- Both the "Please Please Me" and "With The Beatles" albums contain six cover
songs and eight originals. While there are some parallels between the
covers on both albums, there are equally interesting differences as well.
Given the decidely male image of the group, both sets of covers
contain a surprisingly strong showing of material first popularized
by so-called Girl Groups; three out of six on the first album, and
two out of six on the second.
Although The Boys would seem in some respects to rather slavishly
copy the original versions of the songs in both sets of covers, they
almost always, by the same token, appear to include their own subtle
stylistic touches. This appears with increasing liberty on the second
album, where for example three of the covers whose originals feature a
fadeout ending are given a complete one by the Beatles.
- The differences:
Overall, the set of covers on "With The Beatles" is more heavily
weighted toward driving R&B.; Either that or perhaps it is in
sympathetic vibration, as it were, with the heavier set of originals
on this album that one hears the covers this way. Though a highly
subjective call, I dare say that WTB packs a harder punch as an
album than does PPM partly because of the type of covers it contains.
Less subjective is the fact that the WTB covers represent, in part,
an older layer of the Beatles repertoire than the ones on PPM. Of the
six covers on WTB two ("Till There Was You" and "Money") go back at
least as far as the Decca audition, and "Roll Over Beethoven" goes
back even further. According to Lewisohn, there was even a time
when the proto-Beatles played ROB with John singing lead! The PPM
covers, in contrast, were mostly recent hits at the time the Beatles
recorded them; only "Baby It's You" predates the 1962 season which
immediately preceded the recording of PPM.
- The Beatles acoustic arrangement with its Latin beat and bongos is certainly
a far cry from the smoothly flowing schmaltz of the original version heard
in "The Music Man" Broadway show. Perhaps this bouncier treatment was
inspired by Peggy Lee (unforunately this is the one original cover version
I did not have on hand for this article), or perhaps, they took their own
cue for it from the likes of "P.S. I Love You" and "Ask Me Why".
- A couple of details betray the Beatles own fingerprints; e.g. the flat
VI chord (D flat Major) in the coda and the final F Major chord with the
added Major 7th are definitely *not* part of the original. Despite this,
the musical essence of this song, with its chromatic winding that pervades
both vocal melody and bassline (and which indirectly affects the choice and
progression of chords) is something quite off the Beatles track.
- No matter how much you think he deserves to be ragged on for playing it
apparently from such rote practice, George's acoustic solo work on this
track is tastefully conceived and executed with great nuance. Granted,
it's simultaneously both impressive and depressing to hear the identical
solo, note for note just about, on the Decca tape.
- Every section of this song is based on the same I -> vi -> IV -> V chord
progression, one of *the* most popular cliches of early Rock and Roll,
yet one which for some reason the Beatles generally eschewed.
- The monotony of the harmonic plan tends to blur somewhat the distinction
between what is "refrain" and "verse", but it should be noted how the
former utiltizes dramatic antiphonal counterpoint between the backing
and lead vocals, while the latter features the lead up front with the
backers softly oooh-ing. One of the other covers here features similarly
conspicuous antiphony (see "Devil In Her Heart") and this sort of device
would eventually become a major trademark of the Beatles original work;
think of the likes of "You Can't Do That" and "You're Going To Lose That Girl." In "Postman" the vocal antiphony starts, bang!, right in
the intro, and I for one can't avoid hearing a direct resonance between
those opening shouts of "Wait!" and the Boys own "Help!"
- John is double tracked while the Marvellete's lead is *not*. Otherwise
the arrangement of both versions is essentially the same, allowing of
course for the large change of key required to accomodate the different
vocal ranges of the two groups.
- Incidentally, you'll find that there is some confusion over the authorship
of this song if you compare various sources. Current CD pressings of WTB
credit the team listed above. However the older LP copies of the "Second
Album" list just "Holland" and this is supported by the Parlophone
company-memo originally defining the running order for WTB as reproduced
in Lewisohn's "Recording Sessions." Note though that Lewisohn's "Live"
book lists it as "Holland/Bateman/Gordy." Does anybody out there know
what I sense must be an interesting story behind this ?
FORM Intro -> Verse/Refrain(3X)-> Bridge -> Guitar Solo ->
Verse/Refrain(2X)-> Refrain (complete ending)
COMPOSER Berry
INFLUENTIAL VERSION Chuck Berry (1956)
- As with many other, if not quite literally *all*, of Chuck Berry's songs,
every section of this one is in the 12-bar blues form -- eight of them all in
a row! I only call the fourth section a bridge ("Well if you feel it")
because of the subtle change in the melody and backbeat.
- There's a minor variation here on the standard blues formula in the way that
the chord progression of the last four measures of the 12-bar pattern is
played as IV->V->I instead of V->IV->I. This is actually much easier to
hear on the Beatles version than the original, though I believe they both
play it the same way.
- Formalistically, each 12-bar section is internally sub-divided so that
the first eight measures provide verse-like exposition, and the final four
measures deliver a refrain-like hook. Note how the text of the hook/refrain
itself is varied from section to section. Also, note the subtle way in
which formal plan here contrasts from of that of "Money" below.
- The lyric is wordy to an extreme bordering on the "talkin' blues" style,
and is quite wrily irreverant. Seen in this perspective, Chuck's
performance scans the words against the beat more freely than does
George, in a way that anticipates the style of Dylan in some respects.
- The original features a drumming style that is less splashy than the
Beatles cover while the Beatles double track the lead vocal and add
their hand-claps to the rhythm track. But these are small details and
otherwise, the Beatles just about rip the whole thing off from Chuck
right down to the opening riff and "middle twelve" break.
INFLUENTIAL VERSION (Smokey Robinson and) The Miracles (1962)
- There's an unusually complex form at play in this song; note, that I
define my terms used above as follows:
Verse == "I don't like you ..."
Refrain == "You really got a hold on me ..."
Closing == "I love you and all I want you do ..."
Bridge/Re-intro == instrumental followed by "Tighter!"
- The vocal arrangement is equally complex with the relationship between
the lead and backers frequently alternating between trio, solo, and
some antiphonal singing.
- Harmonically, the song features an emphasis on the I- vi progression
that is rather Beatles-like in an coincidentally ironic way.
- Smokey does it in the higher key of C with (just like Chuck) a different
scanning of the words. The original arrangment also features saxes and
notably, a fadeout ending. John has the good sense here to sing it
single tracked, but while his performance has an obvious intensely raw
sincerity to it, Smokey's own smoothness is rather hard to beat.
FORM Intro -> Refrain/Verse(3X) -> Refrain -> Outro (complete ending)
COMPOSER Drapkin
INFLUENTIAL VERSION The Donays (1962)
- The lyrics and arrangement of this song present an argument betwen the
backers who warn the lead of his lover's cruel dishonesty, and the lead
who point-by-point protests their sad prophecies as false and refuses
to be swayed by their counsel; it's a regular little Greek Chorus Drama in
miniature.
- The form of the song though is surprisingly flat in spite of the dramatic
scenario, with a mechanical succession of Refrain and Verse pairs. Defining
my terms again:
Refrain == "She's got a devil in her heart ..." -- I'll still peg
these sections as refrains in spite of the fact that the lyrics which
follow the hook line keep changing in each reiteration.
Verse == "He'll never hurt me or desert me ..."
- Both formal sections of the song have a convergent harmonic shape, which is
unusual. The refrains start off with ii->V->I (shades of "Don't Let Me Down") and the verses start off with the IV->iv->I (Major IV to minor iv)
cliche.
- The transfer of this song from a female to male group obviously necessitated
changing the words a bit as well as a transposition of key (the Donay's did
it in E.) The original has a large-ish sounding band behind it and a fadeout
ending. The Beatles include maracas, and not only make the ending a
complete one, but adorn it with one of their beloved Major ninth/seventh
chords on I.
FORM Intro -> Verse/Refrain(3X) -> Break -> Verse/Refrain ->
Refrain -> One Last Refrain (complete ending)
COMPOSER Bradford/Gordy
INFLUENTIAL VERSION Barret Strong (1959)
- This is yet another song in which (virtually) every section is in 12-bar
blues form, but it bears an interesting comparison with "Roll Over Beethoven." Here, the 12-bar frame is divided so that only four measures
are verse-like exposition with the remaining eight devoted to a raving
refrain. The proportions in ROB are a reversed eight-to-four. And the
difference is more than just a mathematical curiosity to the extent that
the longer refrain section in "Money" is as much a factor in making it
a "screamer" of a song as is the performance of the lead singer. If
you're looking for other examples with which to test this theory, look
back to the first album where you find the verse of "Chains" which
corresponds to the ROB 8+4 pattern as well as "Boys" which matches
the 4+8 pattern of "Money."
- One additional parallel between "Money" and ROB is the way they both have
final sections in which the hook-phrase takes over the lyrics completely.
- The Beatles cover presents the intro and solo as an eight-measure
compression of the 12-bar frame. The original keeps both those sections
at the full twelve bar count. Note however that the original has only
two instead of three verse/refrain pairs before the break.
- The vocal line of this is very bluesy with lots of juxtaposed Major/minor
thirds and flat 7ths and the arrangement yet again features a large amount
of antiphonal singing. The Beatles throw a hard edged piano in the mix
and of course John's blistering vocal now *single tracked*. The use of
the E Major key nicely supports Tony Barrow's suggestion that you can flip
the disk over for a second play from the beginning since the first track,
"It Won't Be Long", is also in E.
- The selection of this particularly raving number for the final track
of the album and the modification of it to include a big-finish complete
ending sounds to me like they were striving hard to repeat the immense
success of "Twist And Shout" on the first album, and I'd dare say they
come pretty darn close. If you want to get picky here, perhaps you might
deduct a few points either because the spin-off of the earlier TAS triumph
is a bit too obvious or because the message of the lyrics is kind of crass
and rough, for all its tongue-in-cheek posturing, in a way which doesn't
entirely become the image of the group at this point with their collarless
suits and little boots. If I don't watch it, though, I'm going to starting
sound too much like Eppie.
---
"Have you no natural resources of your own ?" 121791#42
---
Copyright (c) 1991 by Alan W. Pollack
All Rights Reserved
This article may be reproduced, retransmitted, redistributed and
otherwise propagated at will, provided that this notice remains
intact and in place.
Click here to return.
Click here to return to AWP's index.
