Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
2.50pm
26 March 2012
Offline
The furore surrounding this has evidently been preying on my mind more than I thought. This morning I woke up from a dream where I listened to ADitL on enormous speakers and could clearly hear Paul joining John halfway through, so I set about recording it to show the forum. Kind of disappointed when I woke up and everything was back to speculation.
3.31pm
19 September 2010
Offline
Zig said
Yes doubt – that clip sounds less like Paul (to me) than any other clip I've heard in the past.
I'm not saying anything definitive (still) because unless we here it from Paul, Ringo or George Martin we will never know. Anything else is simply pure speculation.
*sigh*
Well said. We don't know who it is/was, and we will never know. Can't we accept that we think we're right, but that others aren't convinced, and say we can't be certain till Paul Ringo or George M tell us? And leave it at that? No videos will prove it, unless that video features P, R, or GM telling us the truth. Please?
4.09pm
26 July 2011
Offline
I don't understand the confusion -- it's clearly William Shatner!
4.14pm
26 March 2012
Offline
mr. Sun king coming together said
Zig said
Yes doubt – that clip sounds less like Paul (to me) than any other clip I've heard in the past.
I'm not saying anything definitive (still) because unless we here it from Paul, Ringo or George Martin we will never know. Anything else is simply pure speculation.
*sigh*
Well said. We don't know who it is/was, and we will never know. Can't we accept that we think we're right, but that others aren't convinced, and say we can't be certain till Paul Ringo or George M tell us? And leave it at that? No videos will prove it, unless that video features P, R, or GM telling us the truth. Please?
To my mind, this approach is just as pointless. If speculation is useless, what's the point of a discussion forum about a band of people we have never met and really know very little about? Music discussion is rarely based on concrete facts.
I, too, find this thread annoying, but nobody said anyone was forced to post in it, or even read about others' opinions. Saying "guys we should stop talking about this because we won't come to a conclusion" could be applied to any thread on this forum which requires a subjective point of view.
4.17pm
8 August 2012
Offline
I wish somebody could ask Paul himself who sang it.
4.51pm
19 September 2010
Offline
Ben – in no way is it the same thing. This thread exists to answer a question. If there is no definitive answer to a question regarding fact, why continue the thread?
10.33pm
1 May 2011
Offline
Dont think there is anything wrong with discussion about it, certainly no harm is being done. If folks want to talk sensibly without forcing their opinion thru as if it 100% right then why shouldnt they? Its up to each individual whether or not they read and/or contribute to the thread regardless of there being no definative answer.
Its like the question of Lieutenant Columbo's first name. Some folks swear blind its Frank, some insist it was never made known, others claim it to be something entirely different, the rest groan when it reappears because there is no definative answer, but you cant stop them from talking about it. Its a public forum after all.
2.32am
26 March 2012
Offline
mr. Sun king coming together said
If there is no definitive answer to a question regarding fact, why continue the thread?
Because it's a discussion forum. We may not know the answer, but shutting down all access to the question prevents us from ever getting closer to the truth, or putting forward reasonable and intelligent debate, or changing people's opinions, or even making them simply think. All of those things are better than just going "screw it, we'll never know" and locking the thread.
9.24pm
14 April 2010
Offline
I agree Ben.
When I said "Anything else is simply pure speculation", I meant just that. I did not mean we should stop discussing it. As long as the conversations remain civil, the discussions can be quite fun and interesting.
Locking the thread did come up in the past, but that was only because it got out of hand. If we all keep respecting one another, everything is cool.
I may not agree with some of the posters' opinions, but I will defend to the death their right to be expressed.
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, Let it roll for all its worth.
10.59pm
12 March 2010
Offline
minime said
but could it be possible that John and Paul shared the shame mic for that part, Paul coming stronger in the beginning and then John taking the lead? Even if Paul was meant to be the lead, it doesn't matter if in the end John was the one whose voice was more prominent
Nope, you can clearly hear in the isolated vocals there is only one lead singer, with several "uuhs" in the background.
I mention it AGAIN:
There is a high nasal "uh" in the background that is impossible to be done by any other than John.
The lead sounds so much like Paul from start to finish…
There is no end to my astonishment about how many people get this wrong…
11.01pm
12 March 2010
Offline
Long John Silver said
I just can't hear Paul, maybe as the one who uploaded states that "John main with Paul on background" but that's it.
Thanks for providing another evidence it's Paul.
I CAN hear John, he's doing the high nasal falsetto "uuhs" in the background.
Lead is all Paul with a chest voice.
11.02pm
12 March 2010
Offline
mr. Sun king coming together said
I haven't the slightest idea, and anyone who knows for certain one way or another is wrong.
Eeeh, you DO see the flaw in this sentence, don't you?
11.06pm
12 March 2010
Offline
Ben Ramon said
For that reason I'm convinced both of them sing it together, with Paul's voice brought out slightly more in the mix as it goes on because of his ease on the higher notes. Why else would there be such colossal debate? John fans want to hear John and Paul fans want to hear Paul, and they both hear who they want to because they are BOTH SINGING.
Sorry Ben, not possible.
They provided so many tracks with two lead singers or double tracked voices that it's quite clear this one is different: Just one lead singer.
Sounds very diplomatic, but it's still wrong, sorry.
11.15pm
12 March 2010
Offline
Zig said
I am also in that camp – listened to it this weekend in surround sound. I forget which track was for which singer, but for the sake of argument (how apropos for this thread) let's say John's voice is on the left track.
John's vocals are in the left track. After Paul's "woke up…" part in the right track, the ahs start in that same track. They then fade the vocals to left, right, left; at which point John's vocal starts in the left track again.
See, another proof it's Paul.
He starts the aaah on "his" channel, then it's fading over to John, who continues with the LAST VERSE!
Ah well, I tried logic before, but hardly anyone would listen…
11.42pm
19 September 2010
Offline
paulsbass said
mr. Sun king coming together said
I haven't the slightest idea, and anyone who knows for certain one way or another is wrong.Eeeh, you DO see the flaw in this sentence, don't you?
I'm very slow today, so unfortunately no. Please point it out, it's probably quite apparent.
Edit: Someone get me a dunce cap – I meant to say "anyone who claims knows for certain one way or another is wrong" although wrong isn't the word – more confident then they should be would be a better ending.
11.56pm
19 September 2010
Offline
And, I just want to add – I'm truly being swayed to the Paul side of the tracks. The isolated vocals make it truly McCartney-esque.
12.16am
12 March 2010
Offline
mr. Sun king coming together said
And, I just want to add – I'm truly being swayed to the Paul side of the tracks. The isolated vocals make it truly McCartney-esque.
Welcome!
12.14pm
14 April 2010
Offline
paulsbass said
Zig said
I am also in that camp – listened to it this weekend in surround sound. I forget which track was for which singer, but for the sake of argument (how apropos for this thread) let's say John's voice is on the left track.
John's vocals are in the left track. After Paul's "woke up…" part in the right track, the ahs start in that same track. They then fade the vocals to left, right, left; at which point John's vocal starts in the left track again.
See, another proof it's Paul.
He starts the aaah on "his" channel, then it's fading over to John, who continues with the LAST VERSE!
Ah well, I tried logic before, but hardly anyone would listen…
Actually, that was me trying very hard to give those in the Paul camp every benefiy of the doubt. Nice try though.
If it wasn't both of them edited to sound like they were taking turns, then I hear more John than Paul. I'm just telling you what I hear.
I very much respect your opinions on why you feel it is Macca. I know he is your favorite, but don't think that is the reason why you are so adamant. I really believe that you believe it is Paul. Fair enough.
I will ask that, unless you build a time machine and go into the recording studio as it was happening, you stop telling people definitively that they are wrong. I was not there, you were not there. I hear one thing, you hear another. I realize there is a chance that I may be wrong. You don't. Therein lies the rub. And it does rub people the wrong way when you tell them they are wrong when this is pure speculation. This thread should be fun to discuss. Telling people they are just plain wrong and that they are not using common sense or logic on a matter of pure speculation is not fun.
By all means, please continue to tell us why you feel you are right. By that same token, please stop telling people they are wrong. They might not be.
&
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, Let it roll for all its worth.
6.47pm
16 February 2011
Offline
Whether it's Paul or John in the lead, I think what is certain is that
a. Paul's verse wasn't recorded at the same time as the "ahhh" part, or
b. they cut the tracks and "pasted" them together again
Also, there's an interesting sound effect, or what should I call it, at the very beginning of the "ahh" part- it sounds like someone is moving faster than speed and makes a sort of explosion, if you know what I mean
And why would they record those "uuhhhUUhhh" things in the back if only to drown them in the mix? I don't think there's a second track for them, those backing vocals could even be sung to the same microphone as the lead singer, which makes me think…
Why would it be impossible that they should take turns in singing? They may have adlibbed that part, John and Paul, one of then ahhh:ing while the other one hoots, and then they could change places
Some people claim that the lead singer is Paul because he sounds exactly the same as in Love Rita. I strongly disagree. I never had any problems discerning his voice in that song. And if we take another example, Let me Roll it, which is Paul's solo piece including heavily distorted and reverberated voice- but I can still distinguish him, even in the higher notes. Funny though, critics have said that he sounds like Lennon in that one. That might be, but he certainly doesn't sound like the person doing the "ahhs", although you might expect some similarity considering the artificial effect. Of course, this doesn't mean it cannot be Paul, but his ahhs is a performance he never did before that and never did again 
I would be relieved to find out that the singer is actually George ( really, there are a lot of people who think so)
7.01pm
26 March 2012
Offline
minime said
Whether it's Paul or John in the lead, I think what is certain is thata. Paul's verse wasn't recorded at the same time as the "ahhh" part, or
b. they cut the tracks and "pasted" them together again
Also, there's an interesting sound effect, or what should I call it, at the very beginning of the "ahh" part- it sounds like someone is moving faster than speed and makes a sort of explosion, if you know what I mean
And why would they record those "uuhhhUUhhh" things in the back if only to drown them in the mix? I don't think there's a second track for them, those backing vocals could even be sung to the same microphone as the lead singer, which makes me think…
Why would it be impossible that they should take turns in singing? They may have adlibbed that part, John and Paul, one of then ahhh:ing while the other one hoots, and then they could change places
I thought this too. Good argument.
I would be relieved to find out that the singer is actually George ( really, there are a lot of people who think so)
I wouldn't bank on it being George at all. The likelihood of John and Paul giving him that part to do seems very small, not to mention that George's presence was hardly felt at the Pepper sessions (and I don't really feel his presence on A Day In The Life at all). Plus he doesn't seem nearly as likely to reach those high, powerful notes as the others, not very characteristic of his singing voice.
Most Users Ever Online: 597
Currently Online:
47 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
mr. Sun king coming together: 6972
meanmistermustard: 3545
MeanMrsMustard: 2794
Egroeg Evoli: 1630
vonbontee: 1427
Von Bontee: 1397
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 87
Members: 1726
Moderators: 5
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 3
Forums: 33
Topics: 2433
Posts: 74693
Newest Members: ThomRoxeb1, Mary Gaspard Mcmillan, Im.meena, aengorn7, Upsiditus
Moderators: Joe (2707), skye (2295), Ellie (1), Zig (2769), mithveaen (4675)
Administrators: Joe (2707)
