Quiz: Beatles Songs - 8 Questions to Test Your Knowledge

[SpaceTiger]

2. Which John song was inspired by an easy high rider?

She saaaaaaaaid, I know what it's like to be dead. Didn't she Mr. Fonda?

 

[SpaceTiger]

3. Inspiration for the title of a song that Paul wrote as a piano exercise for himself?

Not sure about this one, but I'd say Martha My Dear. I've heard claims that it was inspired by his dog, Martha, and also his muse. I'd go with the latter.

 

[George Jones]

Not sure about this one, but I'd say Martha My Dear. I've heard claims that it was inspired by his dog, Martha, and also his muse. I'd go with the latter.

Right on. Maybe dog and muse.

Paul: "When I taught myself piano I liked to see how far I could go, and this started life almost as a piece you'd learn as a piano lesson. It's quite hard for me to play, it's a two-handed thing, like a little set piece. In fact I remember one or two people being surprised that I'd played it because it's slightly above my level of competence really, but I wrote it as that, something a bit more complex for me to play. Then while I was blocking out words - you just mouth out sounds and some things come -I found the words 'Martha my dear'.

So I made up another fantasy song. I remember George Harrison once said to me, 'I could never write songs like that. You just make 'em up, they don't mean anything to you.' I think on a deep level they do mean something to me but on a surface level they are often fantasy like Desmond and Molly or Martha my dear. I mean, I'm not really speaking to Martha, it's a communication of some sort of affection but in a slightly abstract way - 'You silly girl, look what you've done,' all that sort of stuff. These songs grow. Whereas it would appear to anybody else to be a song to a girl called Martha, it's actually a dog, and our relationship was platonic, believe me."

 

[SpaceTiger]

Yeah, Paul had a gift for the inane -- that probably bolstered his popular appeal. It really is a beautiful piano bit, though. The idea of it being about his muse really appeals to me and I like to listen to it that way. The whole dog theme just sounds really lame, so maybe it was partially in retrospect that it took on that meaning.

 

[SpaceTiger]

I remember there was some song where Ringo states at the end of the song, "I'm very bored", which was misunderstood to be "I buried Paul".

Actually, it was John at the end of Strawberry Fields saying "cranberry sauce". You can hear it more clearly on one of the anthology versions.

The other supposed clue was Paul being the only one barefoot on the cover of Abbey Road, which would have required Paul knowing he was going to die relatively soon after that picture was taken.

In the Paul Is Dead myth, the supposed car crash occurred in 1966, three years before the making of Abbey Road, so it would have been Paul's lookalike that was barefoot.

 

[George Jones]

Got to get you into my life...hoo hoo hoo! <John in falsetto> dee dee dee dee</>

She saaaaaaaaid, I know what it's like to be dead. Didn't she Mr. Fonda?

Sorry - didn't see your other two answers. Right and Right.

Peter Fonda (who starred in the movie Easy Rider), while on an acid trip, said "I know what it's like to be dead." which inspired John's song She Said, She Said.

Paul's song Got to Get You Into My Life is an ode to pot.

EDIT (SpaceTiger): Just to be on the safe side of copyright laws, we should avoid posting complete lyrics to songs. I actually got into trouble for this once myself.

 

[SpaceTiger]

I remember a little bit about scrambled eggs. I think Paul "heard" the music during an acid (or somesuch) trip...and he came out of it, and played it exactly how he remembered.

I'm pretty sure MIH is right on this one, Paul made a big thing of it on the anthology. He heard the song in a dream and then spent the next year or so playing it to people so that he could make sure it wasn't plagiarized. It's for this reason that, when I'm writing, I never outright dismiss a song that sounds familiar. It could mean that it has been done, but it could also mean that it's so good as to resonate quickly in the mind.

 

[George Jones]

Results


1. According to the Walrus, Who was the Walrus? Back up your answer.

According to John (in the song Glass Onion), the Walrus was Paul. (Jeff Reid)


2. Which John song was inspired by an easy high rider?

She Said, She Said. (Space Tiger)


3. Inspiration for the title of a song that Paul wrote as a piano exercise for himself?

His english sheepdog Martha. (Space Tiger)

4. Where did Paul find the music for "Scrambled Eggs"?

Paul found the melody for Yesterday in a dream. (Math Is Hard)


5. Rosemary's sister was the subject of Which John song?

Dear Prudence. (Evo)


6. John's lead role in the band slid to new highs on which George song?

For You, Blue. (Jeff/Evo/Gokul43201).


7. Which John song is based, roughly, on Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata played backwards?

Because (Gokul43201)


8. Name Paul's ode (as opposed to pde) to pot.

Got to Get You Into My Life. (Space Tiger)

 

[Math Is Hard]

That was a great quiz! I learned a lot!

 

[George Jones]

Harrison playing slide to a John song (which happened a lot in their later years).

Post Beatles, George became an amazing and much in demand slide player. George played some great slide on John's Imagine album, including on How Do You Sleep.

George's mate Eric often commented on George's abilities on slide.

 

[Wishbone]

wait, post beatles he became amazing? you obviously don't know much about him then, he was an amazing guitarist, and the best musician out of all of them. Undoubtably with the guitar, lennon and mccartney aren't great guitarists by any stretch of the imagination. Harrison was a virutoso. Lennon really was much less of a musician than people give him credit for.

 

[SpaceTiger]

wait, post beatles he became amazing?

I think he was referring to George's slide guitar playing.

you obviously don't know much about him then, he was an amazing guitarist, and the best musician out of all of them.

I would say with a good bit of confidence that Paul was the best "musician" out of the bunch. He was a competent (to put it mildly) bassist, drummer, guitarist, and pianist during his time with the Beatles. However, I think both John and George were better "artists".

George's guitar parts were good for the purpose that they served, but I think even he would admit that his technical abilities were nothing compared to, for example, his friend, Eric Clapton.

Lennon really was much less of a musician than people give him credit for

I'm not sure what people usually give him credit for, but I would agree that John's instrumental abilities were the least developed of the four. However, his vocal performances were by far the best and his songwriting skills were certainly on par with Paul's.

 

[Evo]

However, his vocal performances were by far the best and his songwriting skills were certainly on par with Paul's.

I love John's vocals. There was a terrible fight between Paul and John, because Paul wrote almost all the lyrics and music for their early songs, and John contributed very little, but John insisted in getting equal credit. It was a huge thing back in the late 60's.

 

[Gokul43201]

Great quiz George.

And I bow to thee, Tigris Astronomis.

 

[Astronuc]

I had the album Let it Be, and I ejoyed Revolution from the album Hey Jude.

The Beatles were OK, but at that time, I was more into Iron Butterfly, Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Cream, Yardbirds, Traffic, Pink Floyd, EL&P, Deep Purple, The Who, Yes, Spirit, Doors, QSM, Santana, Greatful Dead, Wishbone Ash, Moody Blues, Jethro Tull, Robin Trower, and many others.

 

[SpaceTiger]

I love John's vocals. There was a terrible fight between Paul and John, because Paul wrote almost all the lyrics and music for their early songs, and John contributed very little, but John insisted in getting equal credit. It was a huge thing back in the late 60's.

To the best of my knowledge, they both contributed approximately equally to the writing load throughout the run of the Beatles. In fact, John dominated the early years and his overall count is a bit higher (check out the book, Beatlesongs). On A Hard Day's Night (the album), for example, he was the dominant writer on all but three of the songs. As a general rule of thumb, the writer of the song would do the lead vocals. There are a few exceptions to this, but not very many, so it's a quick and easy way to determine the writer.

There was a recent dispute over the credit for a few of the songs that were solely McCartney numbers, such as "Yesterday". McCartney was upset because Yoko was getting a crapload of money for a song that neither she nor any of the Beatles had anything to do with. However, the dispute occurred long after Lennon was already dead and McCartney eventually decided to give up.

The decision for joint authorship was made in the early 60s because they were very frequently collaborating back then. The order was chosen to be alphabetical. At the time, it may even have been to McCartney's advantage to share authorship on all of their songs. As for the informal credits to the songs, there were only a few small disputes, most notably "In My Life" and "Eleanor Rigby". In the former, Paul claims to have written the entire melody, while John claims it was only the middle 8. The words are indisputably John's, but I don't think historians agree on who wrote most of the melody. In "Eleanor Rigby", John claimed to have helped with the lyrics, while Paul and a few others say he contributed nothing. I think it's generally accepted that Paul was right on that one.

 

[Evo]

To the best of my knowledge, they both contributed approximately equally to the writing load throughout the run of the Beatles. In fact, John dominated the early years and his overall count is a bit higher (check out the book, Beatlesongs). On A Hard Day's Night (the album), for example, he was the dominant writer on all but three of the songs. As a general rule of thumb, the writer of the song would do the lead vocals. There are a few exceptions to this, but not very many, so it's a quick and easy way to determine the writer.

There was a recent dispute over the credit for a few of the songs that were solely McCartney numbers, such as "Yesterday". McCartney was upset because Yoko was getting a crapload of money for a song that neither she nor any of the Beatles had anything to do with. However, the dispute occurred long after Lennon was already dead and McCartney eventually decided to give up.

The decision for split authorship was made in the early 60s because they were very frequently collaborating back then. The order was chosen to be alphabetical. At the time, it may even have been to McCartney's advantage to share authorship on all of their songs. As for the informal credits to the songs, there were only a few small disputes, most notably "In My Life" and "Eleanor Rigby". In the former, Paul claims to have written the entire melody, while John claims it was only the middle 8. The words are indisputably John's, but I don't think historians agree on who wrote most of the melody. In "Eleanor Rigby", John claimed to have helped with the lyrics, while Paul and a few others say he contributed nothing. I think it's generally accepted that Paul was right on that one.

Yeah, I just remember a huge animosity between Paul and John.

George, the least "public" of the Beatles really had talent. I love his songs in the movie "Time Bandits".

His son is the spitting image of him.

 

[SpaceTiger]

Yeah, I just remember a huge animosity between Paul and John.

There was a lot of animosity right after the Beatles broke up, not so much because of writing credits, but mainly because of legal issues and petty bickering concerning the group's split. In the later years of the Beatles, Paul had grown increasingly bossy (as the others grew increasingly distant), so he managed piss all three of them off at various points. You can even see him arguing with George in "Let It Be" (the movie).

During the 90s there was a lot of friction between Paul and Yoko, mainly because of the issues you mentioned. Paul may not have been so bold had John still been alive.

George, the least "public" of the Beatles really had talent. I love his songs in the movie "Time Bandits".

Yeah, George was very cool. My ex insists that I look just like him (when he was young), though I really don't see it.

 

[JamesU]

Iron Butterfly.

So someone else HAS heard of them!


they're okay

 

[George Jones]

So someone else HAS heard of them!

In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida

 

[JamesU]

name another song of theirs..


NOBODY CAN!

 

[George Jones]

name another song of theirs..NOBODY CAN!

You're right - off the top of my head I can't. I have heard other songs by Iron Butterfly, though. I was never really into them, but I had a couple of friends who listened to their albums over and over.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Zooby's Quetion : I haven't got a clue (there were all kinds of different pieces snuck in there), but I'm going for the most likely wrong "duh" guess: Symphony No. 9

Sooooooo close! What piece is most like the Symphony #9 without being the Symphony #9?

 

[Astronuc]

So someone else HAS heard of them!

Ron Bushy's drum solo inspired a lot of percussionists/drummers.

Other songs from Side 1 of In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida,

Most Anything You Want, Flowers and Beads, My Mirage, Termination, Are You Happy. I like the last three, as well as the title track.

I collected all of their albums. Heavy, Ball, and Metamorphasis never approached the level of the IAGDV.

In addition to playing bass guitar, I did take piano lessons and had started getting into the electric organ, so I appreciate Doug Ingle's keyboard playing.

 

[SpaceTiger]

I had the album Let it Be, and I ejoyed Revolution from the album Hey Jude.

That's a shame, those were both kinda lame albums, IMO. The former was an overproduced, disorganized mess and the latter was simply a compilation album used as an excuse to put "Hey Jude" onto a long-player.

I would say the most musically important Beatles albums (in chronological order) were:

Rubber Soul
Revolver
Sgt. Pepper
White Album
Abbey Road

Each one is a different experience and each one broadened my musical horizons. I don't listen to a lot of music pre-90s, but the Beatles (along with Zeppelin and Floyd, of course) laid much of the groundwork for modern rock and pop. I think anyone interested in rock music should listen to them.

 

[Wishbone]

I would say with a good bit of confidence that Paul was the best "musician" out of the bunch. He was a competent (to put it mildly) bassist, drummer, guitarist, and pianist during his time with the Beatles. However, I think both John and George were better "artists".

George's guitar parts were good for the purpose that they served, but I think even he would admit that his technical abilities were nothing compared to, for example, his friend, Eric Clapton.

none of them were as good as eric clapton was at guitar of course, but george great. but if harrison was by lightyears the best guitar player out of any of them, any guitarist can tell you that. John and paul were just like you mentioned, competent, but nothing more than that.

 

[SpaceTiger]

none of them were as good as eric clapton was at guitar of course, but george great. but if harrison was by lightyears the best guitar player out of any of them, any guitarist can tell you that. John and paul were just like you mentioned, competent, but nothing more than that.

Well, I am a guitarist (11 years now) and I wouldn't agree that George was lightyears ahead of the other two. He was better, yes, but not all that much better. Take, for example, Paul's guitar solo on "Taxman"...certainly nothing to scoff at.

George had a great ear for pop riffs, though, and I think that's what really sets him apart. His technical abilities may not have been so great, but his use of the instrument (including those carefully constructed guitar solos in the early work) really helped define the Beatles sound. In this sense, I might even say he was better than Clapton.

 

[Astronuc]

Well, we strayed off-topic, but I guess the quiz is over. Good one by the way! Good job, George!

That's a shame, those were both kinda lame albums, IMO. The former was an overproduced, disorganized mess and the latter was simply a compilation album used as an excuse to put "Hey Jude" onto a long-player.

Well you had to have been then there in that time.

I really didn't get into the Beatles that much - too Top40ish - like the Hollies, The Monkees, Gerry & the Pacemakers, etc. That was fine when I was 10 or younger.

I was more into so-called acid or psychedelic rock.

I would say the most musically important Beatles albums (in chronological order) were:

Rubber Soul
Revolver
Sgt. Pepper
White Album
Abbey Road

Each one is a different experience and each one broadened my musical horizons.

Yeah, 1965 was a pivotal year. Those albums were more like The Beatles II.

I don't listen to a lot of music pre-90s, but the Beatles (along with Zeppelin and Floyd, of course) laid much of the groundwork for modern rock and pop. I think anyone interested in rock music should listen to them.

:rofl: I don't listen to much post-90's rock. In fact I don't listen to much post 70's rock. Don't get me wrong, there was good stuff after about 1975, but really good stuff was less frequent.

We had Blue Öyster Cult from 1972-1975 (first 4 albums). After that, they detriorated into commercial rock. :yuck: So for me, the cutoff for Classic Rock is about 1975.

Two great artists from the 1980's were Stevie Ray Vaughn (the only one who could match Hendrix) and Jon Butcher (his tune 'Holy War' has some unique guitar). Since then, Joe Satriani is about the best creatively with the guitar.

 

[SpaceTiger]

I really didn't get much to the Beatles that much - too Top40ish - like the Hollies, The Monkees, Gerry & the Pacemakers, etc. That was fine when I was 10 or younger.

I was more into so-called acid or psychedelic rock.

Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, and the singles during the 1966-1967 period were part of what defined acid rock and brought it to the fore. Have you never heard Strawberry Fields Forever or Tomorrow Never Knows?

Yeah, 1965 was a pivotal year. Those albums were more like The Beatles II. :rofl:

"The Beatles II" were the Beatles that really influenced modern music. If you stopped listening after "I Want to Hold Your Hand", I think you really missed the Beatles.

I don't listen to much post-90's rock. In fact I don't listen to much post 70's rock. Don't get me wrong, there was good stuff after about 1975, but really good stuff was less frequent.

The 80's, in particular, seemed like a real drag. It isn't until the grunge movement in the early 90's that the density of my record collection starts to pick up again. Post-90's, I've been kind of disappointed by much of the mainstream, but some of the retro stuff (White Stripes, Strokes, Jet) is pretty good. In my opinion, the best band of the last 15 years is Radiohead. It'll be interesting to see how their music influences the direction of rock in the next 10 or 20 years.

 

[Astronuc]

Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, and the singles during the 1966-1967 period were part of what defined acid rock and brought it to the fore. Have you never heard Strawberry Fields Forever or Tomorrow Never Knows?

I've heard those tunes. I'm sorry, but the Beatles didn't really appeal to me, once I heard the other groups that I listed.

For me, the Beatles II was psychedelic rock lite. They just couldn't compare to Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Robin Trower and the others. And I left out Jeff Beck and his work after the Yardbirds, and Journey (with their first album).

I was also into Jazz and Blues. A couple of really excellent guitarists are John McLaughlin and Al Dimeola - both have very quick fingers.

 

[SpaceTiger]

For me, the Beatles II was psychedelic rock lite. They just couldn't compare to Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Robin Trower and the others.

I'm not sure I would call Zeppelin or the Who psychedelic rock (maybe the latter is mildly so, though more like mod rock), but they're both fantastic bands. To my ears, the Who always sounded just as poppy as the later Beatles, if not more so with their simplistic chord progressions. Same with the Doors. Perhaps that's a consequence of growing up on grunge and heavy metal.

It looks to me like you're big on guitar-driven rock. In the cases of Zeppelin, Hendrix, and Floyd, I think this was used to great effect and brought the music to a new level. Much of the time, however, I just felt that it was distracting and ostentatious, especially with guitarists like Stevie Ray Vaughn.

 

[Astronuc]

It looks to me like you're big on guitar-driven rock. In the cases of Zeppelin, Hendrix, and Floyd, I think this was used to great effect and brought the music to a new level. Much of the time, however, I just felt that it was distracting and ostentatious, especially with guitarists like Stevie Ray Vaughn.

Actually, I really like band that incorporate the electric organ and Mellotron, which is one reason I like Emerson, Lake and Palmer. And I like really good, strong base lines - another reason I like EL&P.

Most rock is guitar driven.

I also like what I would call really technical guitar, like MacLaughlin and Dimeola. I forgot to mention Michael Hedges. Listen to Aerial Boundaries if you haven't heard it.

I heard some really good music by California Guitar Trio today. They did interesting adaptations of the 4th Movement from Bethoven's 9th Symphony, Toccata (with fugue) in D minor by JSBach, and "Bohmenian Rhapsody" by Queen.

 

[Wishbone]

Take, for example, Paul's guitar solo on "Taxman"...certainly nothing to scoff at./QUOTE]


taxman, srsly? compared to some of the **** harrison did? not even close. And Zeppelin is a great case of where you can argue the guitar player was the worst at his instrument and still better than almost anyone else at his time. SRV was of course fantastic also though.

 

[SpaceTiger]

Actually, I really like band that incorporate the electric organ and Mellotron

Ah yes, the latter an instrument used to great effect on Strawberry Fields Forever.

Most rock is guitar driven.

I also like what I would call really technical guitar, like MacLaughlin and Dimeola. I forgot to mention Michael Hedges. Listen to Aerial Boundaries if you haven't heard it.

What you call technical guitar is what I had in mind when I said "guitar-driven". I'll give Aerial Boundaries a listen if I get the chance.

 

[SpaceTiger]

taxman, srsly? compared to some of the **** harrison did?

What did you have in mind? I think my favorite Harrison solo is on the album version of Let It Be.