The Beatles/George Martin

Subject: The Beatles/George Martin
From: Dazbo
Date: 28 Nov 06 - 07:20 AM

Watched a re-run (More4, Sunday PM) of Howard Goodall's 20th Centuary Greats about The Beatles. He was very complementary about their writing (use of modes, modulation etc) and how they saved modern classical music (i.e. it was okay for modern classical composers to write tunes again:-)). He stated that one reason for their musical adventurousness was that during their time in Hamburg they had to play all sorts of music (show tunes, rock and roll etc etc.) the role of George Martin was scarcely mentioned. This lead me to thinking up this question.

How much of the success and musical innovation was down to (or at least co-authored) George Martin?

Subject: RE: The Beatles/George Martin
From: GUEST,Johnmc
Date: 28 Nov 06 - 08:40 AM

This is, of course, a question which all Beatles fans have mulled over, and, until the opening up of the secrets of the recordings in the 90's, it wasn't easily resolved.
However, anyone acquainted with George Martin's utterances and with the Anthology series will now accept that Martin himself has no illusions about the genius for melody displayed by the group. Yes, they would have made it without him, but the recordings and arrangements would have been less brilliant.

Subject: RE: The Beatles/George Martin
From: Pauline L
Date: 28 Nov 06 - 01:10 PM

He made a very substantial contribution. They had tremendous talent, but it was raw talent. He is sometimes called the Fifth Beatle -- with good reason.

Subject: RE: The Beatles/George Martin
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 28 Nov 06 - 07:47 PM

Which,by the way, was a question on Jeopardy the other day. The 5th Beatle.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: The Beatles/George Martin
From: Scrump
Date: 29 Nov 06 - 05:17 AM

I thought the 5th Beatle was Stuart Sutcliffe? George Martin must've been the 6th Beatle.

:-)

Subject: RE: The Beatles/George Martin
From: Snuffy
Date: 29 Nov 06 - 08:51 AM

Or the 7th. What about Pete Best?

Subject: RE: The Beatles/George Martin
From: Scrump
Date: 29 Nov 06 - 10:12 AM

True, Snuffy. I believe there were 5 Beatles at one time - Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, Best and Sutcliffe. Sutcliffe departed, leaving the band as a quartet, which they remained for the rest of their career as a band. Sutcliffe was usually referred to as the "5th Beatle" in the days before Pete Best was replaced by Ringo Starr (which happened in 1962 at about the time they signed for EMI).

The "5th Beatle" tag sometimes applied to George Martin has only been done retrospectively AFAIK - slightly confusing for those who remember Stuart Sutcliffe being referred to thus, e.g. if you had a pub quiz question "Who was known as the 5th Beatle?" many would answer George Martin without being aware of Sutcliffe.

Subject: RE: The Beatles/George Martin
From: Peter T.
Date: 29 Nov 06 - 02:49 PM

Without George Martin, the Beatles would have been just another pop group. He is the one who gave them permission and space to develop. It is hard to imagine anyone else at that time -- remember this was before the Beatles!! -- combining classical music training, working on Peter Sellers' records (the crucial Indian music sounds), Goon shows, and so on. Martin latched on to both their rock background and their "songster" background (complex songs like Besame Mucho as part of their staple act) and ensured they could combine them both. After a while, once they had the idea and were rolling, they needed him less. But he was their oxygen at an early stage. George Martin is being typically modest.

yours,

Peter T.