20YearsAgo wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 3:30 pm
Not knowing exactly how the BBC went about recording and editing performances, is it possible that the trio tackled the song in-studio but that, eventually, the BBC chose not to use it? Gibson might've heard the song as aired during the series and falsely assumed it was his version?
Well, the shows were put together like this: the guest act was booked and either did their session the same day (for episodes 1-4) or on a different day altogether (from ep5 onwards). The songs were probably all selected in advance so they could clear copyright and make sure all royalties would be paid etc, rather than just have The Beatles turn up on the day and play whatever they liked (which is not the way the BBC worked). They seem to have recorded the requests from fans in between songs rather than do them at the end of the session so as to make editing easier. For the remaining links, the presenter (Pee Litres or Rodney Burke) wrote a "script" and another session would be held so that the presenter could record links as required to make the episodes 28 & 1/2 minutes long and make sure some of the more current requests were read out. All the presenter links and guest artist songs would then be edited into the master reel of The Beatles' session. The master reel would then be full of splices and not suitable for re-use for music but Bernie Andrews said that these sorts of tapes often got erased and re-used for talk shows and documentaries.
So, yes, it would have been perfectly feasible and no big deal for The Beatles to have recorded their version of the theme at the June 1st session and have it edited into the tape of ep1 in time for June 4th. Perhaps Lorne Gibson's story is true and they did record a version of the theme. Then maybe Terry Heneberry did a "George Martin" and thought that he might ask Bobby Graham (a well known session drummer) to sub for Ringo on June 1st to re-record the Pop Go The Beatles theme. But then perhaps some rehearsal and/or arguments took place and The Beatles got their version together without any help. Judging by Paul's negative comments about the series title some years later, they might have dragged their heels and it took a shock like this to rouse them. It just seems too big a co-incidence that both Lorne Gibson AND Bobby Graham (who had no connection with each other) would both talk about subbing for The Beatles a week apart from each other. Unless they are both just exaggerating wildly, something out of the ordinary must have taken place. As I said this is lent further weight by Terry Henebery singling that one song out for special mention in 1982.
I agree with you about the Paul screams and the Lennon harmonica, plus the overall sound being very "Beatlesque." During peak Beatlemania, many groups were tasked to imitate the Beatles for various purposes. Whole albums were created that traded on the Beatles name but contained only music by bands trying to sound "like" the Beatles... for the most part, it's easy to separate the imitators from the real thing. If the PGTB theme wasn't actually the Beatles, it surely ranks amongst the best of the imitation jobs.
It absolutely is The Beatles. No other band had that sound, or even knew how to make it. Because they had never had any instruction, they were unique.
That being said, is it possible that the theme might've been created during a hodge-podge session of musicians that included Paul and/or John?
The bass is a bit one-notey, but since Paul can be heard screaming there's no reason to think it's not him playing it.
Interesting... I wonder if there's a half-truth hidden in here? Perhaps Ringo might've been late and Graham sat as the other Beatles loosely ran through the numbers they'd perform for the show? Perhaps he stood at the drums while the engineers did soundchecks etc on the Beatles' gear? And from that memory, Graham might've then hoped that some fragment of what he'd done with the Beatles would've landed on the air?
Graham might not have tuned in when PGTB 3 one-time aired on June 18 63... and that he only heard the Beatle songs from that show decades later on one of the Beatles BBC specials from the 1980s (or perhaps on the 1994 LIVE AT THE BBC cd set?). Hearing, say, "Memphis" might've sparked a memory of him standing at Ringo's drum while engineers, checking the levels, would've asked him to tap the toms...
All feasible yes. Bobby was constantly in work and a session with the Beatles would have been just one of hundreds that year. He could have taken some dim memories of helping out with the arrangement and imagine that he recorded a whole show with them.
But... the business about the BBC not thinking Ringo was "adaptable enough for what they wanted to do" was hogwash. This would've been the Beatles's TWENTIETH appearance on the BBC... and Graham wants us to believe that suddenly the BBC decided Ringo wasn't good enough?
Well of course Ringo was good enough, but Terry Heneberry had only worked with The Beatles once prior to PGTB (on Swinging Sound 63) and was a big jazz fan who hated pop. His attitude may have been similar to George Martin with Love Me Do. He knew that Carter Lewis ATS would be in the studio the following week and that their drummer was the best known session drummer in Britain. So maybe he just thought he would take advantage of that to get it over with. Whatever happened though, I don't think anything Lorne Gibson or Bobby Graham might have contributed got used.
To me the track sounds just like the I saw her standing there instrumental from the mersey sound
Yes, good call. It does.
One of the underlying issues here may be the illusory nature of human memory. And that's a BIG can of worms in this field of endeavor. Research suggests that every time a memory is accessed, it is essentially overwritten. And the more you "remember" it, the more it's overwritten and subtly changed, often to fit a preferred narrative or color a perspective. I've seen it compared to playing a game of "Telephone" with yourself.
Yeah you're right. In a psychology lecture once we watched some footage of people having false memories implanted. It was really disturbing. The people being interviewed were related a (fictitious) incident that had supposedly taken place in their past, and asked if they could remember anything about it. They would initially reply that they had no memory of it, then the interviewer would gradually introduce small details into the conversation and, bit by bit, the false memory would take shape in the person's mind. After a few sessions like this, the person had a clear visual memory of the fictitious incident, and totally believed that it had taken place. Perhaps more disturbing is that it doesn't even really require another person to steer the process. If a person really wants to believe something is true, then they can gradually build up a phantom memory over a period of months or years until it seems absolutely real.
