Wednesday, September 2, 2026

The Liberation of Paul McCartney (1971)



 The Top of Pop

By Lillian Roxon

Daily News

September 5, 1971


    Poor Paul McCartney. One year the prettiest face in rock and roll. This year, the man everyone loves to hate. Everyone's at him. His old friend and workmate John Lennon has a nasty song about him in his new album. His old girlfriend and housemate Fran Schwartz has 20 pages about him in her just-finished and still very hush-hush book. His most devoted fans get into fights with him, and now Rock Liberation has chosen him as its next big target.

     Rock Liberation? Oh yes! If you think women's liberation is heavy, wait till Rock Lib gets really steamed up this fall. It was Rock Lib that staged that big party in the street outside Bob Dylan's house on his birthday this summer. Not that he was there or anything, but he sure as hell heard about it. And the next thing we know, there he was, liberated as all get out, up on stage at the Bangladesh concert with George Harrison, singing all his old songs and pouring money into the pockets of the poor and needy. Incredible.

     Maybe Rock Lib has nothing to do with it at all, but you can't blame them for feeling encouraged. So flushed with success, they have now turned to Paul, not early enough to get him to Madison Square Garden, alas, but still. 

    In what must have been more than a casual coincidence, the day the Liberators chose to shake up the former Beatle was also the day the women of New York chose for their second annual mass march up Fifth Avenue. What I think the rock people were trying to tell us was that they are all kinds of oppression, and that it is probably better to be born female than to have to listen to another Paul McCartney solo effort. 

    In any case, there they all were at 79th and Park, where the McCartneys sometimes stay when in town, waving placards and making speeches designed to goad Paul like Dylan back into the land of the living. It was no use telling them it's not nice to parade noisily outside people's homes, and that besides Paul is getting a band together with the talented and beautiful Denny Laine.

    It was no use pointing out that anyone truly interested in liberating rock might do better to use that energy promoting new, fresh artists instead of trying to give mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to old ones. It was no use because Rock Lib does have a point. Paul has been snotty and isolated. If musical aristocrats like Eric Clapton, Steve Winwood, Bill Wyman, and Charlie Watts could come out of their isolation to back Howlin Wolf in one of the most magnificent and important albums of the year, the London Hall and Wolf Sessions, then it's hard to see what Paul has been trying to prove all alone there in Scotland. The sooner he's liberated, if you ask me, the better


At the Hotel St. Regis

Photo by Matthew Lewis Jr. 

 

Much love and thanks goes to Ingryd for cleaning up the top photo and for sharing the 2nd.


September 2, 1971

Sgt Pepper era John


 

Here's Derek

Photo by Paul McCartney 

 Taken at the airport in Hong Kong at the start of the World Tour in 1964

Concerts Today are Just Spectacals (1976)

Paul and Linda performing in Cincinnati in 1976 -- not knowing that some people were having a terrible experience. 

 I hear a lot of people complaining about the concert experience today, and I agree with most of what they're saying (ticket prices are out of control for most shows these days), so I found this article about the concert experience 50 years ago really interesting.   I, for one, am glad that "festival seating" for the most part is in the past.  I can't imagine the nightmare that must have been for a big concert, and how disappointing it must have been to get there early and find yourself way in the back, unable to see over the heads of everyone standing.  Anyhow I thought this writer had an interesting comentary. 

Concerts Today are Just Spectacals

By Terry Lawson

The Journal Herald

September 2, 1976

     don't go to concerts anymore, and I feel pretty guilty about it. A good portion of my life revolves around music, and even the best-produced record albums are no substitute for experiencing music live. Communication is, of course, what music is all about, and presumably musicians should communicate best in an environment where they can receive as well as give.

     But I find it hard to fathom that most music fans are getting much out of the vaudeville spectacles that pass for concerts these days. They seem increasingly to have less and less to do with music. My last foray into the arena was to attend the summer's Paul McCartney and Wings concert at Riverfront Coliseum in Cincinnati. The first disappointment came when it was discovered that the Cincy appearance was one of two on the tour that called for "festival seating." To the uninitiated, festival seating is a red herring word for "no reserved seats"; it generally means that the promoter of the concert did not want to go to the trouble and expense of having tickets numbered and ushers hired to guide patrons to seats. Also, with this arrangement, more bodies can be packed into a limited space since there are no seats set up on the floor. 

    To counter this, I and about 4000 others arrived at Riverfront an hour or so early to attempt to get a decent seat. Most of the gathered crowd amused themselves by indulging in the great American pastime, boozing. By the time the appointed door-opening hour had come and gone, the crowd was surly, screaming and smashing empty glass containers against the walls of the arena. When the crowd began pushing against the glass door, the security people panicked and threw all the doors open at once, allowing the 20,000 or so who gathered behind the early birds to swarm in ahead of the mob in front. The promoters also abandoned the idea of collecting tickets, prompting the wheeler-dealers attending the concert to return outside and sell their tickets to the unsuspecting, hoping to score a scalper's ticket at the arena. 

    By the time my friends and I made it inside, the only seats left were behind the stage. $9.50 bought me a beautiful view of McCartney's back. Oh yes, the music was terrific. That is-- the part of it you could hear between the constant barrage of firecrackers being lit and pitched all around the arena. One firecracker sailed perilously close to McCartney's right ear. He hardly blinked, causing an observer to deduce this was sort of de rigurer. 

    Leaving the scene was as revolting as the rest. Vomit and broken glass were everywhere you stepped. The feeling was that of a prisoner leaving Devil's Island. The papers reported the next morning that one concertgoer left the Coliseum and walked directly into the Ohio River, drowning.

     Now this may be somebody's idea of a good time, but not mine. When I related this experience to a friend, he chided me, saying I was just "too old to enjoy myself." The same friend returned to Riverfront the following week to see Yes, his favorite band, and came away with an almost identical reaction. "Maybe I'm too old too," he grumbled. 

    Of course, not all concerts are as poorly produced and managed as the McCartney fiasco. There are some promoters, Bill Graham of Fillmore fame, who come immediately to mind, who are professional enough to avoid the pratfalls and attempt to bring the music-hungry hordes an enjoyable experience. But concerts do not function as purely musical experiences anymore. More and more, they have become excuses for a gathering of the tribes, for young people to assemble, to smoke grass, booze, and revel in their sameness. The music is secondary. Pity, I sure do love to hear live music.

Tuesday, September 1, 2026

Produced by George Martin (1981)


 

Produced by George Martin

Melody Maker

August 21, 1971


    George Martin is probably the most shadowy character in rock and roll history. His influence has been immense, yet few people outside the immediate circle of the Beatles truly understand how much of a part he played in the early years of the greatest group the world has ever known. John Lennon was recently quoted as saying, "Show me a piece of music that George Martin ever wrote." Yet, it's undeniable that such classics as "Yesterday," "Eleanor Rigby," and "A Day in the Life" could not have appeared in the form they did without his presence in the background. It's impossible to assess his true contribution, particularly as he's a modest man and his relations with the group are now virtually non-existent  (although he did some of the scoring for Paul's Ram album recently and wasn't credited on the sleeve).

     He went to work at the BBC music department, and from that he moved almost by accident to EMI, where he went straight into production, knowing nothing about it. Eventually, he took over as head of Parlophone, the youngest label chief EMI had ever appointed. On the label at that time were Jimmy Shand, Johnny Dankworth, and Humphrey Lytleton, and Martin proceeded to make his name with such luminaries as Jim Dale and the Temperance Seven. 

    He also became known as the Comedy King through his hits with Bernard Cribbins, Peter Sellers and Charlie Drake, and by the end of 1962, he was looking for something different, something that would give Parlophone a rather hipper image. 

M M:  Do you remember how the Beatles came to you at EMI?

 Martin:  Oh yes, very easily. Brian Epstein brought them to me, not to EMI. Well, he had already taken them to EMI, and they'd been turned down. I didn't know that until afterwards. 

MM: Who turned them down?

Martin:  The story is that, first of all, he took them to a guy who was the marketing manager. I don't think I'd better mention his name, and he played the tapes to two producers. Now there were four producers at EMI at the time: Norrie Paramor, Norman Newell, Walter Ridley, and myself. Two of these four heard the tapes, and I didn't. So one of the other three is also innocent. They said they weren't any good, so Epstein went away and played them to Decca, who showed an interest in them and brought them down for a test. It was fairly favorable to begin with. Then later on, Brian found that he'd got to bring them down for a second test while Decca made up their minds, and he got rather shirty about it. He tried them with other companies as well. I think Pye and Phillips. In desperation, he took the tapes to HMV on Oxford Street to get some lacquers cut because he wanted to place the songs with a publisher, and the engineer there, Ted Huntley, thought the tapes were great. He took them upstairs to Sid Coleman, who ran EMI Publishing, and said Sid liked them too, and said, "Have you played them to EMI?" Brian said, "Yes, but nobody wants to know." And Sid told him to play them to me because I was looking for something. Brian brought them round to me, and that was it.

 MM: Can you remember the songs on the tape?

 Martin: No, I can remember "Your Feet's Too Big" was one of them. There was a motley collection. I think possibly "Love Me Do" was on it, but I'm not sure. Certainly, the songs didn't knock me out. In fact, I wasn't knocked out at all. In defense of all those people who turned it down, it was a pretty lousy tape, recorded in a back room, very badly balanced, not very good songs in a rather raw group, and I wanted something, and I thought they were interesting enough to bring down for a test. I said, "Bring them down from Liverpool. I don't want to go up there, and I'll have to look at them in the studio." Obviously, Brian inwardly groaned, thinking he was going to go through the same thing as Decca, but when he came to London and I spent an afternoon with them in Number Three Studio in Abbey Road, I liked them. I thought they were great.  I liked them as people apart from anything else, and I was convinced that we had the making of a hit group, but I didn't know what to do with them in terms of material.

 MM:  There was a kind of hiatus in pop at that time. Were you conscious of that?

 Martin: Very much so. I was very envious of Norrie Paramor, who had Cliff Richard, the big star. I've been making comedy records: Peter Sellers, Charlie Drake, Bernard Cribbins, and I'd done it because I'd enjoyed it anyways. It was a way of giving Parlophone something different, and I was successful, so I became the Comedy King. I envied Norrie for his success with Cliff because every comedy record you made was a onceer. You had to start from scratch the next time around, whereas if you had an artist like Cliff, once you got him up there, all you got to do was find a reasonably good song and give it to him, and you got a second hit. This, to me, was much easier  at least, I thought so, and I was always looking for something of that sort. When the Beatles came along, I thought, "Well, I didn't know where I was going to get the songs from, but they seemed a pretty good group, and they seemed to have that kind of raw sound that people hadn't heard about yet."

    M M: What was it that was different? The raw sound or the fact that they were a group rather than a solo singer?

Martin:  Well, I didn't recognize that because the tapes weren't like that. They were occasionally singing together, but mostly they were alternating. Sometimes it was John, sometimes it was Paul, and sometimes George. In fact, my first sessions with them were looking for the voice. I thought "They're great people, but who am I going to make the lead voice?" I spent an afternoon with each of them in turn listening to them. I chucked out George pretty quickly, so it was left to either Paul or John. 

MM:  Were all three singing equally when they came to you? 

Martin:  They were doing all those old rock standards, "Chains," and "Anna," and so on, and they were doing them the way they had heard them on records, imitating the records. So they were singing together, but occasionally one would burst out in a solo. Then it suddenly hit me that I was being stupid. I was looking for a solo voice when I didn't need to. I should just take them as they were. Then we got rid of Pete Best, and Brian brought Ringo along. I was rather suspicious of him. 

MM: What was wrong with Pete Best?

 Martin:  He was the best-looking of the group, which was rather curious, but he never joined in with the others. He was always a bit quiet, almost surly, but the basic thing that I didn't like was his drumming. It wasn't very solid, and he didn't bind the group together. I said to Brian that I didn't want to use him on the records, although he could do what he liked with him outside of the studio, as part of the group. But there was no reason why I shouldn't use a session drummer. No one was going to know. This was obviously the trigger because the boys had been thinking of getting rid of him anyway, but they wanted someone to do the dirty work for them.

 M M:  What did you think of Ringo's drumming when you first heard him?

 Martin:  I didn't give him a chance to begin with. He suddenly turned up at the session. I didn't know he was coming, and I booked Andy White. I said, "Well, Andy's here, and he's paid for, so he's going to play. You could join in on  tamborine if you like."

 MM: This was the "Love Me Do" session?

 Martin:  Yes, we actually did it again with Ringo playing drums because when I heard him, he was much better than Pete Best. He gave it more solidarity, and the fact he was more raucous than Andy White, and it obviously fitted the group anyway. He was pretty rough in those days, but pretty good.

 MM: So he did actually play on that single?

 Martin:  Oh yes, but we have two versions of "Love Me Do." In all honesty, I can't remember which was which. I think maybe the one that Andy played on was on the album. 

M M:  When you first met them, did you consider them seriously as musicians at all, as guitarists or composers?

Martin:  As composers, they didn't read. They hadn't shown me that they could write anything at all. "Love Me Do" I thought was pretty poor, but it was the best we could do. They hadn't got anything else, and I hadn't got anything else to offer them either. As players, they were quite adequate. They could play guitar pretty well, and they had a fairly uninhibited sound. The question of them being deep minds or great new images didn't occur to me, or to anyone, or to them. I should think it was after we made "Love Me Do," that I was determined to find a hit song for them. I was scouring the publisher's office looking for material on our group, which nobody wanted to know about. EMI heard the Beatles, which they thought was a silly name anyway, and they didn't attach too much importance to it. Comedy Man tries to get into the pop field, you know. We hit number 17 in the charts, which raised a few eyebrows, but only just. So I found them the song by Mitch Murray, which I thought was just ideal for them, and I gave it to them to learn for the next session. When they turned up on the session, they said they didn't like it. 

MM What was it? 

Martin: How Do You Do It. They actually recorded it, but said they'd rather do one of their own numbers. I said I hadn't heard anything of theirs that was any good, so they did. "How Do You Do It." John sang the solo quite well, actually, and he came to me and pleaded with me. He said, "Look, I think we can do better than this. If we write something better, can we do it?" And I said, "Yes, but you're turning down a hit." They quickly came back with "Please, Please Me," and I must confess, it knocked me out. They worked out all the little harmonies, and it was super. I said, "That's great. You've got your first number one hit." I was so confident about it, and I gave "How Do You Do It"  to Gerry, and that became number one too. So I was justified both ways. That was the beginning of them. 

MM Did you ever think they'd be able to follow up "Please Please Me" with more of their own compositions? 

Martin:  It all happened so fast. Then events move so quickly. Brian was pressuring them all the time to write new material, and they were caught up in the success whirlwind. And they wanted to continue writing. They'd come to me and say, "What do you think of this?" And that's how "From Me to You" happened. It needed a bit of polishing here and there. As soon as we'd make "Please Please Me", I decided to make an album very quickly, and I brought them down for just one day. We started at 10 o'clock in the morning and finished at 11 o'clock at night. I made the first album. Brian was also caught up on the success thing, and he wanted to load me with a lot of other stuff. Then it was kind of a partnership. I'll give you the raw material and you give me the goods and we'll sell it. It was a very happy year, but it was terribly hard work. I was in the studio the whole time, and I've never worked so hard in my whole life. 

MM:  When did the group's attitude to you start changing and vice versa? I expect that With the Beatles and Beatles for Sale were made in much the same way as Please Please Me, weren't they?

 Martin:  Even though they'd written their own songs, they had them on as songs rather than as records. They weren't thinking in terms of records. They were thinking of a chorus, a middle eight, and an ending. When I started off with them, I'd organize their beginnings and endings and their solos, it seemed terribly elementary now.  But when they sang the song first, I'd time a chorus, and when it came to one minute and 20 seconds, I'd say, "Right, it's not long enough. Go back to the middle eight", or else we'd have a little guitar solo or a bit of piano. It was all dead simple, and gradually the collaboration grew. It was just the four of them, and if there was any keyboard stuff, I'd put it in. It wasn't until "Yesterday" that we started using other instruments.

 MM: When did you start noticing their use of unusual construction like odd bars of two, four, and so on?

 Martin:  I can't really remember. They never noticed it at all. 

MM: You never tried to make them iron it out and write a 32-bar song?

 Martin:  Not a bit. I recognize those aberrations, so to speak, were part of that. It would have been silly to change them because that would have destroyed their spirit. I don't think I ever quarreled with them musically at all. The only time I ever really came to blows with them was over something quite different, which was a record sleeve. It was one that was never issued over here. They were dressed up as butchers, and it came out in America. It was their idea of a joke.

 MM:  In the early days, did John and Paul really write together? 

Martin: Yes, but they also wrote separately. "Please Please Me," "From Me to You," and "I Want to Hold Your Hand" were undoubtedly collaborative efforts. They'd sit down and literally construct the songs together. I can't remember the first individual song, so that obviously even before I met them, they were writing individually. But if you go through them, you can hear which of them are John-oriented and which are Paul-oriented. "Yesterday" is obviously Paul, and that's an interesting point because it was the first time we ever used anyone other than Beatles on a record. There was no one on that record but Paul and a string quartet. 

MM:  How much part did you take in the creation of  "Yesterday?" Presumably Paul wrote all the melody and lyrics. 

Martin:  Oh sure. What happened was that he had this song, which he'd been kicking around for a long time. He'd play it to me on the piano, and it was called "Scrambled Egg." He was looking for lyrics all the time, and we all thought it was a good tune. When he finished it and he wanted to record it, I said that I couldn't see what we could do with it. I couldn't see what Ringo could do with a drum beat on a song like this. I told him the best thing to do was to go down to the studio and just sing it, so he just played the guitar and sang. I honestly couldn't think what to do with it, except put strings on it. And Paul said, "What Norrie Paramor stuff?  Manatovani? No." Then I had the idea of using a string quartet, a very classical thing, and Paul thought it was a great idea. 

 M M:  It seemed like a big step at that time.

 Martin:  It was. I spent a day with him getting his ideas on how the strings should sound, and I went and wrote the score for the string quartet and recorded it.

 MM:  Did you notice them growing apart, developing distinct personalities?

 Martin: Paul and John had their own identifiable styles. Paul was the syrupy one, and John was the hard one. But the rift wasn't there then. They were really a unit. 

MM:  Being in that high-pressure situation must have pushed them together.

Martin:  Even Brian was outside that little castle. Brian and I were looking on. 

M M:  Did Brian ever have anything to do with the actual music? 

Martin:  Nothing at all. He was quite right not to. The relationship was fine. Brian was very much the businessman, fixing up all the dates and so on, and he had that tremendous air of.... a snooty air with people, which sold the Beatles as being more important. He had a great manner, really.  He liked to be considered a part of the music. In fact, he was very hurt one day in the studio. The boys were downstairs, and I was talking to them through an intercom. Brian picked up the mic and said, "Why don't you do such and such?" And John said, "Brian, you look after your money, and we'll look after our music."  Brian flushed to the roots of his hair, and never said any more. He was obviously very hurt by that.


I'm the Greatest


 September 1, 2001 

The Man and His Music (1986)


 The Man and His Music

By Robert Palmer

NY Times News Service

September 4, 1986


    A funny thing happened to Paul McCartney on the way to making his next album, or, to be more specific, it happened to his co-producer Hugh Padgham. "When we started working on the record, Hugh came in one day and said he'd had a dream," McCartney recalled when he visited New York this week. "He dreamed he woke up one morning and had made this really bad syrupy album with me, an album he hated, and that it had blown his whole career." We took that as a little warning. 

    That's as good an explanation as any for the unexpected hard rock and psychedelic flavors of McCartney's album Press to Play, which will be in the stores next week. After signing a multi-million-dollar deal with CBS and making a series of albums for that company that were a bit syrupy and were successful but not hugely so, McCartney has returned to the harder textures and more emphatic rhythms of rock, and he has returned to Capitol, the label for which he first recorded as one of the four Beatles.

     "Sometimes it's nice to kick over the traces," McCartney said. "Sometimes you just need it, like in my case, I'm thought of maybe as being an ace balladeer. People know I do that; they don't know I also like to do harder stuff like "Angry" on the new album, or associate me with electronics and backward guitars, which we used on some of the other new songs. But at one time, I was in the avant-garde of what was going on around the time of the Sgt. Pepper album, which was largely my influence."

     McCartney feels he is being unfairly typecast in many of the histories of the Beatles and of rock in general that continue to flood the book market. "They make me out to be the ambitious, cold, ruthless half of the McCartney-Lennon songwriting team," he said, "and they make John out to be the happy-go-lucky, brilliant one.

     "I was reacting to one of those definite true story books on the Beatles recently," McCartney said, "and one of the things I told the journalist was they made me out to be a maneuvering swine, but John could be a maneuvering swine too. The next thing I know, there's a story: 'McCartney calls John Lennon a maneuvering swine' in papers all over the world. All I meant was that in our business dealings, John was good at maneuvering. There's nothing wrong with that. I suppose I shoot my mouth off, say what I think. But while I loved John, I don't think it's a good idea to just sanctify him. I don't think he would have liked that. He liked the truth."

     Whether he's been stung by criticism in books and the press, or is simply entering a new phase, McCartney seems much more like the rock and roller again after some years of churning out relatively insidious pop. In addition to the new Press to Play, which is his most creative and committed-sounding album in years, there have been live performances. McCartney performed at the Prince's Trust charity concert in London recently, not as the pop balladeer who wrote the Beatles ' song "Yesterday," but as the rocker who sang the Beatles' version of Little Richard's songs. 

    "They had a monster band," he recalled, with people like Eric Clapton, Elton John, Phil Collins... I came out there and did "I Saw Her Standing There," and "Long Tall Sally," which I hadn't sung in 20 years. I didn't know if I could still sing that high, but when I tried to put it in a lower key during rehearsal, it started to sound like Pat Boone! So I just went for it the way I'd originally done it."

     These songs were two of the most abandoned all-out rockers McCartney sang with the Beatles. His performance at the concert will be seen in the United States soon as part of an HBO cable television special. "The concert made me realize that I can do Beatles songs again," McCartney said. "The Beatles' breakup was kind of like a divorce. There was always the feeling afterward that none of us wanted to touch those songs, but time heals all, and besides, they're good songs. So now I'm kind of looking around for a band again. I don't fancy looking too hard at the moment. I just want some good players. That's all. No image to speak of. If they play good, it doesn't matter how they look. "

    McCartney said he hoped any band he put together wouldn't be compared with the Beatles or with this post-Beatles band Wings. "I suppose I shouldn't worry," said the ex-Beatle, whose familiar mop top is shot through with gray these days. "We used to joke about kids in a record store finding a Beatles album and saying, 'Hey, look, Paul was in a band before Wings.' Now it's true, and now I'm starting to get fans who were too young to remember Wings."

The 33 1/3 days


 

Stand By Me


 George and Ringo with Ben E. King