studio, told Martin he wanted the piccolo trumpet. To my recollection, Paul did not know the official name. He called it something like "a high trumpet" or a "high horn".

George knew what he was referring to.

According to the source, Paul told George Martin the exact notes he wanted for the horn break. I cannot remember if the source said Paul whistled or sang "da da da" to convey the notes and the rhythm.

George wrote the part down. He told Paul there was a problem. A couple of notes were above the range of the piccolo trumpet.

Paul was crushed, as those were the notes. George said maybe all was not lost, that the best symphony players could sometimes exceed the standard range of an instrument by a bit, and said that they would just have to try it.

It was played beautifully, without a problem. The notes played were the exact notes conveyed to George Martin by Paul McCartney. (No improvisation.)

So George Martin was

1. not the composer of the piccolo trumpet part
2. not the arranger of the piccolo trumpet part

according to this source, who told this story directly to the camera.

I said previously that I considered the source impeccable in this instance.

2 reasons:

1. The source was there when this transpired.
2. The source had nothing to gain by lying (and something to lose).

The source was George Martin.


So in the instance of this "Great Arrangement", the composer and the arranger of the "Penny Lane" recording was indeed one of the "four kids from Liverpool", Paul McCartney.


I do not believe that the documentary was fabricated by the British Empire using CGI or that George Martin was paid off in the interest of revisionist history.


The whole assertion of the British Empire driving the Beatles is INANE!


EVERYBODY who knows,
KNOWS that the Beatles were a cold war creation of the KGB!


P.S. Not that well known: One must be very wealthy to be Knighted. It is very expensive, and those titles provide quite a revenue stream.

(As in "You can be in our club! It's a great honor! But you must pay your dues." ((The "dues" here are NOT the toil made to be worthy of club inclusion.))

To 90dB:

I'm not the one typing the veiled threats here either.

You should give it up, please.


--Mac

Now I'm making 'veiled threats'?

Incredible.


You were the one who introduced race into a fun thread about the Beatles' gear. Probably because you see everything through the lens of race, and I truly pity you for that.

Stating that something was a business endeavor by private individuals looking for success, and that those private individuals were surely aware of the effects of the Marshall Plan and very likely to have paid heed now has been turned into "Mac said it was the Gummint!" ...

As for whoever said or wrote whatever after the fact of the arrangement, I would point out some of the claims John Lennon made as to his input and some of his rash communications in writing to Paul, Linda and Sir Martin as evidence that nobody today can even get to what obviously was the case. As for Martin, seems to me that his responses have tended towards the gentlemanly side of things, such is the case of the true gentleman.

But I won't just say that "I read it once" here's a link to it:

http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/stop-the-pr...-192300104.html


--Mac

I guess Frank Zappa must have been as racist as you accuse me of being as well.

In his own words, from an article penned by Frank himself for Guitar Player magazine in the 80's we find the following:



emphasis added

Source: http://www.afka.net/Articles/1987-01_Guitar_Player.htm

Mac, Zappa was spot on. If it weren’t for the British invasion and the fact that those in the invasion praised the black blues artists then most of America would have never known about them at that period of time.