Видео

If Pete Best had really been as bad as people like to claim, he probably wouldn't have been their drummer for two years. Without Pete Best they would never have come to Hamburg. Previously, no drummers wanted to stay with the Beatles for long because they constantly got into arguments with John Lennon. Pete Best was quiet but maintained his own drumming style. Ringo, on the other hand, did everything that John Lennon and Paul McCartney told him to do. If Paul McCartney didn't like Ringo Starr's drumming, he would sit on the drums himself. After the Beatles split, Paul McCartney said he didn't need Ringo's drumming. 🤪

In an interview with Tony Sheridan,he claimed that John,Paul and George developed the style of playing in order to cover up the short comings of Pete.

YES. Pete is the reason for the Beatles success. They couldn't go to Hamburg without a drummer. The Beatles before Pete were called that "Bum" group. Pete started playing drums in 1959 I believe. Without Pete, they wouldn't have made it. Pete is a hero not a zero.

Love Me Do comment only going to 17 on the charts was off center...statement insinuated without saying so, that Pete Best played on the Love Me Do record. "they needed Ringo to go further than 17. " Pete Best never played on the released version of Love Me Do on Parlophone label. Andy White, a Scottish session drummer, [hired by producer George Martin because he did not know they replaced Pete Best], temporarily replaced Ringo Starr on drums for the Beatles' first single, "Love Me Do". The recording session took place on September 11, 1962, [Pete was already out of the band!!!] and White played drums while Starr played tambourine. The version featuring White is available on the Please Please Me album and the American version of the single.

They tried to comb his hair down, it didn't work, his hair was to curly, that could be why Pete was let go. The Beatles wanted a certain look and image. Pete didn't have the look

COME TO FATHER by APOLOGETIX a great Beatles parody

Also I hate all this talk about Him been too Quiet and not Wanting To Stop back after the show Yeah So What The man wasn’t bothered personally am down if that was me but that was Pete in no way was it worth sacking him for Because of that he neally killed himself in 1967

He did save the Beatles who knows what drummer They would have got if Pete had not came into the picture let’s all admit Here to those who sais he’s crap as a drummer Logically if they had not found Him and got some one else in who knows what nobody they would have got They would have probably got a drummer worse then Pete Let’s be honest so let’s stop Taking the Moral high ground on a man who I’d argue has improved in later life and Had not came in the picture Ringo probably Would have never Came into the story Face Facts

Yes! He saved The Beatles by getting fired!! 😅😅❤

I've seen that same photo. I read that the manager ENSURED that Pete Best had the hairstyle.

The rift between Pete Best and The Beatles was inevitable if we consider that Pete didn't have the same hunger for success as his bandmates as he came from a happy upper middle class merchant family. In fact, the opposite from Ringo who came from a Dickensian background. And also the hunger issue is what made Pete to not improve as much even with all those hours of practice.

I'm not saying that Pete was a better drummer than Ringo, I prefer Ringo, but Pete never even played ISHST with The Beatles. The song was written in September 1962. Pete was fired in August. If you are talking about the band Pete most recently played the song with, he was 80 years old. The band he was playing with was terrible.

Did Pete even know that Martin was underwhelmed by his skills & was gonna use a session drummer? We've all probably seen the interview with Paul in which he described Ringo sitting in and everything came together. They were keenly aware of the mountain they were trying to climb and the first leap was for John to put his ego in his back pocket & invite Paul to join the group. Too bad 'cause Pete is a good guy and I've seen his band play several times. They kick ass! It's triple cool that The Anthology project enabled Pete Best to reap some of the financial benefits associated. So I'm told.

Much of Beatles lore as people know it is pure fantasy and/or was created to be good publicity. People do know what really happened, but hardcore Beatles fans refuse to accept it. First, Pete was not a bad or incompetent drummer. He had his own fan base. That was just the excuse that was used to explain his dismissal. Neither John, Paul, nor George ever asked for Pete to be replaced. What happened is that Brian Epstein panicked when George Martin told him that IF he offered The Beatles a contract he was going to use a session drummer. This was, in fact, a standard practice back then, but Epstein didn't know that. He thought that the recording contract was in jeopardy, but it wasn't. In fact, Paul came closest to blowing the June 6 EMI audition because his bass amp was so poor that Martin declared there was no use trying to put anything on tape. EMI engineer Ken Townsend saved the audition by rigging a makeshift bass amp out of speakers and components already in the studio. Inconceivably, McCartney showed up with the same crappy amp for the September 4 recording session. Also, the popular notion that the lads wanted Pete out and Ringo in for some time is another piece of fiction. Once the decision was made to replace Pete two other drummers were asked to take the seat before they asked Ringo, but those two both said no. Even after Ringo had said yes they still asked a fourth drummer to fill the spot. When he also said no they went back to Ringo by default. One other note. You really can't use John Lennon quotes for reliable Beatle history. For any of his quotes you can ALWAYS find another one that contradicts it if you keep looking. For instance, people often cite the one where he says Pete Best was a lousy drummer, but rarely mention the one where he say that Pete was a really good drummer, but Ringo was a better Beatle. Another Lennon quote that contradicts the lousy drummer quote was when he said their best music was never recorded because The Beatles were at their best when they were playing the clubs in Hamburg and Liverpool, which of course is when Pete was the drummer. Ringo's demeanor was a better fit with the band and he certainly is a great drummer, but when it comes down to it he only became a Beatle over Brian Epstein's erroneous belief that their recording contract was in jeopardy when it was not.

2:24 That drummer is Johnny Hutchinson of The Big Three. He filled in on several occasions in the time before Ringo.

This is a ridiculous 'assessment' of the Pete Best situation. The usage of studio drummers was actually standard operating procedure,at that time. Furthermore -' Love Me Do" reached Number 17 with Ringo Starr as the drummer. The whole 'haircut' that Pete Best 'refused to adopt ' is another urban legend that Astrid Kircherr herself said is not true at all. Pete Best didn't adopt the same hairstyle as the other Beatles because of his naturally curly hair. Also -' There was no band called ' Rory and the Hurricanes '. It was Rory Storm and the Hurricanes '. And the Beatles first went to Hamburg in 1960( not 1962).

18:32 Hold on! This is the part most people misinterpret: Pete recorded a test run of Love me Do, then George Martin offered a proper recording session for the song, but didn't mention getting a new drummer. So, Pete Best never knew about Andy White ... probably I learnt about many years later. Pete's drumming on Love Me Do is completely different from Ringo's drumming. What's weird is that Andy White plays Ringo's drumming rhythm instead of doing his own beat. In my opinion Pete failed the test at Abbey Road mostly because Love Me Do, and especially the version they recorded that day was a very bad song (OMG, that song sucks so much!) ... they could have recorded anything else. IDK, why they thought that a few weeks new song was the best choice!

Yes, Ringo was the better drummer and a better fit personality wise, that’s not debatable. But, Pete Best was the one that was there for the formative years when they honed their skills in Hamburg. Pete’s “Atom Beat”, while rudimentary and lacking creativity, was still the signature sound back in the Hamburg gigs that gave them a raw/harder, almost proto-punk rock sound. If we are to take John Lennon’s own words when he said…”We never played better or rocked harder than we did in Hamburg”, well then, Pete was part of that “Never played better or rocked harder” phase that laid the groundwork that would eventually propel them to immortality. In the end, the right drummer (Ringo) took over to take them to the next level.

I was 10 when first learned of Pete Best and recall as vividly as 11/22/63; Classmate Mitchell L. clipped and brought that morning’s Newspaper Article with a picture and headed “The “Almost” Beatle”.

Well said, thanks for posting..

On the day of contact nobody knew the fate of the beatles band. Pete went to join with the all stars band and got little. success. So said that it was destiny.

A lot preferred Pete's heavy drum beat but lets face it it wasnt the jealousy over the girls (it was there) it was just that they got on well with Ringo who fitted in so much better socially. Pete would go off on his own all the time and wouldnt hang with the others. He was quiet and reclusive ! Big mistake with John , Paul & George ! And it wouldnt have stopped those 3 from being that big success from I Want To Hold Your Hand on whoever was the drummer. Oh and I saw Pete Best with a Beatle haircut shortly after no problem too ! 🤡

As a Beatles historian, I must point out to any potential viewers of this appalling podcast that it is factually riddled with inaccuracies aside from that,- it appears to be nothing more than a ham fisted attempt to use The Beatles story to advertise a very questionable publication which claims to offer the:- 'Secret of success ' ! 🙄. Avoid !

You seam to skirt the core of the actual truth with a reluctance to point out what is blatantly obvious to every musician, the fact that Best was not an average drummer, but far below. Let your own ears do the talking by listening to him on those early Beatles recordings..... after the proverbial 10,000 hours of practice! Anyone can put in the hours, but not everyone is or can become a musician, that’s just the way it is...., & The Beat Goes On 🎶

These are all very good points, i used to ask the same questions, why Pete Best did not join other upcoming Bands? Why he did not get a call to join other Bands?? He was known in Liverpool!! If he was such a good drummer and oh so good looking than why he gave up so easy?? He even had a very good support in his Mother!! So got no tears for Pete Best of the 1960s!!

Let me tell you this; i play chess and yes you get better after 100 hrs of playing and learning and after that you stay at same level regardless how many more hrs you play!! You hit a ceiling and thats where you stay!! Unless you pick up a few chess books learn from the masters your skills will stay the same even after 10 000 hrs... So the time doesn't help because you keep repeating what you already know!! If you got talent than practice can make you a master and in chess you got BRAIN!!

PETE BEST held the Beatles together - back in December of 1960 - when they returned to Liverpool , England and were very sad that they did not make it as a band over in Hamburg - Germany on their first tour there - PETE BEST and his mum MONA opened their basement into a night club - at where the Beatles revived their interest in staying with music - TRUE STORY HERE !

OK, The Beatles and 10,000 hours.... humm? The average person, who works a full time job, puts in 2,000 hours per year. It would take them five years of full time work to reach the 10,000 hours. Now, The Beates were only in Hamburg for 2 years. If they played 8 hours a day (which I've read isn't exactly accurate. They alternated sets with another band, at least part of the time while they were in Hamburg), that would be 2,000 X 2 = 4,000 hours. This is well short of the 10,000 hours. They would had to of played 3 more (in addition to their Hamburg hours) years, 8 hours a day (which they did not) to reach the 10,000 hours. I highly suspect that The Beatles did not put in 10,000 hours. I suspect that they did put in enough time, though, to get good at knowing their basic chords, learning some minor pentationic and major scale type lead guitar stuff, being able to make basic harmony with vocals, play some standard cover tunes, and use the knowledge of cover tunes to craft some of their own tunes. They also learned how to "entertain" on stage. This was enough knowledge, in combination with their creativity, to get them to the stage that they were at, with their first albums. George Martin, no doubt, helped them with showing them chords, and other things musically. They were good students, and very ambitious with new knowlege. Now, about their success, they had the convergence of three things: A limited technology (they were pumped through the radio, endlessly to a group of people who had very few options for entertainment, electronically (there were only a handful of TV and radio stations, in each market back then. Endless choices for music were not yet available on cable TV, or the internet. So, the limited technology worked in their favor.) Then they had the right age of audience and lots of them. Boomers were born at just the right time for The Beatles presentation. Their were hoards of young, unsophisticated minds, looking for entertainment, and remember they only had a few channels on the radio, to listen to.) Then there was the culture. It was much more monolithic than today's culture. Everyone listened to the same radio stations, basically had the same hair cuts, and dressed the same. It is not like today. This culture of uniformity was perfect for young rebellious minds to want to break out of. The Beatles offered them a rallying point, with their long hair, irreverent jokes, etc. The culture of youth wanted some rebellious heroes. So, like three slopes on an X-Y plot, The Beatles were like where these lines converge, that is, the point where they meet. All three aspects were present, and that was the recipe for The Beatles and their massive popularity. Timing was everything. Of course, The Beatles had to come up with the goods, and they did: they played well, sang well, wrote well, and entertained. (PS: This narrator seems to miss the fact that Ringo's drumming was also rejected by George Martin on The Beatles first recording. They used a session drummer, instead of Ringo. Because Martin rejected Ringo's intial drumming, does that mean that Ringo's drumming was sub standard? Yet, the narrator says that Martin's assessment of Pete showed that Pete's drumming was substandard. This is an interesting double standard. ) By the way, I had the opportunity to talk to Pete, for several minutes, one time. Yes, he's a very mellow, supportive, nice chap. What you see on TV intereviews is the real Pete. I enjoyed this video presentation. It was interesting, and made some good points. The narrator is right as his summation of Pete Best, at the end of this video. Pete did see them through the Hamburg years, by being their drummer. That IS an important part to play in The Beatles history.

Bravo

A lot of speculation here, but it's nonetheless fascinating. I agree that the Beatles may not have become The Beatles if Pete hadn't been replaced. Ultimately, the Beatles were greater than the sum of their parts...

The Beatles could have had success with any good drummer. The Beatles were marketed to worldwide fame. It wasn't the fantasy of a magical combination of just the "right" four guys. There are thousands of world class musicians who never get the opportunity to be marketed to worldwide fame. It is a myth that the better you are, the further you will get in the entertainment industry. The music business is, and has always been, about who you know. Celebrity takes on a life of it's own. Had Brian Epstein not come along when he did, the band could have eventually dissolved. None of them had any idea how to go any further. There's a big difference between playing clubs and securing a major recording contract with worldwide marketing.

Gladwell was correct when he attributed the first "I Saw Her Standing There" recording played here to Pete Best. However, he is wrong when he says it's bad drumming.

▪ Pete Best and his mother, Mona, were totally involved in the formation of _The Beatles._ They played at her club with her managing them. ▪ _The Beatles_ including Pete Best formed a legal partnership in December 1961. He was good enough then. ▪ Ringo Star was the *fourth* to be offered the drummer's job. The other three turned it down. Two because of what they did to Pete Best. ▪ From the first session at Abbey Rd, it took John, Paul and George over two months to reject Pete. ▪ Pete Best's drumming in subsequent bands was more than acceptable. ▪ Pete was not fired as he was 1/4 of _The Beatles._ He could not be fired unless the partnership was dissolved. In fact _The Beatles_ employed manager Brian Epstein. ▪ Pete Best was levered out of _The Beatles_ by deceit. ▪ Pete Best had a legal case against _The Beatles._

possibly but they didnt save him. im glad he can sell records ect and not be broke as he seemed pretty cool in interview.

The first guy that got to be famous for be fired from a band. He's lucky enough. He never was a Beatle . As Macca said, The Beatles really began the day Ringo started drumming with us.

PETE WAS TOO AGITATED AND FIGETY !!!!

No

It’s not JUST practicing that makes one a better musician. It is also necessary to study the instrument and listen to other musicians that can teach you new ideas, skills, etc.

Oh brother... "How could he not improve?" Easy. People don't get better just because they play thousands of hours. If you listen to Best in his later solo time in the 80s, 90s, and now, it's obvious that he's a poor drummer. He never got better. Never.

Pete was a phenomenon at that time girls would pitch tents in his garden, that was his power, you don't have a drummer for 2 years then decide he's not good enough, you would know in 5 minutes if a drummer was lousy, 2 years seriously

Bottom line is Pete was straight and the others were bisexual

Talking out your arse mate

I’m sure Pete was a good Drummer, but you said it Ringo was a unique drummer, and Ringo felt better to the Beatles, and what happened to Pete Best Drumming Career. This happens all the time in bands. Someone is out it.

I don't mean to be demeaning, I love Pete Best. he's a great guy. but he might have saved the Beatles by leaving.

Why isn't there as much focus on Stu Sutcliffe? He was a lousy musician too. And an ex Beatle. I'm confused

Best wasn't the best. Lol!!

Long story short- Best was fired because he was not best.

Some of this is very naive. Re: Pete becoming better (or not) after playing for so long in Hamburg. Playing with bad habits for 8 hours per day....will NEVER make anyone better....just make them better and more professional at being poor.

THE MOST FAMOUS FIRED GUY...ENOUGH WITH PETE BEST- HES FINE

ruclips.net/video/QBe-ZfrQ_RA/видео.html