Turn Me On, Dead Man

Every so often a band comes along that makes you sit up and take notice.  Such is the case with a psychedelic/space rock/stoner band from Lima, Peru, called Serpentina Satelite.  I didn't know anything about Serpentina Satelite until I ran across this fantastic video. This is "The Last Drop" from their 2008 release Nothing to Say.

On September 6th, Serpentina Satelite released Mecanica Celeste on Rocket Recordings in a limited edition run of 600 vinyl LPs, including 100 on colored vinyl.  You can't specify which type of vinyl when you order the LP because, as they explain, the albums were shrink wrapped without any indication of which sleeves contain the colored vinyl, so take your chances.  The LP will also come with a download code that you can use to get the digital version of the tracks from iTunes.  The description of the album Serpentina Satelite provides is a trip in itself:

MECANICA CELESTE is a conceptually unique take on psychedelia, conceived by manipulating traditional religious songs, text ideology and poetry with heavy fuzz guitars, swirling drones, spaced out wah solos, motorik rhythms and delayed vocals, to create a head melting experience of an album which climaxes with the proto metal riffs of track Sendero, giving the band a fresh sounding approach to the well trod grounds of space rock: SERPENTINA SATELITE tried to get to heaven but ended up in space!

This is one album I will definitely be tracking down.  A couple of tracks from the new album are posted on Serpentina Satellite's MySpace page and on SoundCloud, and -valis has selected a track from Mecanica Celeste called "Fobos" as his Pick of the Week, which will air on Turn Me On, Dead Man Radio tomorrow (September 10, 2010) at noon, eastern time.  Also be sure to check out -valis's blog Trip Inside This House, a powerful force that is making the world safe for psychedelia.

One last thing, the video for "The Last Drop" was produced and directed by Henry Gates, who also directed an interesting short film featuring Renato Gomez (guitarist for Serpentina Satelite) called "Fallas De Origen (Transmission Failure)".

Recently Rolling Stone magazine released another "Collector's Edition" of song rankings--this one ranks the top 100 songs by the Beatles. Like the recent update to their picks for the 500 greatest songs of all time, The Beatles: 100 Greatest Songs is a fun read, but fortunately this one skips much of the self-importance evident in Rolling Stone's all-time greatest songs list. No "blue-ribbon panel" necessary for this one, just the editors of Rolling Stone. At the top of their list is "A Day in the Life," and the rest of the Top 10 Beatles Songs is on their website.

I was interested to see if Rolling Stone's list favored John more than the other Beatles. That has been the case with cover photos, as John holds the record for most appearances on the cover of Rolling Stone with 29 (including the premier issue of the magazine in 1967). The Beatles have been featured on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine 13 times, and John and Paul have appeared as a duo on the cover of Rolling Stone three times, and John has appeared alone (or with Yoko) 13 times. Paul has appeared on the cover without any other Beatles 10 times, so his total is 26, not far behind John but considering that John died almost 30 years ago after a reclusive five-year period, and that Paul has been active through the entire time that Rolling Stone has been in publication, it is striking that John leads Paul on this score. In case you're curious, George has been on the cover four times outside of the band for a total of 17 appearances, and Ringo has only been on one cover without the Beatles for a total of 14 appearances.

A "by the numbers" analysis is given on the last page of The Beatles: 100 Greatest Songs, and it does, in fact, show that John is the favorite Beatle among the editors of Rolling Stone magazine. The list includes 40 songs written by John alone and 17 written in collaboration with Paul, while the list contains only 35 written by Paul alone. The list also includes eight songs written by George. John is disproportionately represented on this list, but by how much depends, of course, on how you attribute authorship to each of the Beatles' songs, not to mention how you count the songs (is "Revolution 1" the same as "Revolution"? Is the "Abbey Road Medley" one song, as it is counted in The Beatles: 100 Greatest Songs, or is it eight songs?) William J. Dowlding developed rather detailed authorship estimates in his book Beatlesongs, and I used a simplified version of Dowlding's conclusions that is consistent with the "main writer" attributions used in The Beatles: 100 Greatest Songs. I came up with the following:

This accounts for the Beatles output from 1962 to 1970, removes duplicates and cover versions, and counts the "Abbey Road Medley" as one song. Assuming equal contributions from each author in collaborative efforts, this means that John was responsible for 44.1% of the Beatles' output, Paul accounts for 41.8%, George 12.7% and Ringo 1.4%. John and Paul, then, are both disproportionately represented on the Rolling Stone list at the expense of George and Ringo. John accounts for 48.5 songs on the Rolling Stone list (40 individual compositions and 17 collaborations with Paul), while Paul accounts for 43.5 songs (35 individual compositions and 17 collaborations with John). George only has eight songs on the list and Ringo, well.... Then I wanted to see if John's songs were ranked higher than Paul's on average. Using a simple method of giving the author 100 points for the #1 ranked song, 99 points for the #2 song, 98 points for the #3 song, and so on (and dividing the points evenly for collaborations), John has a total of 2524 points, Paul has 2137 points and George has 389. That is, John's point total is almost 50% of the possible number of points, while Paul has 42.3% and George has only 7.7% of the points. In other words, John's songs tend to be ranked higher than Paul's and George's. To sum up:

One last thing, I wanted to see if the list included songs from all eras equally, or if the editors of Rolling Stone were more partial to early- or late-period Beatles music. It turns out that the editors of Rolling Stone love Revolver (understandably) above all. About half of the Beatles output from most years made the Rolling Stone top 100 list, but almost all of the tracks the Beatles released in 1966 made the list. Both sides of the "Paperback Writer/Rain" single as well as all of the songs on Revolver with the exception of "Love You To," "Doctor Robert," and "I Want to Tell You" were included in the Rolling Stone top 100.

My biases are similar to Rolling Stone's.  My top 10 Beatles songs would be:
1. Strawberry Fields Forever
2. Rain
3. Tomorrow Never Knows
4. Dear Prudence
5. A Day in the Life
6. Two of Us
7. Ticket to Ride
8. Let It Be
9. Blackbird
10. It's All Too Much

Though my favorites are almost all late-period tracks, I am partial to John's songs and my favoriate album is Revolver.

The "Paul is dead" story has inspired a number of works of fiction. In 2009, Frayed Edge Films released a short (22 min.) film entitled Turn Me On, Dead Man (sounds strangely familiar...), in which a fictionalized version of the Beatles perpetrates a hoax after the death of one of their principal members. Without revealing the tragedy to the public, they replace "Blake" with the winner of a lookalike contest. The truth is bound to come out, though, particularly after fans become aware of odd "clues" about this deception that have been placed on the band's records. Recently, Andru Reeve (author of the definitive book on the "Paul is dead" story, also entitled Turn Me On, Dead Man) and I watched the film and discussed it.

Dead Man: My initial reaction to Turn Me On, Dead Man is that I understand why they would have to fictionalize the story, but the movie is so short that they're relying on the viewer to already be familiar with the whole "Paul is dead" mythology. The movie feels more like a few images and songs hung on a story that exists completely outside the film. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it felt like there was plenty of room for them to add to the story. What's your reaction to it?

Andru_Reeve: I agree 100% with your assessment. We get it, but that's because we're familiar with the story. Someone coming in cold will not understand it. It was deeply entertaining -- I enjoyed the homages -- and the music is top-notch. Also, the cinematography and casting were way better than I expected. The big disappointment is that I felt they reached an important transitional apex -- then, the credits roll. What happens next? Why place the clues? It felt like impressionism to me. Not that that is bad. The only explanation I can come up with as to why it was scarcely 20 minutes long was their budget.

DM: Yes, and they probably didn't have any extra money for a legal fund to fend off lawsuits from Apple if they had've used copyrighted Beatles material! I enjoyed the homages, too, and the music is sufficiently Beatlesque--some of it reminded me of the Rubber Soul Project. The music effectively captured the Merseybeat/Beatlemania period and the psychedelia of the Sgt. Pepper-era. Interesting contrast in that the music felt completely realized even though the film was just a sketch.

They took a few liberties with the story: the band is American, John is with the Yoko character as early as 1964, the rumor of Blake/Paul's death doesn't hit the public until 1971 and the band has already broken up. Given how deeply the history of the Beatles and the PID story are etched into my brain, those those things didn't sit well with me. I'm willing to believe the filmmakers had legitimate reasons for making those alterations, but given the brevity of the movie it's hard to see what those are. I thought they were sort of getting at something by switching to color when Blake/Paul is killed and throwing in the images of street protests and Vietnam combat, but you're right, other than perhaps John's obvious contempt for the new Blake/Paul there's no explanation for the clues.

AR: I thought that the shift to color was the most powerful moment; I said to myself: "okay -- this is the big turn." And, again, it works impressionistically just that way. But the story just doesn't meet the anticipated emotional and narrative payoff. You make a good point that "John" comes to despise the "Blake Monster" he created, and that seems to be the impetus for the clues. But, again, it's so subtle (no dialog, no big conflict) that I almost missed it.

Yes, the faux WKNR tableau really confused me. The deejay reminded me more of Venus Flytrap than Russ Gibb, and that took me out of the story (as well as it being the wrong year). I'm trying to be objective about it, because spending 30 years with this myth has resulted in it being subsumed into my DNA. However, it's difficult to make peace with the many blatant alterations to the basic premise of the rumor. Lawsuit? I think the Beatles have bigger transgressors to deal with. Certainly, making the band British and getting the timelines correct wouldn't cause writs to suddenly be served.

DM: It seems to me that the media hysteria around Paul's "death" was closely linked to the sense that the Beatles were going their separate ways. In other words, even though the rumors had been in the air for some time, it was no coincidence that they spread rapidly in late 1969, as evidence was mounting that the Beatles were in the process of breaking up. To relocate the infamous call to the radio station to play "turn me on, dead man/Blake is dead" to 1971 after Paul/Blake's third solo album, as they do in the film, makes no sense to me. (Venus Flytrap! Ha! Well, Venus Flytrap is definitely of the 1970s!)

Also, I thought it was strange that the conflict that leads to Paul/Blake's accident is *Paul/Blake's* frustration with the band musically selling out. In the movie it's John who admits that he just wants to give the people what they want and to stay within popular expectations. If John was willing to compromise his music and succumb to what must have sounded like a bizarre scheme to replace Paul/Blake, what exactly was he trying to accomplish by leaving clues about Paul/Blake being an impostor?

Once again, I'm willing to believe that the filmmakers had reasons for making those choices and that those could be explained in a longer film.

AR: Yes -- the rumor of Paul's "death" was really a metaphor for the death of the band. Of course, a significant element of the myth WAS used in the film -- as you pointed out, Paul/Blake storms out of the studio in frustration at the other members and climbs into his sportscar. It's raining, and I guess he picks up "Rita", whose VW Beetle is seen with its hazard lights flashing, evoking the ABBEY ROAD album cover. Rita "recognizes her famous driver"-- to (more or less) quote Joel Glazier's account of the accident -- and excitedly jumps all over him, causing the fatal crash. John either feels guilty, or fears losing all of his accumulated fame, and devises the coverup, utilizing the winner of the Blake Lookalike Contest. Those essential cornerstones of the tale are indeed in place.

The problem is that they are, again, "impressions" that both you and I immediately recognize and appreciate because we know the folklore so well. To someone coming in cold, I'm afraid alot of these images won't register the same way with them as they do with the PID cognescenti.

I agree with you that one of the major problems with the hoax being revealed AFTER the demise of the band is that it blunts the impact. Having the rumor appear in 1969 as the Beatles were themselves dying made the story really resonate with all of the symbolism of graves, churchyards, ceremony, iconography and deep sadness and mourning. The "loss" isn't as profound if the object of one's love and adulation is already gone.

DM: Did it bother you that the band was American? Or that they never gave them a name? To me that presents a real problem. The film made the band seem almost generic, as though any group could have stood in for the Beatles during this era. I would argue that the Beatles' commercial and musical success, as well as their social impact, was because of some very specific qualities the group possessed, and that it might very well be impossible to somehow fictionalize this story. In addition, the whole "Paul is dead" hysteria already has a "stranger than fiction" quality to it, such that trying to fictionalize it actually makes it seem more run of the mill. I don't know how the filmmakers could have gotten around this other than to just make the movie about the Beatles. What do you think?

AR: Yes, Dead Man -- it did bother me that the band was portrayed as a rather generic American outfit (albeit with definitive proxy members for John and Paul). It's true that part of the reason the Beatles "worked" is because of their singular composition. Imagine if just ONE element of their make-up was different -- Stuart Sutcliffe still on bass, for instance, or if they weren't groomed for early success with the suits by Brian Epstein. I know this is all an academic discussion, but I *really* don't think the Fabs would've had the same impact if EVERY element wasn't in place. However, the film is a parallel universe, and we must accept that this unnamed band DID have the impact of the real McCoys in this particular universe. I guess it boils down to just how much suspension of disbelief you are prepared to engage in. I'd rather have the band be the Beatles, but I'm imaginative enough to let that go in service to the overall story. However, the story in this case feels unfinished.

DM: I agree. I should say here that I really did enjoy watching the movie, even though my somewhat arcane criticisms may make it sound otherwise. I hope they do develop it into a full-length feature film. Closing thoughts?

AR: BOTTOM LINE: the film is technically polished and professional in every way. For close followers of the Paul-Is-Dead rumor, it's an evocative "sound-and-light poem", and it will be enjoyed by those who know the overall myth well. Otherwise, it is far too oblique for the casual viewer. I'd really love to see a feature-length treatment of the story -- however, I'd like it to hew more closely to the blueprint we've all been reading for the past 40 years.

I ran across an interesting story recently that Justin Bieber's track "U Smile" has been slowed way down, turning it into a long, druggy ambient track. This story has created a real stir on the internet (I'm consciously avoiding the term "goes viral" for reasons I can't quite articulate at the moment). The track was posted by Shamantis on SoundCloud and runs over 35 minutes (35:29 to be exact) and includes pop-up commentary. Though already venturing into strange territory, the story then takes an even stranger turn in that a group calling itself Photon Wave Orchestra posted the track as "Echoes Across the Astral Wastelands" on their own website, though this has been contested by Shamantis. While Photon Wave Orchestra's site is still up, it appears that the playback of "Echoes Across the Astral Wastelands" has been disabled. And though it appears that Shamantis is the originator of the track, I have to say that "Echoes Across the Astral Wastelands" is a much better title than what Shamantis came up with, "J. BIEBZ - U SMILE 800% SLOWER."

J. BIEBZ - U SMILE 800% SLOWER by Shamantis

I was confused by this story at first because the detail that kept getting repeated in that internet-echo-chamber sort of way was that "U Smile" had been "slowed down 800 percent." In percentage terms you can only slow down a track by values less than 100, as a track slowed down 100 percent would become infinitely long. Slowing a track by more than 100 percent would mean that you've entered some sort of crazy parallel universe where time runs backwards (but perhaps the laws of physics would actually apply to Justin Bieber's hair!)  Justin Bieber's "U Smile" is 3:17, which means that the track would have been slowed by about 90.75 percent to result in such an epic length. But there's something more than just slowing the tempo going on here. Audacity is free software that makes it easy to change the tempo or pitch of a track, or you can change the speed of a recording by altering the tempo and the pitch proportionately, much like using an alternate speed with a vinyl record on a turntable. In fact, there are settings for changing a recording from 33 1/3 rpm to 45 rpm or 78 rpm, the settings on turntables (remember 16 speed? That one was always fun). Neither altering the tempo nor the speed of "U Smile" results in "Echoes Across the Astral Wastelands."

It turns out that this track was produced with free software called Paul's Extreme Sound Stretch, which changes the tempo of a track but does so in a way that makes the result sound smooth. Lifehacker provides a video tutorial on "How to Create Your Own Slowed-Down Ambient Epics." NPR provides a good explanation of the method of stretching audio tracks. The original audio is broken up into small segments and each segment is stretched by a factor set by the user. The stretched segments are then overlapped, which results in a smooth, continuous sound. Using the same software to compress a stretched track does not unpack the overlapping sounds and so the result is a noisy, though still recognizable version of the original track. A compressed version of "Echoes Across the Astral Wastelands" is available on Audioboo, and it is, in fact, "U Smile" with the noisiness you would expect. Given all this, I concur with Jason Sigal who wrote on WMFU's Beware of the Blog that "Echoes Across the Astral Wastelands" constitutes a transformative work that is well within the bounds of fair use.

A somewhat related note is that a similar technique was used in the creation of the soundtrack music for the movie Inception. Hans Zimmer not only used Edith Piaf's song "Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien" in the film, but he also used a stretched version of the song for the film's musical theme.

Here's another interesting book I ran across recently: What Have You Changed Your Mind About?: Today's Leading Minds Rethink Everything. The book was produced by Edge Foundation, an organization dedicated to providing a forum for "the most interesting minds in the world" to discuss intellectual and scientific ideas. I thought the title of the book sounded interesting and everything, but when I saw "With an introduction by Brian Eno" on the cover, I was all in.

The book pulls together the responses of 131 people from a variety of backgrounds, and the subjects they address are all over the map. Most of the entries are thought provoking--a few klinkers here and there but with the entries averaging less than three pages each, the book never gets bogged down. In addition to writing the intro, Brian Eno also contributed an essay answering the question asked in the title. I did some counting and found that the field most represented in the book are psychologists (30), followed by physicists (24), and then science and technology writers and editors (23). Here's a summary of the fields of the respondents (note: the figures total more than 131 because several people claimed multiple fields).

What's clear from this figure is that very few of the respondents are involved in the arts. Alan Alda writes about how he has changed his ideas about the existence of God. Alda is the actor who played Hawkeye Pierce on the TV series M*A*S*H and now hosts the show Scientific American Frontiers on PBS. Only one other person, Jaron Lanier, claims to be associated with the arts, but he lists himself as "computer scientist and musician" (Despite once dismissing the idea, Lanier has come to believe that virtual reality can be effective in treating psychological disorders).

So while it may seem like Brian Eno is out of place in a crowd like this one, reading Eno's intro and essay makes it clear that he is right at home in this forum. In his essay, Eno describes how he was sympathetic to Maoism as a young man, but he has come to see that sort of revolution as counter-productive. He is now sees greater value in the unglamorous approach of working within the system to try to improve the lot of as many people as possible. Though he is no longer a political radical, Eno has played a part in popularizing some fairly radical musical ideas, as well as putting his unique stamp on some very popular musical works. After playing keyboards in Roxy Music, Eno released four solo albums of art rock before venturing into more experimental forms of music. Eno is credited with coining the term "ambient music," the aim of which is to create an atmosphere with sound, and he released several ambient albums. Eno has also promoted the idea of generative music, where rather than creating the music itself, the musician creates a system that produces the music, and once set in motion the music could go on indefinitely. Eno has also gained notoriety as a producer, shaping the sound of such artists as David Bowie, U2, Talking Heads and others. In addition, Eno created The Microsoft Sound. The guy seems to be everywhere.

What Have You Changed Your Mind About? is the fourth book of this sort from Edge Foundation, but I wasn't familiar with these books until I saw this one. These books promote a "Third Culture," which is a reference to a phrase used by C.P. Snow. Snow was a physicist who was also a novelist and in 1959 he wrote the book The Two Cultures, which lamented that "literary intellectuals" and scientists did not communicate with one another. A few years later Snow wrote optimistically about a "Third Culture" where the two cultures would be communicating directly with one another, but this hasn't come to pass. In 1995 John Brockman, the editor of What Have you Changed Your Mind About?, published the book The Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution. Brockman, however, uses the term "Third Culture" in a different way than Snow did. While those in the sciences and those in the humanities continue to operate in separate worlds, Edge Foundation was set up to promote a Third Culture in which scientists communicate directly with the general public. The success of several popular books on scientific subjects, including Edge's books, shows that the a broader educated lay community is definitely interested in science and want to be in on the discussion. I'm sold on the value of this kind of forum, and I'll probably check out What We Believe but Cannot Prove: Today's Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty next. One last note, the blurb on the back of the book says Edge "asked 150 high-powered thinkers to discuss their most telling missteps and reconsiderations" but I counted 131 responses. It would be interesting to know who didn't bother to answer.

Early in their career, the garage/psych band The Droogs released a single entitled "Ahead of My Time," an appropriate theme song for this underappreciated band. Several years before it became fashionable, the Droogs were playing what would later be called "garage revival". The Droogs released several singles beginning in 1973, and their early records were energetic interpretations of little-known 1960s garage-punk songs along with original material inspired by those records. Also, in terms of their artistic independence, the Droogs anticipated the "do it yourself" approach of punk rock by several years, releasing their records on their own label, Plug 'n Socket. Despite releasing several compelling albums over a thirty-year span, however, the Droogs are little known outside of a loyal following, much of which is in Europe.

A few years back I interviewed guitarist Roger Clay about the long and eventful career of the Droogs. Here is the two-hour show that aired on Turn Me On, Dead Man Radio.

Part 1

Part 2

Ric Albin (vocals) and Roger Clay (guitar) began playing together as kids in the 1960s in a band called "Savage Rose"—only later did they find out a Danish band was using the same name. They formed the Droogs in 1972, taking their name from A Clockwork Orange, a novel by Anthony Burgess (1962) made into a film by Stanley Kubrick (1971). Their first release, a 7" with cover versions of the Sonics' "He's Waitin'" and the Shadows of Knight's "Lightbulb Blues", came out the following year. Creem praised this record as the first American independent punk rock single. "Bow down to 'em on Sunday for that alone." Their subsequent singles included more songs that have come to be regarded as garage/psych classics, but the band quickly shifted the focus to original material. The A side of their second single was "Set My Love on You," written by Albin and Clay, backed with "I'm Not Like Everybody Else" by the Kinks. The Droogs' next two singles featured all original material inspired by 1960s garage punk. The Droogs choice of material at this time was certainly out of the ordinary. Lenny Kaye's original Nuggets compilation came out in 1972 but few, if any, new bands were playing this sort of music in the early- to mid-1970s. In fact, the stripped-down approach of the Droogs was decidedly out of step with the trends toward progressive and arena rock prevalent at the time.

The Droogs had few places to play until the garage revival began in the late-1970s. The difficulty finding an audience and the lack of a stable rhythm section proved frustrating for the band. The Droogs considered packing it in, but with the success bands such as the Last and the Unclaimed, who also drew on 1960s rock, more venues opened to them. By the time those bands were on the scene, however, the Droogs were already veterans of the genre. Rhino included the Droogs' "Ahead of My Time" on their 1979 compilation L.A. In noting "if ever a band were ahead of its time, this was the one. Pre-dating the current movement by five years in spirit, attitude, and ideas, Rich Albin and Roger Clay epitomized the late 70's American New Wave Band."

The Droogs released two more singles and an EP before recording their first full-length LP in 1984, Stone Cold World. Despite its favorable reception, Stone Cold World didn't receive the same level of attention that was given to albums by other California bands exploring similar territory. As noted in The Encyclopedia of Popular Music, "Stone Cold World was sadly obscured in the flurry to praise Green On Red, the Long Ryders and Bangles, but Albin and Clay doggedly pursued their chosen direction when the fashion faded." The Droogs' second LP, Kingdom Day, which was released in 1987, also received a fair amount of airplay on college radio stations. This album was included in Rolling Stone's retrospective section "The Year in Records" as one of a handful of albums representing "highly individual but equally striking contemporary refractions of the psychedelic dream." Despite critical acclaim, however, the Droogs did not reach a broad audience. Perhaps most frustrating to the band is that they've always faced a cool reception in their home base, Los Angeles. Puzzling and frustrating for the band, "You're never a prophet in your home town," says Roger Clay with some resignation. After years of releasing their own records, the Droogs signed to the label PVC/Jem in the mid-1980s, but that label folded while the Droogs were on tour supporting Kingdom Day.

In his review of Stone Cold World in Melody Maker, Ian Gittens remarked that while the Droogs wore their 1960s garage rock influences on their sleeves, they "draw heavily on a whole range of influences to for an approach peculiarly their own; taking from all times". His concluding remark, calling the Droogs "a curious anachronism", clearly demonstrates a problem the Droogs long faced. That is, despite the quality of their material, the Droogs have not fit easily into any of the trends that have come and gone during their career, making the band difficult to market to a larger audience. Though Stone Cold World contained a re-recorded version of the Albin/Clay's "Set My Love on You", along with a live version of "He's Waitin'", the Droogs incorporated influences that set them apart from other garage revival bands. Creem referred to Stone Cold World as showcasing their "new, streamlined moderne approach to punkadelic blues". Timothy Gassen, author of Knights of Fuzz: The Garage and Psychedelic Music Explosion, 1980 to Now, didn't consider Stone Cold World—or any of the Droogs' recordings after 1983, for that matter—to be garage revival releases. Also, despite being included on a couple of new wave compilations, the Droogs weren't really a new wave band, either. Being from southern California and playing 1960s-inspired music, the Droogs were often associated with the neo-psychedelic Paisley Underground. The Droogs' sound, however, was always more garage punk than the more psychedelic sound of Paisley Underground groups, such as the Dream Syndicate and the Rain Parade. Still, the Droogs had close ties to other bands from the area, particularly the Dream Syndicate. Dave Provost, the bassist for the Droogs since the early 1980s, has also played for the Dream Syndicate. Other Dream Syndicate members have made guest appearances on Droogs recordings. Karl Precoda played guitar on "I Want Something" and Steve Wynn joined Ric Albin on vocals for his song "Maria", both of which appeared on the 1990 LP Want Something.

Fortunately for the Droogs, the late-1980s brought the band success in Europe. The Droogs' early singles had become sought-after collector's items and the Droogs were well received on their tours of Europe. Roger Clay attributes the Droogs' success there to a European interest in American music and the more varied radio programming available in European countries. Some time ago I got a copy of Where The Bottles Flies!, a bootleg CD of the Droogs performance at the Roskilde Festival in Denmark in June, 1997. The Droogs had their own set to play at the festival, but they agreed to fill in for the Wu Tang Clan, who had canceled because of an altercation at the Newark airport on their way to the festival. Unfortunately for the Droogs, the festival management didn't do a particularly good job of letting the audience know about the change. According to a story in the Danish newspaper Politiken, the Droogs were subjected to

mean behavior by the audience, throwing glass bottles, filled paper cups, food left-overs and other items at the Droogs, who were replacing the original group.... Though the situation seemed pretty dangerous to the Droogs, the Americans kept playing against the riot, without a word for the first four musical numbers, at which point the singer Ric Albin sarcastically said: "Well, thanks for the shower!". The throwing also damaged the light control panel in the green tent, so the concert continued in a dark tent.... The Droogs, in spite of the dangerous and unreasonable conditions played a tight and well organized program to the end. When simple garage rock can be played so nicely with varied tempos and primitive atmosphere, you give in. And the audience did the same. At the end of the concert the Droogs received enormous ovations and the request for encores.

"Call Off Your Dogs" & "Puzzled Mynds" from Where The Bottles Flies!

One of the most avid collectors of the Droogs' recordings was Hans Kesteloo of the German label Music Maniac Records. Music Maniac released Anthology in 1988, collecting all of the Droogs' early singles and the 1983 EP Heads Examined. Music Maniac also released the Droogs' follow-up to Kingdom Day, Mad Dog Dreams in 1989. Since PVC had folded, that album was not released in the United States until the following year. After adding a couple of tracks, Skyclad released the album in the United States as Want Something. The Droogs' label troubles continued, however, and their next two albums, Droogs Live in Europe (1990) and Guerrilla Love-In (1991), were released only in Europe on Music Maniac.

In 1997, the Droogs returned with Atomic Garage, which featured a raw, less polished sound. No covers of 1960s garage-punk classics are included on this album, but the fuzzed-out sound of Roger Clay's guitar harkens back to the sound of the Droogs' early recordings. The title of the album signals a return to the energy of garage rock, but using a variety of equipment, vintage and new, the album sounds retro and current at the same. Apart from minor complaints about the drumming, The Bob called Atomic Garage an otherwise "perfect album for lovers of introspective psych-garage-rock."

Perhaps someday the rest of the world will catch up to the Droogs. In 2006 the Droogs released a career retrospective compilation Collection, and much of their catalog is now available as digital downloads.

When thinking about a title to use, I chose the phrase "turn me on, dead man" because it's memorable and provacative, but the strange thing about this often repeated phrase is that no one actually spoke those words. The phrase "turn me on, dead man" entered popular culture in the late-1960s when people looking for clues about the death of Paul McCartney played the Beatles track "Revolution 9" backwards. When reversed, the repeated phrase "number nine... number nine... number nine..." becomes "turn me on, dead man... turn me on, dead man... turn me on, dead man..." Like other catch-phrase memes, "turn me on, dead man" has now spread beyond its original context and has been used for a variety of purposes. There's this website, of course, and the associated internet-only radio station on Live365.com. The radio station came first, actually. I set up the website and included an article about the "Paul is dead" rumor with the intention of explaining the significance of the name. Only later did I discover that Andru Reeve (now a contributor to this blog) had written a book about the "Paul is dead" rumor using the same title years earlier that went into considerable detail about this strange story. Andru has now written two editions of his book. The first edition was part of the "Rock and Roll Remembrances" series and carried the subtitle "The Complete Story of the Paul McCartney Death Hoax." The expanded second edition is subtitled "The Beatles and the 'Paul Is Dead' Hoax." Another book entitled Turn Me On, Dead Man by Jerald Ford published earlier this year is a fictional account of the "Paul is dead" story. A recent movie called Turn Me On, Dead Man (2009) is also a fictional account of "Paul is dead" but I believe the book and the movie were created independently.

A repackaging of a 1979 radio broadcast about the "Paul is dead" rumor carries the subtitle "Turn Me On, Dead Man." Other Beatles-related uses of the title "turn me on, dead man" include a blog about the Beatles, an episode of Ground Zero TV that discusses Charles Manson's bizarre interpretation of the Beatles' White Album (and adds some "out there" conspiracy theories of its own), and the Beatles bootleg album Turn Me On, Dead Man: the John Barrett Tapes. Most of the uses of the phrase "turn me on, dead man," however, have little to do with the "Paul is dead" rumor. To my knowledge the band Turn Me On Dead Man has never made reference to "Revolution 9" or the "Paul is dead" rumor (although one of their tracks is called "Beatle George"). Also, several songs with little or no connection to "Paul is dead" are entitled "Turn Me On, Dead Man":

	Artist	Album	Year
	Game Theory	Lolita Nation	1987
	Swell Maps	A Trip to Marineville [reissue with bonus tracks]	1989 (original release, 1979)
	The Tear Garden	Last Man to Fly	1992
	Exit	Disco Sucks (compilation)	1996
	23 Degrees	From Here to Tranquility Vol. 5: The Silent Channel (compilation)	1996
	Bill Lloyd	Standing on Shoulders of Giants	1999
	Swifts	Quiet Little Mouse	2004
	The Brettster	Everything But Why	2008
	Tauntaun	Tauntaun	2009
	Ceremony(NL)	Reflections of a Decade	2009
	Spirit of the Matter	Zuble Land	2010

Other variations on the title include "Turn Me On 'Mr. Deadman'" (2000) by the Union Underground, "Turn Me On Again, Dead Man" (2008) by Tape Recorder Three, and "You Turn Me On" (1992) by the Beat Happening, where the line "turn me on, dead man" is repeated several times.

I did some Googling and found several articles that have used the title "Turn Me On, Dead Man." A Scientific American article by Michael Shermer uses the "Paul is dead" rumor as an example of how we make false associations. Our brains are good at pattern recognition, but this capability sometimes leads us to make associations where none exist. According to Shermer, in the search for clues about the death of Paul McCartney, "What we have here is a signal-to-noise problem. Humans evolved brains that are pattern-recognition machines, adept at detecting signals that enhance or threaten survival amid a very noisy world." Shermer refers to this as "the Turn Me On, Dead Man Phenomenon--if you scan enough noise, you will eventually find a signal, whether it is there or not." Also, an article about video game design on the website Game Design Advance uses the "Paul is dead" rumor to put forth the argument that urban legends make for the best alternate-reality games. Once again, however, most of the articles that use this title have nothing to do with the "Paul is dead" rumor. A Screen Rant article describing a recent movie where the Beatles become zombies uses the title "Turn Me On, Dead Man" even though the movie itself has little to do with the "Paul is dead" rumor, except that "Paul is undead" in the movie. The title was also used by the Boston Phoenix for an interview with George Romero. This article put the word "Dead" in quotes, as Romero was the director of The Night of the Living Dead (I see a "turn me on, dead man"-zombie connection building here). An article lamenting the lack of new music in the 2008 Grammy awards used the title "Turn Me On, Dead Man" to make light of the practice of giving the awards to dead musicians over living artists. An article in the University of Toronto student newspaper used the same title to highlight the excessive use of death imagery in the language we use to describe sexuality. Perhaps the most tenuous use of the phrase "turn me on, dead man" is in the Hollywood Elsewhere article about the most overpaid actors in Hollywood.

Like other catch-phrase memes, "turn me on, dead man" has gone well beyond its origins. What makes this unique, however, is that it is a line that no one actually said. Perhaps there are other examples of misheard lyrics or misquoted movie lines that have taken on a life of their own, but none immediately come to mind. Examples, anyone?

I was in Barnes & Noble the other day and a book jumped off the shelf at me. I was enjoying thumbing through We Never Learn: The Gunk Punk Undergut, 1998-2001 even before I realized that the author was Eric Davidson, lead singer of the New Bomb Turks. The book is a fun read, full of stories about bands that played raucous garage punk in the pre-internet era. Though they may not have achieved mass success, they amassed loyal fans who loved the over-the-top shows, and a good time was had by all, which was the whole point of it anyway.  Eric Davidson describes gunk punk as "rocking around with a ragged revamp that seemed to have completely dismissed hardcore and gazed through beer goggles back to lost '60s garage rock (Sonics, Seeds) and/or early '70s proto-punks (Stooges, MC5, Dictators, New York Dolls, Flamin' Groovies, Cramps)." When Blurt asked Eric Davidson to name the three most important gunk punk bands, and he listed off 14.

Eegads! Well, if I must, but I'm making it longer, in relative chronological order...

• Various Billy Childish groups - consistent, unrelentingly trashy recording and honesty.
• Lazy Cowgirls - Whipping up all raw American roots music fast-like before most did, before hardcore even.
• Pussy Galore - Template-setting garbage noise leap forward for garage punk.
• Dwarves - They made the perfect rock 'n' roll record, Blood, Guts & Pussy, and had probably the best overall live evocation of the We Never Learn icky ethos.
• Gories - Mick Collins says it best in the book - essentially, when he heard all those lame post-Nuggets comps' ads say "Wild, primitive garage rock!" then he bought them and they were jangly folk, he said they decided to make records as wild and primitive as those comps claimed. And did!
• Supersuckers - No one really sounded like the Ramones, the Saints, and Motorhead in 1990. Burped out a great sense of humor while living and playing within the often self-serious grunge central, Seattle.
• Mummies - Along with the Gories, truly reiterating the "anyone can do it" stance. The disgusting stained mummy outfits as a retort to the dress-up surf revival going on around them was a nice touch.
• Devil Dogs - Being one of the best rock 'n' roll bands ever, playing every show with sweaty urgency, and having Andy G hilariously spout off at all the jerks in the audience, yet winning them over, all make up the general savoir faire of gunk punk.
• New Bomb Turks, natch - Mike Lavella said to me, "I don't know how you're going to write this book without saying what a big deal your band and that first album was on the scene." So there, I said it here. Ha!
• Oblivians - Their informed roots and extremely well-written songs - blasted sloppy through a revived sense of trash after early side-projects - made them a kind of garage punk 7" tidal wave era cresting point, that washes down on bands to this day, where their reunion gigs are selling out in a few days.
• Teengenerate - Ditto, only WAY trashier even; maybe the most explosive live act of this whole thing.
• Hives - Veni, Vidi, Vicious was a truly great, catchy-approachable album that yanked a lot of this book's aesthetic chutzpah into the charts, which has never been easy.The Ramones couldn't even do it!
• Clone Defects - The Defects - whom I used to help sneak into Detroit area shows and watch piss people off around town before they formed - knew their garage-punk shit, and then ate it again, shitting it out as a cosmic mind-bending meal for another generation, I suppose.
• Black Lips - Similar job as the Clone Defects, only more Replacements drunk-winkers than Crime acid-eaters.

Many of these bands are still active, but gunk punk as described in We Never Learn had largely run its course by 2001. The New Bomb Turks themselves were a key band in this scene, of course. The New Bomb Turks still perform every now and then but they officially called it quits in 2003. At that time lead singer Eric Davidson explained,

Jim, our guitar player, is coming back to school as a teacher, our drummer has a baby and plays in another band, our bass player Matt and I may go back to school. It's a busy time for everybody.

Guitarist Jim Weber is now an English teacher at Hilliard Davidson High School in Hilliard, Ohio. A recent issue of the school newspaper The Wildcat includes an interview with him. Jim Weber reports that he took up teaching because he "wanted to make an impact for the better". In response to the question, "What comes first your passion for music or teaching?" Weber responded, "Teaching, hands down." As he explains to his students on his website, "As you may or may not know, I play in a band called the New Bomb Turks. Before I became a teacher playing guitar was my job, that was how I earned a living. That ended about 6 years ago, but we we still play a couple of shows every year."

New Bomb Turks bassist Matt Reber is now the manager of the Wexner Center Store, the bookstore of the Wexner Center for the Arts in Columbus, Ohio. As part of a book tour in support of We Never Learn, Eric Davidson did a reading recently at the Wexner Center. Earlier that day, Eric Davidson and Matt Reber appeared in an internet forum to answer questions.

The New Bomb Turks have played a few reunion shows in association with Eric Davidson's book tour, which has been a mix of highbrow and lowbrow. The New Bomb Turks played show at the Bell House in Brooklyn with Live Fast Die that was followed by a book release party. The day after the reading at the Wexner Center, the New Bomb Turks performed at the Surly Girl Parking Lot Blow-Out with the Gibson Bros. and Scrawl. Eric Davidson then continued his book tour in Chicago with a book signing at the Museum of Contemporary Art.

I'd definitely recommend We Never Learn. Not only is the book an enjoyable read, but it also comes with a code to download 20 tracks by bands highlighted in the book.

At the beginning of 1969, the Beatles were looking for ways to regain their sense of being a performing unit, to recapture the immediacy and the exhilaration of their early days. The band had been adrift since the death of their manager, Brian Epstein, in 1967, with all of the Beatles were finding other pursuits outside of the band. In Brian's absence Paul assumed a greater leadership role in the group, though this met with some resistance from the other Beatles. Paul felt that the Beatles had to continue challenging themselves but the other Beatles were more content to enjoy the rewards of their success. The White Album sessions in 1968 had been contentious and each of the Beatles had approached those sessions as though they were solo artists with the Beatles as their backing band. Intent on restoring a sense of purpose for the group as a whole, Paul came up with the idea to film the band rehearsing new material. After the rehearsals that band would stage a concert and the result would be a live album of all new material to be released along with a film showing the band's creative process. The Beatles agreed to record the new material live without overdubs, a departure from the days of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, where the Beatles explored the limits of studio technology.

In order for the film crews to record the Beatles' rehearsals, the Beatles set up on a large soundstage at Twickenham studios. Because of the film crews, the Beatles had to work during the day—something they were not at all accustomed to. Tensions within the band were already evident and the conditions of the project only heightened them. Things got so bad that George quit the band less than two weeks into rehearsals. He returned a few days later under the condition that the band move to Apple studios and abandon the live concert. George also took it upon himself to bring in keyboardist Billy Preston, which proved to be a productive move. Because in the presence of an outsider, the Beatles were on their best behavior.

George Martin was only marginally involved in the Get Back/Let It Be project, so Glyn Johns did most of the production for the album. Paul had approached Glyn Johns, who was an independent "balance engineer" and a member of the filmmakers union. After the recording was over, Glyn Johns produced an album of material and presented it to the Beatles in the Spring of 1969. Glyn Johns took the "warts and all" approach in assembling Get Back, as it was then called, but the results were not particularly good.  Several years later, however, Paul was quoted as saying that he loved Glyn Johns' Get Back mix. Johns tried a second time several months later with a somewhat altered playlist, but the Beatles rejected his efforts again. John Lennon then approached Phil Spector to assemble an album from the tapes of January, 1969. Phil Spector delivered the Let It Be LP, which included orchestral and choir overdubs, much to Paul McCartney's displeasure.

Because Paul McCartney was so dissatisfied with Phil Spector's production, on November 18, 2003, a new version of Let It Be, called Let It Be... Naked was released. The liner notes for this release explain that "the Let It Be project retained an air of unfinished business." Paul McCartney initiated the creation of a new version of the album, which features polished performances of all of the songs. Gone are the choral and string accompaniment. Also gone are is the jam tune "Dig It" and the impromptu performance of the Liverpool folk tune "Maggie Mae." Let It Be... Naked adds "Don't Let Me Down," which was the B side of the "Get Back" single, released in the Spring of 1969. Let It Be... Naked did not ultimately "replace" Phil Spector's Let It Be in the Beatles' catalog, though.  When the Beatles' albums were remastered for release on September 9, 2009, it was Phil Spector's version of Let It Be that was remastered along with the rest of the Beatles' original albums.

There are three basic takes on the Get Back/Let It Be project that differ in the following ways:

The Glyn Johns Get Back mixes [never released]
- one performance from the rooftop concert ("One After 909")
- a "warts and all" approach with rehearsal versions of songs with a lot of studio chatter

Let It Be, Produced by Phil Spector [1970]
- three performances from the rooftop concert ("One After 909", "Dig a Pony" and "I've Got a Feeling") 
- studio performances with overdubs and orchestration
- one jam ("Dig It") and one impromptu oldie ("Maggie Mae") and a few instances of studio chatter

Let It Be... Naked [2003]
- studio and rooftop performances without overdubs (for the most part) but the sound has been improved by using digital technology
- no studio chatter with the tracks, but a second "Fly on the Wall" disc included with studio conversations and rehearsal versions of several songs

Glyn Johns's First Get Back Mix
May 28, 1969

Side A
1. One After 909 (3:03)
Recorded live on the rooftop of Apple studios on January 30, 1969
2. Rocker (0:45)
Recorded January 22, 1969
3. Save the Last Dance for Me (1:38)
Recorded January 22, 1969
4. Don't Let Me Down (4:09)
Recorded January 22, 1969
5. Dig a Pony (3:48)
Recorded January 24, 1969
6. I've Got a Feeling (3:00)
Recorded January 24, 1969
7. Get Back (3:14)
Recorded January 28, 1969

Side B
1. For You Blue (2:45)
Recorded January 25, 1969
2. Teddy Boy (3:43)
Recorded January 24, 1969. "Teddy Boy" was omitted from Glyn Johns's second version of Get Back. Paul re-recorded this song for his first solo album McCartney.
3. Two of Us (3:31)
Recorded January 24, 1969
4. Maggie Mae (0:41)
Recorded January 24, 1969
5. Dig It (4:26)
Recorded January 26, 1969
6. Let It Be (3:58)
Recorded January 31, 1969 with overdubs recorded April 30, 1969
7. The Long and Winding Road (3:42)
Recorded January 31, 1969
8. Get Back (reprise) (0:40)
Recorded January 28, 1969

None of the Beatles wanted to face the job of mixing an album from the Get Back sessions recordings. Glyn Johns presented his first version of Get Back to the Beatles on May 28, 1969. Johns made an effort to present the Beatles returning to their roots and playing without overdubs or studio effects. No doubt this was a compelling idea, the results of his efforts were mixed.

Glyn Johns opened both of his mixes with "One After 909," one of the first songs John and Paul wrote. This song was the only rooftop performance that Johns included on Get Back. Rather than start the track at the opening note, Glyn Johns wanted to capture the feel of the rooftop concert. Before the Beatles begin to play "One After 909," one of the crew yells "all cameras [take] four!" At the end of the track, Glyn Johns added two bits of rooftop concert banter. After John's brief rendition of "Danny Boy," Glyn Johns edited in John and Paul's concluding remarks at the end of the rooftop concert. Paul thanks Ringo's wife Maureen John quips, "I'd like to thank you on behalf of the group and ourselves and I hope we passed the audition." It's interesting to note that Phil Spector also used both of these segments on Let It Be. Glyn Johns then moves to a long segment recorded on the first day of recording at Apple studios. A brief jam entitled "Rocker" ends abruptly, followed by studio chatter indicating that the band were uncertain what song they would do next, and Paul calls out that they should play "Save the Last Dance for Me." The ensuing performance is brief and Paul doesn't know all the words. They conclude the track by segueing into a brief moment of "Don't Let Me Down." The Beatles finally perform "Don't Let Me Down" in its entirety after more studio chatter. John says, "This time it's serious. I remember your waltz--your 3/4, my 5/6." Paul urges John, "Do your thing, man" and John replies "I'm doing it all the time I can't keep off it." After a false start John asks Ringo to give him some cymbal crashes "to give me the courage to come screaming in." In another session John then suggests that the band perform "Dig a Pony" straight into "I've Got a Fever," John's joke title for "I've Got a Feeling." Glyn Johns is clearly playing a major role in this session. Prior to "Dig a Pony," John says, "alright Glynnis, we're off again" and at the end of "I've Got a Feeling," Ringo hits his drums and asks "Glyn, what does that sound like?" Side 1 concludes with the single version of "Get Back."

All of the studio performances on side A, with the exception of "Get Back," are very loose, full of silly chatter, improvised comic vocals and a number of mistakes. Side 2 opens similarly, a clinking glass, a brief practice run on the guitar, and one of the crew yelling "quiet, please!" before the Beatles play George's "For You Blue." As Mark Hertsgaard points out, "For You Blue" was an inconsequential song, and an odd choice to include on Get Back, especially given the backlog of excellent songs George had written during the latter years of the Beatles—enough to fill set three-record set All Things Must Pass. Still, the performance of "For You Blue" was more polished than most of the other tracks on Get Back. Paul offers it the following track, "Teddy Boy," "for further consideration," and it sounds like a rehearsal. Glyn Johns used an earlier version of "Two of Us" than Phil Spector included on Let It Be. "Maggie Mae" is a brief song, but "Dig It" goes on for much longer than the edited version that Phil Spector included on Let It Be. Glyn Johns then included two of McCartney's songs recorded the day after the rooftop concert. "Let It Be" included overdubs that had been added in April, 1969. Still, these songs were unadorned compared to the lush production that Phil Spector added. The Beatles' performance is particularly moving on "Let It Be" and "The Long and Winding Road" but Johns undercuts that mood with a bit of studio chatter between the tracks in which John asks "are we supposed to giggle during the solo?" to which Paul replies "yeah." Glyn Johns concluded Get Back with a brief reprise of "Get Back" recorded in the studio with annoying vocalizations by Paul. The Beatles could not agree on releasing Glyn Johns's version, so he edited a second version that he presented on January 5, 1970.

Glyn Johns's Second Get Back Mix
January 5, 1970

Side A
1. One After 909 (3:03)
Recorded live on the rooftop of Apple studios on January 30, 1969
2. Rocker (0:34)
Recorded January 22, 1969
3. Save the Last Dance for Me (0:20)
Recorded January 22, 1969
4. Don't Let Me Down (4:40)
Recorded January 22, 1969
5. Dig a Pony (4:04)
Recorded January 24, 1969
6. I've Got a Feeling (2:45)
Recorded January 24, 1969
7. Get Back (3:14)
Recorded January 28, 1969 - The single release version
8. Let It Be (4:02)
Recorded January 31, 1969 with overdubs recorded April 30, 1969

Side B
1. For You Blue (2:45)
Recorded January 25, 1969
2. Two of Us (3:26)
Recorded January 24, 1969
3. Maggie Mae (0:37)
Recorded January 24, 1969
4. Dig It (4:06)
Recorded January 26, 1969
5. The Long and Winding Road (3:39)
Recorded January 31, 1969
6. I Me Mine (1:45)
Recorded January 3, 1970 by George, Paul and Ringo. John was on vacation at that time.
7. Across the Universe (3:27)
Recorded February 4 and 8, 1968
8. Get Back (reprise) (0:40)
Recorded January 28, 1969

Glyn Johns changed a few things for his second Get Back mix. He left off "Teddy Boy" and added "Across the Universe" and "I Me Mine". Paul would later include "Teddy Boy" on his first solo album McCartney. Mark Lewisohn suggests that the reason Glyn Johns removed "Teddy Boy" was because Paul had informed him that he would include a re-recorded version for his first solo album, which would be released in the spring of 1970. "Across the Universe" had been included on a World Wildlife Fund album and Glyn Johns remixed the recording. Glyn Johns added "I Me Mine" to this version of Get Back because it was included in the movie. In one of the early Twickenham sessions, George sings the song to Ringo and starts to work out the parts. The version included in Glyn Johns's second mix was recorded several months later, though, on January 3, 1970. Only George, Paul and Ringo appear on this recording because John was vacationing in Denmark at the time.

Glyn Johns kept most of the studio tom foolery, but he edited out most of the Beatles' sloppy performance of "Save the Last Dance for Me." All that was left of this track from the first Get Back mix was the refrain and the segue into "Don't Let Me Down." Glyn Johns was true to Paul's initial concept for Get Back. Both of the versions of this album that Johns produced presented the Beatles as they were in the studio, "warts and all." Listening to these mixes, though, it's clear why the Beatles were not enthusiastic about them. Rather than creating a sense of immediacy and spontaneity, the Glyn Johns mixes are often annoying.

Let It Be
Released May 8, 1970

Side A
1. Two of Us (3:36)
Recorded January 31, 1969. Opens with John's studio banter, where he introduces "I Dig a Pygmy," his joke title for "Dig a Pony." John also gives a joke name for the band, Charles Hawtrey and the Deaf-Aids.
2. Dig a Pony (3:54)
Recorded live on the rooftop of Apple studios on January 30, 1969
3. Across the Universe (3:48)
Recorded February 4, 1968, with overdubs added February 8, 1969. Phil Spector removed some of the sounds, slowed down the tempo, and added orchestra and choir overdubs.
4. I Me Mine (2:25)
Recorded January 3, 1970. Phil Spector added orchestra and choir on April 1, 1970.
5. Dig It (0:50)
Recorded January 26, 1969. A brief segment of the extended jam that Glyn Johns had included in both of his mixes. Phil Spector added John's falsetto studio banter, "That was 'Can You Dig It' by Georgie Wood. Now we'd like to do 'All [Hark?] the Angels Come'" as a segue into "Let It Be."
6. Let It Be (4:03)
Recorded January 31, 1969 with overdubs recorded April 30, 1969. More overdubs were added on January 4, 1970. George Martin produced the track and scored the brass and saxophone parts.
7. Maggie Mae (0:40)
Recorded January 24, 1969.

Side B
1. I've Got a Feeling (3:30)
Recorded live on the rooftop of Apple studios on January 30, 1969
2. One After 909 (2:55)
Recorded live on the rooftop of Apple studios on January 30, 1969.
3. The Long and Winding Road (3:37)
Recorded January 31, 1969. Phil Spector added orchestra and choir overdubs on April 1, 1970.
4. For You Blue (2:32)
Recorded January 25, 1969.
5. Get Back (3:07)
Recorded January 27, 1969. The single version of the song, which Glyn Johns had used in his Get Back mixes, had been recorded the previous day. Phil Spector concluded this track with John's farewell from the rooftop concert, "I'd like to thank you on behalf of the group and ourselves and I hope we passed the audition."

Let It Be... Naked
Released November 18, 2003

1. Get Back
According to Paul Hicks, the version of "Get Back" that Phil Spector used was a studio version. They used the same version but omitted the ending.
2. Dig a Pony
"Dig a Pony" is the rooftop concert version.
3. For You Blue
"For You Blue" is the same version that Phil Spector used.
4. The Long and Winding Road
"The Long and Winding Road" used on Let It Be... Naked is the final take that the Beatles performed. This version has slightly different lyrics than the Phil Spector version.
5. Two of Us
"Two of Us" is a remixed version of the Phil Spector version with little editing.
6. I've Got a Feeling
The Beatles performed two versions of "I've Got a Feeling" in the rooftop concert. The producers of Let It Be... Naked used parts of each version.
7. One After 909
"One After 909" is taken from the rooftop concert without much editing.
8. Don't Let Me Down
"Don't Let Me Down" was also taken from the rooftop concert but with some editing to replace the verse in which John forgot the lyrics.
9. I Me Mine
"I Me Mine" used the same take from the Phil Spector version, apparently with the overdubs.
10. Across the Universe
The producers used the same version of "Across the Universe" that Phil Spector had, introducing stereo for the tamboura and John's vocals, and faded out at the end.
11. Let It Be
"Let It Be" is apparently also the same version Phil Spector used.

Because of the rancorous relations between the Beatles, Let It Be has acquired the reputation of being a substandard effort by the group—-a document of the forces that precipitated their breakup. Each of the Beatles made disparaging remarks about the atmosphere of the Get Back sessions and these were widely quoted. Listening to the music on Let It Be... Naked, however, does not bear this out. Let It Be... Naked makes it clear that the songs included on the original album were a consistently good and that Let It Be is on a par with any Beatles album.

The name Let It Be... Naked refers to the fact that the tracks are not "dressed up" with Phil Spector's elaborate orchestration. Let It Be... Naked includes several performances from the rooftop concert but all of the ambient noise has been removed. The studio recordings have been cleaned up as well and while this highlights the strength of the material, it reduces the spontaneity of those performances. Glyn Johns chose to focus on the liveliness of the Beatles in the studio, including a considerable amount of studio banter in both of his Get Back mixes. Perhaps too much, as the chatter often detracts from the listener's enjoyment of the material. Phil Spector included a only a limited amount of the Beatles' studio banter—-it's interesting to note, however, that Spector included almost exclusively John's quips on his version of Let It Be. Where Glyn Johns used studio banter, improptu performances and rough rehearsal versions of songs excessively, Let It Be... Naked leaves out this material entirely--or rather, relegates it all to a more polished "Fly on the Wall" bonus disc. While I can live without "Maggie Mae," I miss "Dig It", particularly the brief edit that Phil Spector included on Let It Be. It's a wonderful example of John's free association.  I'm glad both versions are available. 

TMZ is reporting that Jake Holmes has finally--finally--filed suit against Jimmy Page for plagiarizing the song "Dazed and Confused". In case you're still skeptical, TMZ also posted the legal documents for this lawsuit. Because he waited so long, Jake Holmes can only sue for damages from the last three years because a statute of limitations (or a "statue" of limitations as the New York Post calls it) applies to lawsuits like this one.

I would imagine that Jake Holmes is not doing this for the money, though. In a 2001 interview with Will Shade, Jake Holmes revealed that he did approach Led Zeppelin several years after the release of Led Zeppelin I about the authorship of "Dazed and Confused". No one from Led Zeppelin replied to Holmes' queries and he didn't pursue the matter. Perhaps now that Jake Holmes's 1967 album The Above Ground Sound of Jake Holmes, which contains his version of "Dazed and Confused," is now back in print, and information about this song now abounds on the internet, Jake Holmes is responding to the groundswell of support for him that has arisen over this issue.

The following is from Led Zeppelin: Plagiarism?, an extended piece that has been on this website for several years now:

"Dazed and Confused" from Led Zeppelin's 1969 debut album was one of the group's signature numbers. The songwriting credits list Jimmy Page as the sole author of this song, but "Dazed and Confused" was originally written by Jake Holmes and included on his 1967 album The Above Ground Sound of Jake Holmes. A 1990 interview with Jimmy Page in Musician is revealing.

MUSICIAN: I understand "Dazed and Confused" was originally a song by Jake Holmes. Is that true?
PAGE: [Sourly] I don't know. I don't know. [Inhaling] I don't know about all that.
MUSICIAN: Do you remember the process of writing that song?
PAGE: Well, I did that with the Yardbirds originally.... The Yardbirds were such a good band for a guitarist to play in that I came up with a lot of riffs and ideas out of that, and I employed quite a lot of those in the early Zeppelin stuff.
MUSICIAN: But Jake Holmes, a successful jingle writer in New York, claims on his 1967 record that he wrote the original song.
PAGE: Hmm. Well, I don't know. I don't know about that. I'd rather not get into it because I don't know all the circumstances. What's he got, The riff or whatever? Because Robert wrote some of the lyrics for that on the album. But he was only listening to...we extended it from the one that we were playing with the Yardbirds.
MUSICIAN: Did you bring it into the Yardbirds?
PAGE: No, I think we played it 'round a sort of melody line or something that Keith [Relf] had. So I don't know. I haven't heard Jake Holmes so I don't know what it's all about anyway. Usually my riffs are pretty damn original [laughs] What can I say?

The interviewer let the matter go at this point, but the article adds the following footnote: "The acoustic "Dazed and Confused" on The Above Ground Sound of Jake Holmes (Tower Records ST 5079, June 1967) is very, very close to Led Zeppelin's 1969 version, musically and lyrically."

It's commonly acknowledged that Jimmy Page had heard Jake Holmes play "Dazed and Confused" before the Yardbirds (and Led Zeppelin, of course) began performing the number. In Hammer of the Gods: The Led Zeppelin Saga Stephen Davis writes that the Yardbirds heard Jake Holmes at Café a Go Go during a stint in New York in 1967, and they were impressed with his performance of "Dazed and Confused," which they felt was "a brilliant number—dramatic, frightening, and very stealable." A somewhat different account comes from Greg Russo, who asserts that on August 25, 1967, Jake Holmes opened for the Yardbirds at the Village Theater in Greenwich Village. Jim McCarty and Jimmy Page were so impressed with Holmes's performance that each of them went out and bought a copy of The Above Ground Sound of Jake Holmes.

Greg Russo is perhaps the more credible source, as he is the author of Yardbirds: The Ultimate Rave-Up . He also wrote the liner notes for the 2003 EMI reissue of Little Games, the last studio album released by the Yardbirds. This reissue adds a number of tracks, including a live performance of "Dazed and Confused" recorded for the BBC in March, 1968. By that point, "Dazed and Confused" had become part of the Yardbirds live repertoire. The Yardbirds did not record a studio version of "Dazed and Confused" for release on any of their albums, but it was included on Live Yardbirds Featuring Jimmy Page, a concert recorded at the Anderson Theater in New York on March 30, 1968. Epic released Live Yardbirds! Featuring Jimmy Page in 1971 to capitalize on Jimmy Page's success in Led Zeppelin, but they did so without the permission of the Yardbirds and carelessly listed the title of "Dazed and Confused" as "I'm Confused." Reportedly Jimmy Page was displeased with the recording quality of Live Yardbirds and he was horrified to find that "the producer had tacked on bullfight cheers and sound effects of clinking glasses to make the concert sound 'live.' Jimmy Page has gone to some lengths to keep this album off the market.

Comparing the versions of "Dazed and Confused" by Jake Holmes, the Yardbirds, and Led Zeppelin is revealing. The structure of Jake Holmes's version of the song is as follows:

The structure of Led Zeppelin's version of "Dazed and Confused" is similar to Jake Holmes's version, but the Led Zeppelin version features original lyrics (other than the repeated title line) and adds some elements not present in Jake Holmes's recording. Here is the structure of "Dazed and Confused" as Led Zeppelin recorded it for Led Zeppelin I:

Led Zeppelin's version of "Dazed and Confused" is twice as long as Jake Holmes's original version of the song and includes a few elements that are original. Led Zeppelin's version has four verses (of almost all original lyrics) rather than three, and verses 2 through 4 in Led Zeppelin's version conclude with an original guitar break. Also, although they maintained the same time signature, Led Zeppelin's theme B has a different rhythm than Jake Holmes used. Where Jake Holmes had employed a syncopated rhythm, Led Zeppelin uses a straight 1-and-2-and-3 rhythm that alternates among the various members of the band. Over that rhythm, Led Zeppelin engages in a call-and-response between Jimmy Page's guitar and Robert Plant's vocals, but like the Jake Holmes version this section culminates in a psychedelic guitar solo. The real departure from Jake Holmes comes when Led Zeppelin break into an uptempo 4/4 solo section. This section ends with a power chord riff before returning to the 12/8-time guitar break used throughout the track. Like Jake Holmes, Led Zeppelin close out the track by returning to Theme B.

In his 1990 interview with Musician, Jimmy Page claimed, "we extended it from the one that we were playing with the Yardbirds," but this does not stand up to scrutiny. The earliest recording of the Yardbirds version of "Dazed and Confused" was recorded live for Top Gear Programme at the Playhouse Theatre in Hulme, Manchester, on March 6, 1968, and was included on the 2003 EMI reissue of Little Games. The structure of this version is as follows:

As you can see, the Led Zeppelin version of "Dazed and Confused" is nearly identical to the Yardbirds' version. All of the elements of Led Zeppelin's version are present in this recording by the Yardbirds: theme B with its 1-and-2-and-3 rhythm traded among the members of the band, the uptempo 4/4 solo section, and the guitar break. The main difference between the Yardbirds' version and Led Zeppelin's version is the lyrics. Keith Relf sings Jake Holmes's original lyrics in this recording, reprising to the first verse to conclude the track. By the end of March, 1968, however, Keith Relf had changed some of the lyrics. In the version of "Dazed and Confused" on Live Yardbirds Featuring Jimmy Page, recorded some three weeks later, the Yardbirds played only three verses, all of which featured some revised lyrics. It should be pointed out, however, that Robert Plant did not use any of Keith Relf's lyrics. As stated earlier, Robert Plant wrote all original lyrics for "Dazed and Confused," with the exception of the title line. One thing commonly repeated is that in changing the lyrics, Robert Plant changed the meaning of the song. According to the liner notes for James Patrick Page: Session Man, "Dazed and Confused" has a "sinster descending bass scale and jittery paranoid lyrics that described a bad acid trip." According to Jake Holmes, however, despite the psychedelic elements in the reocrding, "Dazed and Confused" is not about taking LSD. Like the Led Zeppelin version, this song is about the difficulties of a failing relationship. Still, Robert Plant's lyrics are original, if a bit more misogynistic than Jake Holmes's lyrics ("Soul of a woman was created below").

It's clear that Jimmy Page had heard Jake Holmes's version of "Dazed and Confused" before the Yardbards performed the song, let alone before Led Zeppelin recorded it for their first album. Jake Holmes has never received any acknowledgement or compensation for "Dazed and Confused." In an interview with Will Shade, Jake Holmes revealed that he did approach Led Zeppelin several years after the release of Led Zeppelin I about the authorship of "Dazed and Confused". No one from Led Zeppelin replied to Holmes' queries and he didn't pursue the matter. Why he chose to do this is puzzling, because he deserves credit for writing "Dazed and Confused."