Page 113 of 196
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 4:20 pm
by brammy
I guess this sort of begins to answer my own question:
In 1968 The Beatles taped (and filmed) two performances for British and American TV. Two media were used because of PAL/NTSC issues (it's much easier, and provides better quality, to shoot film and transfer it in either NTSC or PAL than transcoding PAL to NTSC or the other way around. This was more true in 1968 than today.)
Can anyone explain this?
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 4:39 pm
by brammy
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 4:52 pm
by johnnysain
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 6:21 pm
by brammy
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 7:05 pm
by johnnysain
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Fri Dec 24, 2010 11:22 pm
by kieran campbell
thats a cool video, thought that, that wouldn't be the sort of song they'd do live
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2010 12:16 am
by johnnysain
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2010 4:37 pm
by servant
brammy wrote:So whats the story with the mix of that Revolution performance on from David Frost?
...I think that it was recorded earlier (probably that same day) with Billy Preston (who cant be seen in the video) and that they were lip synching for this performance
No, that's not Billy Preston - off-camera or pre-recorded. Revolution is the only Beatles track on which London session great Nicky Hopkins played electric piano. Since the Beatles were singing live to pre-recorded tape, I would guess that Nicky's not in the room but comes from the tape.
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 12:38 am
by brammy
ah, very interesting.... but "singing live to a pre-recorded tape" doesn't explain the John vocal at the end that clearly doesn't match his mouth.
So you are saying that none of those instruments are live?
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:50 pm
by wolfgang
we discussed the Revolution videos already.
But we didn`t discuss the alrights. I have no doubt: the sound-track used for this performance is identical to the studio version, but without the vocal track.
So only the vocals are live. But the "well it's gonna be alright, alright, alright" in the middle of the song and at the end of the song were -partially- double tracked
by John on the record. And one of these tracks has managed to come into this sound-track mix. So the last two "alrights" came only from the mix, John missed to sing it live. (btw. same on Hey Jude: Paul sings double tracked, one Paul from the mix, and one Paul live from the show in the verse before John and George
joined singing).
Alright?
Wolfgang
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 4:01 pm
by brammy
Alright..... thanks for the good explanation.
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 6:45 pm
by Ric N. Backer
Cool thread. I'm currently reading, "Many years from now," by Barry Miles, so the pics add a bit of flavor to the text.

Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 7:40 pm
by brammy
Too bad they didn't do those David Frost appearances completely "naked".
(no, I'm not referring to their clothes).
and speaking of their clothes, I rate them
#1: George (love that sweater color)
#2: RIngo (looks casual, as does George)
#3: John (should have ditched the tie)
#4: Paul (dorky shirt and dorkier hi-rider pants)
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2010 12:25 am
by kieran campbell
I think that Paul looks casual
Re: Groovy Beatles pictures
Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:39 pm
by JakeK
I don't want to offend anyone, but Paul looks kinda...girly? I don't know... I've been called a "man with a great fashion sense". Why? I don't know...
I do like what George and Ringo are wearing, they look all right.