Why Did The Beatles Let Pete Best Go?

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Sep 14, 2000 9:04 am

I am interested in your opinion as to why The Beatles decided to let Pete Best go in August 1962. Pete addressed this question in a recent concert and to this day he has not received an adequate explanation. He did comment that the remaining three Beatles did know, however. I thought it may be interesting to explore this topic here.

markthemd · Post by **markthemd** » Thu Sep 14, 2000 12:28 pm

George Martin maintains that he had a poor sense of timing and rushed .

I have read that he was the one the girls were after .Could be that by ridding them selves of the old cute one and getting Ringo to back them up,insured girls would be interested in the 3 front men.

Maybe their egos said "How come Petes getting all the great looking chicks?"

rick12dr · Post by **rick12dr** » Thu Sep 14, 2000 12:40 pm

Pete wasn't a bad looking guy, but cuter than Paul?? C'mon!!!

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Sep 14, 2000 1:04 pm

Far be it for me to be critical of George Martin, but I heard Pete Best drum for more than an hour on September 12, 2000 and I could not see a thing wrong with his timing. And if you listen to the Polydor recordings of "My Bonnie" and "Cry For A Shadow' for example, you will not find that the drumming detracted from the overall quality of those numbers or suffered from problems of timing. Also, I believe that Martin had similar concerns about Ringo in the beginning. So did Pete Best just get better over the past 40 years or was he good enough at the time he left. My view is that drumming had little to to with Epstein's/Beatles' decision. So I am inclined to think that politics has a greater role to play in his ousting that timing. I am sure Best would agree, however, that the "timing" was not right.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Sep 14, 2000 1:26 pm

By the way, here is another photo of Pete hammering out a beat during his "Best of The Beatles" Tour.

admin · Post by **admin** » Tue Sep 26, 2000 6:49 pm

Upon further reflection and reading I am beginning to be more inclined to think that Pete Best was sacked from The Beatles because of his increasing popularity. Not only was he popular with fans with regard to his drumming and pleasant demeanour, but in addition was even beginning to step forward on the stage and sing some solo numbers. I am betting that there was a significant jealousy factor wherein John and Paul resented being displaced as frontmen, if even only momentarily. Remembering that the Beatles at this time were young adults and still struggling with who they were, Pete may have been perceived as a threat to them. Understanding that they had been fairly close friends with Pete, they opted for Epstein to be the one to break the news. It is most surprising that the remaining Beatles have not spoken to Pete Best about this even up to the present day.

Macca_Fan · Post by **Macca_Fan** » Tue Sep 26, 2000 9:34 pm

Its an interesting question to ponder ....
But Ringo worked out fine. He has always been underrated as a drummer but the man could keep time like a clock and thats what its all about !

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Sep 27, 2000 8:26 am

Yes I concur that Ringo did indeed work out exceedingly well as his role of drummer for The Beatles. He also had the right sort of personality to put up with the tension created by conflict among John, Paul and George. That he could keep good time (and I believe he could) was not shared by the sound engineers and the producers early on, however. It is to be remembered that Andy White was asked to replace Ringo on "Love Me Do" as George Martin was not pleased by the recording of this song that would eventually rock the world. Martin was concerned, perhaps overly so, that the first release be The Beatles' best effort. Funny, as I listened to their music from the earliest recordings, I don't think I was ever worried about the drumming. Please find a photo of Andy White below.

admin · Post by **admin** » Wed Sep 27, 2000 8:41 am

To comment further on Pete Best's interest in singing, encouraged by requests from fans in the early Cavern days, I am reminded of this photo that shows Pete out in front with Paul on drums.

I believe that situations such as this were important in the other Beatles choosing another drummer who was more willing to stick to the drums and less likely to steal the show. I am wondering if Ringo was worried that he may sacked in the same manner should he not work out.

steve · Post by **steve** » Fri Sep 29, 2000 9:58 am

Nonwithstanding any issues regarding Pete's popularity vis-a-vis the other Beatles, I believe
it is also important to consider that Ringo was simply a better drummer; a comparison of 1962-63 recordings bears this out. Anthology 1 has material from both the Decca sessions and the EMI sessions of June, 1962. Compare Pete's playing there with that of Ringo on the Live at the BBC discs. Ringo seems to hold the band together so well; I've been trying to sound like him for 20 years - his playing is so full of subtleties and nuances...truly a guitar player's drummer! His solidity undoubtedly contributed to the confidence of the band in front of him - it's easier to deliver a vocal, etc, when you know the drummer is going to be right there every time, in the pocket. Nonetheless, the timimg of the Beatles decision to sack Pete couldn't have been more unfair - on the verge of making their first record.

anon · Post by **anon** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 5:06 pm

Ringo's style is what sent The Beatles music over the edge. His excitement and enthusiasm with the use of open hi hat and riding the crash cymbal created a wild sound that Pete Best was not doing.

admin · Post by **admin** » Sat Sep 30, 2000 5:44 pm

You make a most interesting point that really hasn't been discussed to any great extent. He was indeed much more dynamic and animated overall. As you say, the open hi hat and riding of the crash symbol did make us stand up and listen. Moreover, his head movement from side to side was also a behaviour that was apparently very different from Pete Best's drumming style. While watching Pete Best closely on September 12, 2000 (albeit some 38 years later) he was a most competent time keeper but did drum conservatively throughout. Your question raises another, did The Beatles know this at the time, in other words, did they seek Ringo out because of this? So little is known about John, Paul and George's involvement with Ringo at the time. Just how often did they really see Rory Storm and the Hurricanes perform anyway?

Gary_Cost · Post by **Gary_Cost** » Mon Oct 02, 2000 11:00 am

Drumming, popularity and chicks aside, I have read that Pete was moody and tempermental. He would get mad at something and would refuse to show up for a gig! That alone would get you fired in any band (or job) that I've had! He also refused to wear his hair in the 'Beatle' style. Historical records show that the Beatles were without a drummer, but needed one in order to go to Hamburg. They auditioned Pete and said "He'll do!" I think he got the job playing drums for the group only because he was at the right place at the right time. Yes, he was their drummer for 2 years but, outside of the Liverpool locals and the folks in Hamburg, the rest of the world considers Ringo as 'the drummer' of the band.

admin · Post by **admin** » Thu Oct 05, 2000 12:33 pm

From The Beatles Anthology: By The Beatles, we get a first public glimpse as to why The Beatles let Pete Best go. The information is from pages 70-72 of the Chronicle Books publication released on October 5, 2000.

According to Paul McCartney, the idea of letting Pete Best go came from George Martin. While the group initially rejected the idea, in the end The Beatles agreed for fear that their contract may be cancelled.

John Lennon's comments were that Pete was included so that The Beatles could go to Hamburg and that they had always planned to let him go. He added that the decision was not based on jealousy.

George Harrison's view was that it was bound to happen as Peter did not show up for performances and Ringo would fill in. Eventually the group felt that Ringo was a better fit. In the book George seems to take the lion's share of the responsibility for getting Ringo in the group as he kept reinforcing the idea to John and Paul.

While each of the Beatles had a slightly different perception of the circumstances leading to Pete's sacking, on one point they all seemed to agree. The consensus seems to be that they manner in which Pete Best was let go was somewhat cowardly and insensitive and that it was a difficult decision to make.

Marcel_Daguerre · Post by **Marcel_Daguerre** » Tue Oct 31, 2000 9:49 am

I recall having read somewhere that Pete Best was asked to join the group for two reasons: he owned a drum set and his mum would let them play in the basement (she may even have had a night club there). I think the best explanation of his ouster is that the band had outgrown his abilities. Ringo was the best drummer they knew and since they were going into the studio, they must have figured, "Let's be as good as we can be." As we all agree, that was very good indeed. As for George Martin's replacement of Ringo with Andy White, I believe this was done before Martin had ever heard Ringo play - he had based the decision on Best's playing.