Wow, these videos are very cool, hi the beatles vocal harmony!!!!

I was trying to find the words that you stated so well. Not to pit one Beatle against the other (after all, they were greater as a sum of their parts), but Paul’s very close “there, but not there” seemingly effortless high harmonies kick it into the Thrill-mode range, for sure. Its visual equivalent is watching two birds flying close formation wildly, yet in complete control.

John is singing the falsetto parts on “I wanna hold your HAND”. On the word HAND, it’s John’s falsetto, not Paul. Paul goes high in the bridges “I can’t hide, I can’t hide, I can’t hide”

@@ardavansarraf2973 yep. they are singing in close harmony. John’s voice however dominates clearly - including the high notes. You are actually hearing John more; not that it matters.

@@ardavansarraf2973 really???

@@ardavansarraf2973 you're right, but when they sing I wanna hold _your ha-a-a-a-a-a-and_ in the chorus, McCartney's high harmony there is very euphoric and mania inducing

You're wrong, because

Al the Alligator why wrong

Larry Smellbutts69 he means the song because

3 words; THE BEACH BOYS

nothing beats the early albums

First heard on CBS News Cronkite after the Kennedy assassination. I was 11 but was captured at once.

Also they performed magic with just two voices on "If I Fell" which happens to be John's complete song. He thought of everything except the intro, which was George Martin's idea.

That's why solo covers of I want to hold your hand or In My life don't come close to the originals which has vocal harmonies of Two and sometimes three of the Beatles.

George is the sneaky harmony on a lot of their tunes...and it added exactly what they needed. George wasn't a fast study but he had Paul and John to do harmonies. In later years he did the pretty much by himself in studio cuz he learned a great deal while in the Beatles. They never stopped learning....

it was actually "I get High", but when they arrived in America on the Ed Sullivan Show, they were strictly told not to use the word High, but to substitute "I can't hide" instead. The censors required them to do that if they wanted to perform that song. They also played it that way in other locations. In one instance John defied them, and said it anyway.

@@adrianreyes4702 Are you sure about that fact? I'm a Beatles fan since 18 years, but I've never heard or read this story. I know the story when Bob Dylan asked them why they sing "I get high" and if they maybe tried weed or other substances, but John and Paul told him that they actually sing "I can't hide".

@@adrianreyes4702Hi Adrian, that story is incorrect. Lennon and McCartney were never about writing about getting high in '64. Bob Dylan introduced them to pot, but well after the Sullivan appearance. Also, it would have never gotten past George Martin and EMI's policy. I believe you're mixing it up with the Rolling Stones appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show, when they sang, "(I Cant Get No) Satisfaction". Sullivan specifically told him not to sing the line, "when I'm trying to make some girl". Jagger did anyway, and it was bleeped.

it sounds kin of the same

​@@adrianreyes4702inside rhymes with hide better than high does

Yeah, after he stopped singing with Paul he hated the sound of his own voice alone. Seems like he wanted to double track it to make up for Paul's not being there.

That's almost what I think of my voice. I always think double tracking would make it sound better.

True although if you listen to a song like “girl” he shows a great vocal without double track

Paul had the range and more voice control and a little soul....but I thought John always had a sexier voice. ..

Totally agree about George. Despite growing up listening to the Beatles I didn't appreciate George's guitar playing until I saw a very good tribute band a few years back and the George character really shone. After that whenever I played Beatles songs I really tuned in to George and he his guitar parts are brilliant.

I loved Emerick's book, but I thought he was a tad harsh with George. It seemed like whenever he described any song it was "George hamfisted his way through a solo" or "We had to slow the tape down just so George could get it right." And maybe they had to, but why keep bringing it up? He seemed to knock each one of them except Paul. He probably could have farted into the mic and he would have called it brilliant.

@@TheShape2534 Agree completely. In my mind, one of the band's biggest overall accomplishments was the song "I'm Only Sleeping." I can't imagine a better song: the stuttery acoustic rhythms evince a feel for meter that I can't even aspire to, the vocals are haunting and sound like "real" John, the raw John we get on Plastic Ono Band and the like. But even before I played guitar (only took two months tops of listening to the Beatles in the summer after 6th grade before I got one!), the most striking part of the song to me was the ethereal touches of backwards lead guitar. As I got older, I learned how hard George worked to get it perfect. He didn't just improvise pretty music and hope it sounded good backwards, he *composed* the solo forward and then *learned* it backwards. He spent 18 hours getting it *just* right, and to my mind it stands as one of the biggest musical contributions George ever made to the group. How does Emerick describe it? That George was such a poor guitar player that it "took" him 18 hours. As though all the meticulous planning and the Herculean effort to brute-force the muscle memory to learn an intricate solo *backwards* was nothing more than a failure. The blindspot towards George's musicianship he shows is staggering. I get it: the engineers didn't want to have to work 18 hours starting the night before and he would have been paid fine even if George just stuck a less-planned out solo on there, but that he can't even appreciate the magnitude of that musical moment at all really makes me unhappy. I know lots of us appreciate the work George put in. It hurts to think that he was much more likely to put his impassioned efforts 110% his bandmates' songs than they were to take his songs seriously for quite some time. When I was a kid getting into the Beatles, Think for Yourself, Taxman, While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Savoy Truffle, For You Blue, Old Brown Shoe, It's All Too Much, all these songs and more meant just as much to me as any other Beatles songs, and without them, I wouldn't have been as inspired to take up music myself. And that says nothing about his contributions to the others' songs. Guitar touches, obviously, like the riffs in, for example, "It's Only Love" and "You Can't Do That," that tie the songs together, but also composition ideas he wasn't credited for like the "Ahh! Look at all the lonely people" bit in Elanor Rigby or the order the chords go in for "Octopus's Garden." The way he supported Ringo in his blossoming songwriting is very heartwarming: he knew what it was like to not be taken seriously by the others. John eventually realized they had been terrible to George, but Paul really seemed to have a hard time admitting how they had circled the wagons and kept George from his fair share of attention and album space. Anyway, I obviously don't spend too much time thinking about the Beatles. Haha!

Well I’ll speak for myself. I never heard of Geoff emerick but I sure know and admire George Harrison as a musician and a guitarist.

Can you list some of em out. Cause everyone says Lennon had a weak vocal range he always sung low. And he could never do oh darling doesn't have the range

It's amazing how Paul could harmonize and seamlessly blend with John, and end the note "exactly" at the same instant as John.

It was Lennon's vocal crack

Então canta uma língua desconhecida eu não sei identificar

Tem uma frase ao contrário que é dado fandaut naquela palavra feitalt e fica bem baixinho o volume por trás da voz eu não sei que palavra é essa

Por favor se a palavra significar algo ruim não fale que eu não quero nem um pouco saber o que é não estou interessado

They recorded this song and she loves you in German. These versions are well known and readily available

John says "You'll let me hold your hand" Paul: "I wanna hold your hand"

I made a mistake...The song they couldn't put on that Hollywood Bowl album was " If I Fell" very hard vocal tune to do when you can't hear yourself.

No just a melodic love song as all the early stuff was unbelievably good

Ad libbing dirty lyrics to Beatles songs in the early days was de rigeur. As with many other songs (Louie Louie etc). What I remember of this one was "I want to hold your gland. . ." YMMV.

It's Paul and John singing together throughout the entire song.

zedxxx9 John and Paul are completely in unison. They do it so well that it sounds like one person singing. It’s extremely difficult to achieve that effect by the way.

Right? It often sounds like a double-tracked John... but then again in the middle eight and in the finale it sounds like Paul is harmonizing

Those two could really sound like each other. Two of the best!

@@n.f.7342 -- This is the first time it ever sounded to me like a double-tracked John. Usually is VERY CLEAR that McCartney is harmonizing. The only times in this recording where it sounded more clear that there is someone other than John it sounded more like George. But I realize that it is unlikely that McCartney didn't sing on this early Beatles hit so I am probably wrong.

Especially considering they hit.a high note on the word.

The Beatles use of double entendre was much more profound than most realise. For example the backing on "Girl." Both Paul and John speak about this literary illusion as part of the Beatles ah um er artistry.