Posted on 02/17/2013 7:25:01 AM PST by the scotsman
'Tony Sheridan, the singer on the first ever singer credited to The Beatles, has died at the age of 72.
Sheridan died in Hamburg, Germany. Details of his death have yet to be released.
On his early 60s recording, Sheridan’s backing band was The Beatles. English-born Sheridan met The Beatles during their first visit to Hamburg in 1960. They would back him at his shows when they first left England before they were famous.
German producer Bert Kaempfert saw them live and suggested they record together. Kaempfert thought Sheridan was the star and placed The Beatles as his backing band on his recordings.
In total, they recorded seven songs together but only two with all four members. (Ringo had not joined the band at this time). John Lennon once said that more than seven songs were recorded but they have never been found.
Of these recordings, ‘My Bonnie’ backed with ‘The Saints’ was released as a single on Polydor Records. The sessions also produced ‘Ain’t She Sweet’ and ‘Cry For A Shadow’, as well as three other songs.'
(Excerpt) Read more at noise11.com ...
As Maxwell Smart used to say “missed it by that much”.
RIP
Someone trashed those songs. Poor Sheridan.
On the ATCO 45 I have, John sings lead on Ain’t She Sweet. Tony sings lead on teh other side.
“singer on the first ever singer”
Noise indeed.
Silly guy. Everybody knows that the Beatles were Paul McCartney's old backup band.
I always thought it strange that the Beatles recorded a song [My Bonny] that had already been used as a gag on I Love Lucy. IIRC, every time Lucy sang the words “ocean” or “sea” she got squirted with a seltzer bottle.
It was the early 60’s. They probably had never heard of I Love Lucy. It was a different time. I would highly doubt American sitcoms were on British television.
The Beatles, weren't they that band Paul McCartney was in before Wings?
Sheesh, Motown was at its height at the same time produced and much better love songs and arrangements. Even the earlier Shirelles did soppy love songs better than, "Ps. I Love You". Think, "Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow?".
Although, I'll give the Beatles credit for their later arrangements/lyrics on Sargent Pepper's, it still had no soul. "Day in the Life"? What a lot of pretentious crap.
Ask yourself why every jukebox in every bar/club has so many Stones songs and few (if any) have Beatles.
Think, "Honky Tonk Woman" - one of the most classic rock songs of all time. Plus, "Gimme Shelter" was beyond anything Lennon,McCarthy could imagine. The intro lead is probably one of the best in rock history, not to mention the dueling guitar solos in the bridge.
Yes, the Stone's lyrics were darker and not to some tastes, but that and their natural feel for rock and rhythm&blues is what rock n roll is about. THEY were the natural progression from Chuck Berry, Little Richard, et al. The Beatles not so much.
"Please Allow Me To Introduce Myself...".
Beatles will always be the most important rock band ever....their cavern club perfomances and early live shows were full of pure rock, etc......
Songs like ticket to ride, day tripper, rain, helter skelter, yer blues, et al, were as good a rock tune(s) you’ll hear, and their classix like she loves , saw her standing there, i wanna hold your hand, were rock and pop mixed....if you wanna deny that fine, but it doesnt make it any less true.
Mick Jagger can’t sing.
The fact that he’s a “rock” singer, not a “pop” singer, is no excuse.
Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison could sing. Even Ringo could hum along.
That’s why the Beatles have sold gazillions more records than the Stones.
Here’s Meester Hitmaker Bert Kaempfert hisself! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUFvr2kcwYw
The Sandy Beckert show here in the NY area used Bert Kaempfert’s music as the show’s intro music.
That Happy Feeling and Afrikann Beat, if I recall.
Great stuff.
Look up the history of the Stones in the UK. The US albums you mention are not what came out there in the same order with the same cuts. Still, your point is taken.
The real Paul's, not his replacement's, you might mention. In any case, now any hopes for a reunion are, as Bert Kaempfert would surely understand, kaput!
What the story doesn’t mention , I guess it assumes you know, is that Tony remained in Germany, and kept playing there. What (he played), I don’t know, but he probably met and knew the legendary Heino, as well as the legendary Freddy, a privilege to envy, for sure!
Thanks for making my point. Not an ounce of soul in the bunch - bubble gum music. And yes, their early Cavern days were cool, but covers of Berry, Richard, and Bill Haley and the Comets. The Stones did the same thing on their first album and took it to the next level on their second. The Beatles were still doing Partidge Family pop until later. Again, kudos for their later arrangements, but not rock n roll. And bad on the Stones for His Majestie's mess.
Even the Police did a simple blues progression on, "Every Breath You Take", which is arguably their biggest hit.
All's fair in love, war, and rock n roll. But find me a classic rock radio station that plays the Beatles in constant rotation.
"Imagine All The People (being bored to tears while We Hold our Hands).
Called himself the 5th Beatle. Considering how many “5th Beatles” there were at the time...Pete Best, George Martin, Brian Epstein, Billy Preston, Eric Clapton... I was unimpressed with his story and just assumed he was using his tangential Beatles connection to carve out a lounge lizard career.
You don't have to be Tommy Lee (Motley Crue) all over his giantic kit to make your point. However, when Ginger Baker (Cream) and John Bohham (Led Zepplin) emerged with their original beats/styles, a new day appeared for drummers. Sorry, got off point.
Jagger and Richards wrote rock songs that people will be tapping their foot to and dancing to for years beyond this conversation, as Beatle fans do their intellectual gymnastics about their complex arrangements and how influential they were.
The Beatles early stuff was bubble gum - the Stones early stuff were rhythm&blues with many covers of Muddy Waters, Bo Didly, and other blues greats until they expanded on that on their second album. The Beatles may have claimed those legends as their influence, but they sure didn't show it in their recordings - the Stones did from day one.
It would have been interesting to see what the Beatles could have done if they hadn't broken up (thinking Styx or Rush). I doubt as many classics as the Stones - again, too much intellect and too little soul. This debate will go on past our time, however, I enjoy it. Thanks for your input.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.