Helter Skelter tracks

After hearing McCartney rehearsing this acoustic version, it makes me wonder if maybe he had a different "vision" for this song at first.



I imagine that maybe he originally wanted it to sound more serious and down-to-earth like this version. But perhaps the tracking session that day turned into a some stoned and drunken slop fest. :drunk: Instead of a serious work, it seems as though they all ended up haphazardly throwing paint at a canvas and calling it a song. Yet, the public fell in love with it anyway.

Just speculating.
 
You guys do know that John and George are dead, Ringo is the Hasidic Mr, Clean, and Paul is...well...Paul, right?

G.
 
After hearing McCartney rehearsing this acoustic version, it makes me wonder if maybe he had a different "vision" for this song at first.



I imagine that maybe he originally wanted it to sound more serious and down-to-earth like this version. But perhaps the tracking session that day turned into a some stoned and drunken slop fest. :drunk: Instead of a serious work, it seems as though they all ended up haphazardly throwing paint at a canvas and calling it a song. Yet, the public fell in love with it anyway.

Just speculating.
He says in the nearest thing we have to an autobiography that he was after something raw and sonically dirty after being disappointed at hearing a song by the Who that he thought would be heavier than it was. And according to studio staff that were there the night the released verion was recorded, the band were pretty stoned that session.
Mind you, your point and your clip make a great contribution to a thread that's currently running in the songwriting section.
I must say, I like this acoustic version.
 
So the general consensus is that the production on this track is pretty rough. Last night I was listening to a lot of Rolling Stones songs with my buddy, and we discussed about the horrendous production on virtually all Rolling Stones albums from the 60s and 70s. Part of me thinks though, that this crappy production was just another aspect of the uniqueness of all this music. No band anymore would EVER release anything commercially that sounded like some of those Rolling Stones tracks or some of these Beatles tracks. It's kinda sad to me because these quirks give so much more definition to this music, and now I feel as if there is this homogenized sound that every producer is chasing after rather than people trying to push the boundaries. What do you guys think?
 
So the general consensus is that the production on this track is pretty rough. Last night I was listening to a lot of Rolling Stones songs with my buddy, and we discussed about the horrendous production on virtually all Rolling Stones albums from the 60s and 70s. Part of me thinks though, that this crappy production was just another aspect of the uniqueness of all this music. No band anymore would EVER release anything commercially that sounded like some of those Rolling Stones tracks or some of these Beatles tracks. It's kinda sad to me because these quirks give so much more definition to this music, and now I feel as if there is this homogenized sound that every producer is chasing after rather than people trying to push the boundaries. What do you guys think?

Yes, and also, I think it shows that a good song is a good song. A good tune can survive the limitations of the production and still be loved. The Beatles, The Who, The Stones, The Kinks, Jimi, etc....are still adored adored 40-50 years later and a lot of their best tunes are remembered DESPITE the production/sound. :cool:
 
Yes, and also, I think it shows that a good song is a good song. A good tune can survive the limitations of the production and still be loved. The Beatles, The Who, The Stones, The Kinks, Jimi, etc....are still adored adored 40-50 years later and a lot of their best tunes are remembered DESPITE the production/sound. :cool:
Couldn't agree more. I think it is useful to remember that recording is only about a century old and has a history. If you're older, just around the same age or slightly younger (say by 10-15 years) than me, then you can probably recall things like records, tapes and 8 tracks. I don't ever recall sitting around as a kid, teen or young adult wishing the sound of the music I loved was 'better'. I just loved the music. Still do, regardless of the medium.
It can't be stressed loud enough ~ a song you love is a song you love.
My Dad was just the same with his classical music. He taped thousands of pieces from the radio in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s. And he listened to those tapes till some of the reels went transparent ! He moved with the times, technology wise, but even up to when he died at the start of the century, he still listened to those old reels !
 
Yeah, track sharing is something I've had to make lots of use of with an 8 track portastudio ! One becomes a very decisive individual with it, as well as a mixing gymnast {sadly, as opposed to genius !}
I would love to buy this one but it's over £221 on ebay. It was going for $100 when it first came out but I'm loath to spend that kind of money on a book. This one however, is one of five or six utterly priceless books on the band in the studio. Sometimes, they turn up reasonably priced.

HERE it is $100 USD.
 
So the general consensus is that the production on this track is pretty rough. Last night I was listening to a lot of Rolling Stones songs with my buddy, and we discussed about the horrendous production on virtually all Rolling Stones albums from the 60s and 70s. Part of me thinks though, that this crappy production was just another aspect of the uniqueness of all this music. No band anymore would EVER release anything commercially that sounded like some of those Rolling Stones tracks or some of these Beatles tracks. It's kinda sad to me because these quirks give so much more definition to this music, and now I feel as if there is this homogenized sound that every producer is chasing after rather than people trying to push the boundaries. What do you guys think?

I agree. I adored most of the popular music from that era, but never adored the tracking and mixing that came with it. For example, in most of the music from the 50's through 70's, you can't even hear any kickdrum. Some of the instruments didn't sound as real as they do today.

On the other hand, I would not want to hear all of those songs updated with today's "cookie cutter" production. I have come to like them just the way they are.

Many people talk about great mix and mastering engineers from the olden days, but I've always wondered if they could have done better. Maybe it was twice as hard to achieve back then. Or maybe the quality simply didn't propagate through to the end listener like it does today.
 
I don't know. Some of it may be on that Deluxe White Album release of a year ago.
If you're interested and you haven't already come across it, on YouTube there's a couple of deconstructions of Beatle songs and some of them are really interesting. Off the top of my head there's "With a little help from my friends," "Getting better," "Being for the benefit of Mr Kite," "Hey Bulldog," "Birthday," "Revolution," I me mine," "Come together," "Because," "I want you," "Dear Prudence" and I think, "Golden Slumbers/Carry that weight/The End."
 
Yes I found a 12 minute version on YouTube which is like the slow kind of disjointed one but what I was really hoping to find is the missing audio in between the fade out in the fade in of the track on the white album.
 
what I was really hoping to find is the missing audio in between the fade out in the fade in of the track on the white album.
I've never come across anyone ever mentioning that bit. Even in the Lewisohn book, I never got the impression that it went on for a long time as a great jam that they decided to cut. Although it could have. That's what happened with "Revolution 1 " ~ as the song runs out it actually went on for a further 6 minutes and that's what "Revolution 9" was laid over. With Helter Skelter, the stereo version fades out in the same key that the fade in returns in, which, combined with the unadventurousness of the actual notes, gives the impression that it didn't go on for long {although the same thing happened with Revolution 1's key in the runout so I've just contradicted myself !}. Considering the previous 3 takes had added up to 52 minutes, maybe they'd just had enough ! Lennon was quoted as saying that to him Helter Skelter was just a noise.
 
I find Giles really annoying.:cursing: Sometimes it feels like he's trying so hard to be a revisionist.
But don't mind me, I'm just a bit touchy about remixes 50 years after the event. I know I stand alone on this {virtually} but remixing songs of old is a bit like saying the Japanese were the good guys in World war 2. ;)
 
You are right. Ugo.

It sounds like John played that bass with a drum stick instead of a pick.

Lots of noise near the end of the drum track. It sounds like overhead mics only. And Andrew was right. Ringo was a "basic" drummer at best. But then, he is far richer than I am, so I guess he wins.

(I see the Rolling Stones tracks were taken down due to copyright claims by MTV and ABKCO Records.)

For a basic drummer, I am yet to meet anyone who can replicate his simple child like beats. Fact is that he is one of the best. He knows what a song needs. Doesn’t show off and overplay like nearly every drummer I ever played with. And none of them would ever come up with what he did for most of the songs written by the greatest songwriting team of the 20th century. They would have tossed most other drummers.
 
Yes I found a 12 minute version on YouTube which is like the slow kind of disjointed one but what I was really hoping to find is the missing audio in between the fade out in the fade in of the track on the white album.

That version wa s released on the white album deluxe edition from 2018. It plays straight through without fades all the way to the end.
 
I'll probably have a listen one day, but it'll be a once in a lifetime experience for me. It's like deleted scenes and outtakes, interesting to view once and then go back to loving the film the way you've always done so.
 
Back
Top