I brought this up a while back. I too had always thought it was John. After being informed it was Paul I listened carefully to the Anthology DVD mixes and am now convinced it was indeed Paul.
"Some Other Guy" <trusso11783@yahoo.com > wrote in message news:33t2b2l3h7qi224gfm52a5rb75o8ma6qqe@4ax.com...>I remember another statement made in Here There and Everywhere book.....>
I always thought (for the past 30 years or so) that the Ahhhh in the > middle of A Day In The Life was> John. Recently, I read that it was Paul and when I listen now, it sounds > like Paul and I must have> been mistaken all of these years.>
In the book, it states that Paul had to sing "and I went into a dream" > concisely and not go to long> on the word "dream" because it was a punch in vocal and if they didnt > punch out quickly enough, it> would erase John's "ahhhhh" section.>
Also, Tom, I can't help but notice that you are refraining from my> > > challenge to give us any clear proof that Emerick is "wrong" about> > > having recorded Blackbird outside. Is it possible that you're wrong> > > about that, too?> >
Mark Lewisohn..."The Beatles Recording Sessions."> >
Mark Lewisohn was not there when the track was recorded, so, like Ken> Scott, he would have no way of knowing where Geoff positioned Paul.> All Mark had was access to the tape boxes and recording sheets, and> that would not have been annotated.>
As great a researcher as Lewisohn is, it's simply information he would> not have access to. And again, he was not there at the time the> recording was made.>
So that's hardly "proof." That's simply you choosing to believe what> YOU believe. Another case of you presenting opinion as fact.>
Well, for what it's worth, the mono mix has the birds in a different place, time-wise. And I don't hear stray birds elsewhere in the song...
Plus, you can clearly hear his boot tapping on a floor - you can even hear some of the grit.
In article <1152804369.548839.8520@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, fattuchus@yahoo.com wrote:
pepperman wrote:> > b. travers wrote:> > > <jt10824@hotmail.com> wrote in message> > > news:1152759121.673974.73430@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...> > > > tom@aerovons.com wrote:> > > >> jt10824@hotmail.com wrote:> > > >> > tom@aerovons.com wrote:> > > >> > > Well, YOUR ears might be misleading;)> > > >> >
Yes, of course, my ears are wrong and yours are right. That's the> > > >> > problem with self-proclaimed "experts", well-meaning or not: they> > > >> > express their OPINION as FACT.> > > >>
In this case, it's a fact that Paul sings it.....keep listenin' ;)> > > >
Yeah, sure, Tom. I guess you think if you state it often enough it> > > > must be a fact. As I said, that's the true mark of a self-proclaimed> > > > "expert" -- confusing opinion with fact.> > > >
Excellent point. He seems eager to discuss everything else he did.>
Indeed he discusses ADITL in the latest MOJ O . . . no mention of the> aaahhhs.
Ah.
So, this argument is based on the assumption that Paul brags about everything he has ever done.
So if he doesn't mention that he did something, that means someone else did it.
Plus, we must remember that Geoff Emerick seems to be a BIG Paul fan .> > > . . . whenever possible, he portrays Paul as the leader, the genius,> > > the smartest, the most interested in the details of production, etc.> > > Ringo and George come off poorly in his book, and while John is admired> > > by Emerick, he is clearly second fiddle. There is no question that> > > Emerick is a good friend of Paul's, working with Paul after the Beatles> > > split, inviting Paul and Linda to his wedding, having the entire> > > wedding vegetarian much to the dismay of Geoff's own family, etc. It is> > > almost as if> > > Geoff worships Paul.> >
Is it a drawback to be a friend of Paul?> > Is May Pang unreliable because she was in love with John?> > Can we trust Yoko?> > Is George Martin biased because he was involved in Paul albums and don't> > hate Paul.> > Or are the only good sources the ones who despite the man or simply aren't> > that close to him...?> >
You are into Derek-land here...>
IMHO it is not polite to say nasty things about another poster such as> derek.>
I never said it is a drawback to be a friend of Paul . . . . I'm merely> saying that IMHO Geoff is prejudiced in favor of Paul, so it seems odd> that he says John sang the aaahhhhs. He has a clear pro Paul bias.> Therefore, if someone who has a pro Paul bias says John sang the> aaahhhhss, I think it strengthens the point that John sang the> aaahhhsss.>
If Geoff seemed to be very pro John, one could argue perhaps he is> exaggerating or remembering wrong because he favors John.>
You state "Or are the only good sources the ones who despite the man .> . . ." I assume you meant despise, not despite.>
Of course the answer is No. I'm not saying one has to despise anyone> to be a good source.>
Therefore......SHE'S A WIIIIIITCH!!! BURN HER!!!!! <g>
The studer J37 4 track machine "drops in" almost as fast as modern>> machines.>> You can do it on the fly(while reels are running and with the track>> triggered).>> It's no problem>> I have tried...>
They were similar to the A-80, not nearly like an A-800...you needed> about an 1/8th note to get in and almost a 1/4 note to get out. Hardly> like a modern machine, and definitely not Pro Tools;)
On a Studer J 37 you have to stop the machine in order to out of recording but as long as there's no material after the "drop in/out" there's no problem. We're talking about a track with Paul's singing here,and there's nothing after the "aahs"until John's back with "I saw a film today oh boy..." Drop in on a Studer J-37 is no problem here. The "drop-in" is in fact instant = The distance between the erase head and the recording head(aprox one inch). It gives a dropin speed at aprox 1/15 second. The gap between "went into a dream" and "aaah" is aprox half a second.
fattuchus@yahoo.com >>A Canker Sore wrote: >>derek_larsson@comcast.net (dlarsson) >>And the history of the song is clear. The song >>was written by both of them. >>Nonsense.>>This was John Lennon's song - everyone >>knows that. >>Nonsense. >>It was John and Paul's song. Paul wrote the >>middle part. Everyone knows that. >>With all due respect, here is what Paul says >>in Many Years From Now: (page 354) >>"Paul: 'All you Need is Love was John's song. >>I threw in a few ideas, as did the other >>members of the group, but it was largely ad >>libs lilke singing "she loves yu" or >>"Greensleeves"j or silly little things at the >>end and we made those up on the spot.'
It's been a week or more since I responded to this post..so maybe it's my fault...but I wasn't refering to "All you need is Love. I was refering to "A day in the life," which is what the header is refering to.
Knowing that millions of viewers would not >>understand English, John kept the chorus as >>simple as possible."
Brother Michael 20 July 2006 09:56:39 [ permanent link ]
One thing no one has said (unless I missed it): The "ahhhhs" in "A Day> in the Life" are in Paul's higher vocal range, not John's lower one.> When John went high, he went falsetto which is not featured in the> break. It sounds like Paul to me, esp. after it gets going.>
I just finished listening to the "ahhs" (about 25 times) with some good headphones. For 39 years I believed this was John. The first part still sounds like John - but I have to admit now that it is Paul.
If you would like to report an abuse of our service, such as a spam message, please . Если Вы хотите пожаловаться на содержимое этой страницы, пожалуйста .
