::Revolver

by **Berkeleyan** » Mon Oct 27, 2003 10:59 am

Revolver comes 4th, after Abbey Road, the White Album and Sgt. Peppers IMHO.

by **Ghavi** » Mon Oct 27, 2003 6:25 pm

I was thinking about the George words about the "Rubbolver" and let us know the facility to make songs or records that this 4 guys had/have...this 2 albums are a great part of my life...and he have it like the same bunch of songs...Genious with capital G. [:D]

by **Berkeleyan** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:22 pm

Some background on the album title:
The lads had initially opted for "Abrakadabra" but were then told there was such album title already. So they went for Revolver because of at least two meanings behind it: a) an LP on a turntable is a "revolver"; b)the gun itself. Think of it: the cover is a bunch of drawings from their friend Klaus Voormann, with some of them on a motif of some sort of a "Beatle safari".

by **Ghavi** » Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:49 pm

Jajajaja Beatles Safari....[:D]

by **Thomas** » Tue Nov 25, 2003 8:46 am

Rvolver is my 2nd favourite Beatles Album (no 1 is Abbey Road) though it contains one of the worst songs Paul has ever written (yes indeed Yellow submarine). The best tracks on this LP are Here, there and everywhere, Eleanor Rigby, And Your Bird can sing and Tomorrow never Knows

by **theDingle** » Wed Nov 26, 2003 1:53 pm

Well Tommers, I never thought of Yellow Submarine as a bad song, maybe not a great song, and more of just a novelty song, like You Know My Name,Look Up the Number, or The Continuing Story of Bungalow Bill. Beatle fans at the time ('66) still made it number one, and I believe it was the A side.

To me it's all part of the whole that makes REVOLVER the classic that it is.

by **Berkeleyan** » Fri Nov 28, 2003 2:42 pm

It´s been said that Yellow Submarine is one of the all-time favorite pub songs in Britain...regardless of it, I do like the tune, the funny atmosphere in it. Donovan reportedly gave Paul a hand with the lyric "sky of blue and sea of green".

P.S. I have a blurred memory of years ago when some rock writer equated "yellow sub" to marijuanna. A mid sixties tune by Donovan contained a reference to a "mellow yellow", also supposedly related to pot.

by **Maestri09** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:41 pm

I think Revolver was the last album every beatle wanted to work on. after that, it was all fragments of brilliance and togetherness but never enough to make a whole album that all four really wanted to make (that includes Abbey Road).
I read once that john was really excited about Revolver, but never became as excited for any of the albums that came later. I think in that sense, Revolver was the last beatles album. As well, the beatles stopped being a touring band after this release, and inside, they all really wanted to perform above all else--even paul.

Just a question:
If the beatles really wanted to tour and perform, why didn't they? was it really about the complexity of the music? Was it brian's death? Was Paul the only one that didn't "get it"?

...how come no one asks Paul or Ringo (or Yoko) these questions?

by **Cologne girl** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 7:09 pm

quote:Originally posted by Maestri09
I think in that sense, Revolver was the last beatles album. As well, the beatles stopped being a touring band after this release, and inside, they all really wanted to perform above all else--even paul.

Just a question:
If the beatles really wanted to tour and perform, why didn't they? was it really about the complexity of the music? Was it brian's death? Was Paul the only one that didn't "get it"?

...how come no one asks Paul or Ringo (or Yoko) these questions?

I think the answer to all of these questions can be found on the "Anthology" DVDs. The Beatles were pretty put off by the fact that their concerts were drowned by the screams to a point that they couldn't hear themselves, that they were just "playing s**t", as Ringo put it. Plus it seemed they were getting bored by the concert routine, by getting escorted to all sorts of places without ever being able to even escape for a few hours from the hotel to really see where they were.

Another important point seemed to be that they wanted to "branch out", they needed room for other activities, which was why they "invented MTV", just sending their promo videos to all kinds of shows instead of showing up themselves.

I think if you watch the footage of the not-so-early performances as a group and above all the post-Beatles performances, you can see that Paul has been virtually the ONLY one who almost unconditionally loves performing, however repetitive the whole thing may become for him, and that, as I see it, has been one of the magic ingredients (if not THE magic ingredient) of his shows. I think he was the one who most regretted giving up touring - on "Anthology" he says he had been more reluctant to do so than the others.

by **theDingle** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 10:59 pm

True, Cologne girl, that's about the size of it.

I does seem to me that REVOLVER was the last tight album as far as a group goes. I thought it was John at his absolute best. Paul was at his best too and continued to be. Mick Jagger used to refer to them as the Four-Headed Monster, lol, and that is really an accurate suprelative. They were close and were a monster talent.

I saw them as that up until the end---nobody wanted to believe otherwise---but in hindsight I see that REVOLVER was the apex as far as The Group was concerned.

::Revolver

Who is online