Accidental Shoplifting

What would you do...

The wife is out of town. You have your four year old and one year old with you. You go to the grocery store with them to pick up a few things. After paying for your groceries and going back out to the car, you get the kids buckled in and notice that under the one year old's car seat that was in the grocery cart are about $15 worth of items that you forgot about and did not pay for. It is almost dinner time and the baby is getting fussy. It is about to rain.

What do you do?

Dez Record Guides: The Beatles, Pt. 2

SEE the post below for Part 1 of the Beatles Guide.

Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967) *****
What is it about Sgt. Pepper? If you read the reviews of the time (and analysis even today), it was an epochal event in music. I have read reviews from the period that talk about it altering the definition of “music” itself, and that, forget Mozart, music has now moved into its next phase of development. It altered our very culture, supposedly. This from a record with a song inspired by a cornflakes commercial (“Good Morning, Good Morning”), a song about a traveling medicine show rock band (the title track), a tune about getting old and hoping his old lady will still be around to cook for him (“When I’m Sixty-Four”), a song describing a vintage circus poster (“Being For the Benefit of Mr. Kite”) a song, regardless of John Lennon’s denials, about an Alice in Wonderland-like acid trip (“Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds”) and songs that were written from just reading whatever headlines happened to be in the papers that day (“She’s Leaving Home,” “A Day in the Life”). Talk about laboring over every single detail. Remember that their debut, Please Please Me, had been recorded in one 12 hour session. They logged over 900 hours of studio time to record Sgt. Pepper, and supposedly every single instrument and voice was treated with some sort of studio effect and trickery. They had stopped performing live anyway, so without the pressure of creating music that could be reproduced onstage, they were free to play in the studio however they wished with no boundaries. The record became the symbol of the new flower power era and summer of love ethos, you were either “with” Sgt. Pepper or you were not a part of the new culture. Perhaps it is revolutionary precisely because finally popular culture (cornflakes, circuses, newspapers) became indistinguishable from high art (what Warhol tried to do, but better?) Not only had the boundaries been removed as to musical possibilities in the studio, but also the boundaries were torn down between pop culture and art. And isn’t that our world today?

Magical Mystery Tour (part compilation) (1967) ****
American release that was really a combo of two EPs. Side one was comprised of tunes from their silly TV special, with Lennon’s “I Am the Walrus” standing out as perhaps the strangest thing he ever recorded as a Beatle. Side two is a convenient collection of their remarkable single/b-side only releases from ’67 (including “Strawberry Fields Forever,” “Penny Lane” and “All You Need Is Love”). As a package, it is probably their most psychedelic record, but it is more of a hodgepodge than a real record.

The Beatles (aka ‘The White Album’) (1968) ****
Usually the knock on double albums is that they lack focus and cohesion, and that you probably could have had a much stronger record by picking the best tracks and making a single album. All of this is true of The White Album, yet all of that is also its real strength. The White Album’s mystique, its uniqueness, comes from the space provided for each of the Beatles to stretch out. It is essentially like four mini-solo albums. They mostly eschew the heavy studio treatments of their most recent work and try to sound like a band again. But this is an illusion. What you hear on The White Album is four (well, really three) artists declaring their independence from each other and doing their own thing, and the results are often fantastic and often uniquely that Beatle. They essentially act as backing musicians on each other’s tracks (if they all four play on a track at all, which is only on about half of them). Ringo quit at one point, McCartney often recorded all of his own tracks, and the others were so disinterested in Harrison’s work that he had to call in buddy Eric Clapton to play guitar on “While My Guitar Gently Weeps” just to get them to take the song seriously. The record is full of trifles, yes, but also loose humor and gritty rock and roll that had been missing since their early days. Also, the stereotypes are somewhat challenged. McCartney (Mr. cheesy love song) delivers the craziest and hardest rocking song in their entire repertoire (“Helter Skelter”), while Lennon (who was considered the rocker), delivers the most delicate tune in “Julia.” Not all of this works. Several tracks really are throwaways, and who do you know that ever listens to “Revolution 9” all the way through?

Yellow Submarine (1969) *
The Beatles were not interested in being made into a cartoon, so the soundtrack to 'Yellow Submarine' is by far their weakest release primarily because they had no interest in the project (ironically, it was such a success that they later came to appreciate it). Half of the album is an orchestral score from George Martin, two songs are old tunes that had already been released multiple times, leaving four actual new Beatles songs. And clearly, they were scraping the bottom of the barrel and offering up their leftovers.

NOTE: Technically, Let It Be was released as their last album. But the material was recorded prior to Abbey Road, shelved, and then released after AR. Therefore, many Beatles listeners go by chronology of the sessions, and consider LIB to be the penultimate record and AR as the final one. And since AR is a much better record, it makes for better closure. So I will discuss them in that order.

Let It Be (1969/1970) ***
Hey, we’re falling apart and can hardly stand to be in the same room together, so let’s record an album, film it all and release it as a documentary. Sounds good. McCartney was pushing for a “return to basics” and possibly even live performance, which explains the rawer arrangements of these songs. Honestly, about half of this record is throwaways, but there is still some great material here. The title track and “Get Back” are McCartney classics, and Lennon’s “Across the Universe” is gorgeous. I also like “Two of Us” and the Lennon/McCartney mash-up “I’ve Got a Feeling.” Generally unsatisfied with these sessions, the band shelved the material as the group moved on to work on Abbey Road. Later Lennon and Harrison handed the tapes over to Phil Spector, who produced and added strings and choirs to a few tracks, notoriously infuriating McCartney by “ruining” “The Long and Winding Road.” Macca would finally get what he wanted decades later, releasing Let It Be…Naked, the original tapes stripped of Spector’s meddling, with a different running order and slightly different setlist. McCartney was right, the “naked” “The Long and Winding Road” is much better.

Abbey Road (1969) *****
Considering the state of the band at the time, it is remarkable that their last recording was so great. It is almost as if, after all of the animosity and discord, they decided to set it aside one last time to prove that they could still do it right. That they did. One of the things that becomes clear is that nobody was ready for the Beatles to end more than George Harrison. His two songs he was allowed to add to the album were both hits (“Something,” “Here Comes the Sun”), and his songwriting had reached a point to where Lennon and McCartney’s continued dismissive attitude towards George’s contributions had become intolerable. Most of this record is brilliant, with complex harmony singing, deep bluesy grooves, whimsical fragments, multi-part suites. It is a tour de force and a perfect ending.

Past Masters, vol. 1 (compilation) (1988) ***1/2
Past Masters, vol. 2 (compilation) (1988) *****
Many of The Beatles’ most famous hits were single only releases that did not appear on their British records. Since Capitol Records decided to reissue only the British versions of their records, that meant that many of the biggest hits were not available. This was the solution. The Past Masters volumes serve as the perfect clean-up, including all single only releases, b-sides and alternate single releases of some album tracks. Without these releases you would not have available “From Me To You,” “She Loves You,” “I Want To Hold Your Hand,” “This Boy,” “I Feel Fine,” “Day Tripper,” “We Can Work It Out,” “Paperback Writer,” “Lady Madonna,” “Hey Jude,” “Don’t Let Me Down,” “The Ballad of John and Yoko”…etc.

Compilations:
As you might imagine, The Beatles have released many compilations over the years. The two most popular ones are informally known as ‘The Red Album’ and ‘The Blue Album.’ For many (including myself) they served as the doorway to Beatles music. Both were released as doubles, and Red covers 1962-66, while Blue is 1967-70. While 1962-66 (1973) **** and 1967-70 (1973) **** are fantastic intros for the neophyte, there is much to quibble with as far as choices made. Beatles 1 (2000) **** was a huge hit, collecting 27 number one hits on one disc. The much anticipated Anthology series was a set of three double albums packed with unreleased tracks, alternate takes, demos, live cuts. Sounds like a music fan’s dream, six albums of unreleased Beatles material! But, the Anthology series proves that they did, indeed, release their best material while they were a band. Anthology 1 (1995) **, Anthology 2 (1996) **, Anthology 3 (1996) *** are for fans only. They have also released some collections of early BBC recordings, but they are fairly negligible.

Solo work:

All four Beatles had substantial solo careers after the group’s demise. I would also say that all four of their solo careers have been disappointments, considering the talent and expectations (well, nobody expected much from Ringo, so his solo career would have to be viewed as a success…in that he had one.) Lennon and McCartney apparently brought out the best in each other, and more importantly, curbed the others’ excesses. The competition also kept the other on top of his game. Nobody benefited more from the break-up than Harrison, who had a backlog of tunes that Lennon/McCartney didn’t make room for.

As for what to get, Lennon’s John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band (1970) ***** is raw, confessional songwriting. It is bare bones arrangements and startling in its emotional intensity. He was working out demons on record. Imagine (1971) **** is more polished but almost as honest, and a hell of a lot catchier. The rest of his discography is spotty, as he indulged in topical political songs or just coasted, and honestly his inspiration kind of dried up. Lennon Legend: The Very Best of John Lennon (1997) **** puts his solo career in the best light.

McCartney has had the most prolific solo career, but so much of it is disappointing. His band Wings in the 70’s was pretty huge commercially. The best two studio recordings from Macca are Band on the Run (with Wings) (1973) **** and Ram (1971) ***. The rest are spotty and you are best off cherry picking individual songs off the records. Some of his more recent records have been good, but just good. The guy is a consummate musician still. As for compilations, Wingspan: Hits and History (2001) **** does a good job, covering 1970-84.

As I said, George Harrison had the most to gain from the break-up. Proving that Lennon and McCartney had wrongfully dismissed his contributions, his All Things Must Pass (1970) *****, a monumental double record (with a third record of jams), is overflowing with fantastic songs that he needed to get out. It was like opening the dam and letting the flood waters flow, and it is the best solo record from a former Beatle. After that clearing out, though, the rest of his solo discography is much less impressive. Let It Roll: Songs By George Harrison (2009) **** is a fine compilation of his solo work.

Ringo Starr supposedly has some decent records, but I haven’t listened to them. Photograph: The Very Best of Ringo Starr (2007) *** is a nice compilation and I would imagine it is all you need.

Dez Record Guides: The Beatles, Part 1

I had to eventually get around to The Beatles. How do you really rate their discography? Do what the All Music Guide does and just give every one of their core releases (aside from Yellow Submarine) plus the two Past Masters collections five stars each and be done with it? As far as influence goes, there is no discography more significant to popular music since 1960. But I won’t cop out to rating everything of theirs as a masterpiece. I’m going to try and look as objectively as I can at the records. One can differentiate (and hopefully offer some interesting commentary and analysis along the way) between the five star releases and those that perhaps should be downgraded.

What is remarkable about The Beatles’ output is that they released all 12 of their UK records (plus the Magical Mystery Tour American release) and a slew of historic singles all within eight years (1963-70). The pace and groundbreaking quality is unmatched. I probably have connected more with the other British invasion bands (I’m more of a Stones, Kinks and Who fan than Beatles fan), but no matter the extent of your fandom, their accomplishments are singular.

Also, as influential as The Beatles were on, well, everybody, it is interesting to note that they were also quite reactionary to what was going on around them. John Lennon showed a huge shift in songwriting in ’64-’65 that was clearly influenced by Bob Dylan. The folk rock of Rubber Soul was influenced greatly by what The Byrds and Dylan were doing. Paul McCartney is on record as stating that Sgt. Pepper would not have happened had they not been “challenged” by what Brian Wilson did with The Beach Boys' Pet Sounds.

The power shifts in The Beatles are also interesting to watch over the eight years of their recording career. On the first five records, it is clearly Lennon’s band. In that wonderful Middle Period (Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper), it is about evenly split between Lennon and McCartney, with McCartney taking more control by Sgt. Pepper as Lennon started to disengage a bit from the band. On the last records, McCartney is clearly in the drivers seat. Throughout, George Harrison is struggling to find his own voice. He would have been a lead talent with almost any other band, but he had to fight with growing frustration as both Lennon and McCartney continued to view his contributions dismissively. And Ringo Starr was lucky to be there.

Note: I will mainly address what most consider to be the “core” Beatles discography, that being their 12 UK releases, plus the American Magical Mystery Tour double EP and the two Past Masters collections, which include all of their non-LP singles and b-sides. I will briefly comment on various compilations, the Anthology series and solo work in Part 2.

Please Please Me (1963) ***
What is perhaps most impressive about The Beatles’ debut is that, aside from the two singles, the record was recorded in one 12 hour session. Today artists can spend close to a year perfecting their records, but The Beatles went into the studio one off day in the middle of a tour and laid it all down, more or less, live. They were a performing machine at this point, and so this was basically one of their sets that they played every night in clubs. Obviously in a historical sense, it is a seismic cultural artifact. But listening to it just from a musical perspective today, as it is split about evenly between Lennon/McCartney originals and covers, they had not quite found their own footing yet as a recording unit. From the get go the Lennon/McCartney team shows themselves to be special songwriters (“Love Me Do,” “I Saw Her Standing There,” the title track), and occasionally they will catch fire on the covers (like Lennon’s famous vocal shredding single take of “Twist and Shout”), but there is simply too much filler here to make this as great from start to finish as its reputation would suggest.

With the Beatles (1963) ***
Similar story as PPM. Split about evenly between originals and covers, it is comprised of more tunes from their live sets. The grooves are a little deeper here with some more variety, though, and since WTB contains so few of their well known songs, it is actually a fresher listen these days. It doesn't feel played to death, but the filler is still present.

A Hard Day’s Night (1964) *****
From that first CRANG! of George Harrison's 12 string Rickenbacher on the title track, it is clear that they had taken the next step. AHDN is all original compositions, and it is here where they leave their influences behind and start influencing everyone else. You've got the obvious classics, but this record is full of lesser known gems as well. The close harmonies of "If I Fell" between John and Paul are so sweet and together, making their acrimonious breakup a few years later seem impossible. It is interesting to note that the songwriting disparity here is the biggest of their discography, with Paul only contributing three tunes (albeit they are two hits and one of his best nonhits, "Things We Said Today"). But this record is almost all Lennon. And that opening chord. It is a clarion call announcing that the 60's had truly arrived.

Beatles For Sale (1964) ****
In one sense BFS is a step back. On an impossible schedule of touring and recording that most bands today would find impossible to maintain, this was recorded under pressure and they went back to throwing in some covers to fill space. The weariness of this record really shows, from the downbeat vibe of most of the tunes to the cynical title to the haggard faces of the band on the cover, and is fascinating. The two Lennon openers "No Reply" and "I'm a Loser" reveal a confessional and vulnerable John that we had not heard before (along with "I Don't Want to Spoil the Party"). McCartney's "I'll Follow the Sun" is one of those effortless pop gems that he could do like no other. One of the more forgotten Beatles records, BFS is worth the rediscovery, even with the throwaway covers, for its weariness and more desperate tone.

ABOVE: John Lennon and Paul McCartney. The greatest songwriting team of all time? Definitely in the conversation. You can usually tell who was the primary writer by who is singing the lead, although they would often help each other out in crucial ways on each other's songs. George Martin: "They did love each other very much throughout the time I knew them in the studio. But the tension was there mostly because they never really collaborated. They were never Rodgers and Hart. They were always songwriters who helped each other with little bits and pieces." McCartney: "We were always in competition."

Help! (1965) ****
Closing out their early period, Help! is the soundtrack to their second film (although like with AGDN, only half of the songs appear in the film). Some of this is filler, but enough is great. The urgent title track, Lennon's Dylan attempt "You've Got To Hide Your Love Away, " and McCartney's "I've Just Seen a Face" really stand out. Oh, and a little tune called "Yesterday", the most covered pop song of all time.

Rubber Soul (1965) *****
Wow. Where to begin. So begins the period where absolutely everyone in rock paid attention to what the Beatles were doing, either for inspiration or to rebel against. Imagine the pressure, with everyone listening, and yet they deliver time and again. RS is a folk-rock album, and The Beatles were inspired by and were reacting to the work that Bob Dylan and The Byrds were doing at this time. But the experimentation is dazzling within the folk-rock idiom, with one of the first sitars in rock in "Norwegian Wood," the speeded up piano for harpsichord effect in "In My Life," and McCartney's fuzz tone bass as just a few examples. Along with producer George Martin, the Fab Four were learning how to use the studio itself as an instrument. RS is one of the first records in rock music that is made as an album with a cohesive feel and sound vs. some repackaged singles surrounded by filler. With RS, and especially the next two, The Beatles are more responsible than anyone else for turning the album into an artform in itself. John Lennon's songwriting has progressed too. He is looking at life in more complex ways, such as the ambiguous affair in "Norwegian Wood," the aching nostalgia of "In My Life," the self-doubt of "Nowhere Man" and the downright frightening threat of physical violence to his woman if she dares to step out in "Run For Your Life." Also, a third songwriting threat emerges with George Harrison's first good song, "If I Needed Someone," a sparkling gem that Harrison openly admitted was trying to emulate Gene Clark's songs for The Byrds. RS quite simply changed the rules of the game.

Revolver (1966) *****
As ground breaking as RS was, as Robert Christgau said, Revolver was "twice as good and four times as surprising." Revolver blew the doors off as far as the possibilities in the studio. The effects used (backward guitars, sitars, tape loops, vocal treatments that were invented on the spot and became standard practice, chanting monks...nothing was off limits) broke all kinds of ground. These might be mere gimmicks in lesser hands, but Revolver also contains their best set of songs and it is in contention for being the greatest record of the rock and roll era. Lennon pioneers psychedelia with "I'm Only Sleeping," "She Said She Said" and the astounding "Tomorrow Never Knows." But McCartney is the star here. It is his finest hour and nobody has ever mastered pop music so thoroughly with such breadth as Macca does on Revolver. Baroque pop in "Eleanor Rigby," expert balladry in "Here, There and Everywhere," wistful melancholy in "For No One" and the pure groovy exuberance of "Good Day Sunshine" and "Got To Get You Into My Life." McCartney is a thing of wonder on Revolver, and it seems so effortless. All of that, and there is still room for three Harrison tunes (opener "Taxman" is cynical George at his best) and Lennon/McCartney throw Ringo a bone and let him sing "Yellow Submarine."

Part 2 will pick up with Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band and finish the discography and wrap things up.

Garage Sale Culture

Our garage was/is overflowing with stuff. When my wife saw that her father's neighborhood was having a neighborhood-wide garage sale, she convinced him to participate so we could sell a bunch of our crap at the sale. We loaded up two cars worth of items and drove it over to his driveway. Correction: I loaded up two carloads of items. We had a nice globe that I used to have in my law office, three side tables, clothes drying racks, my old bike, a filing cabinet, a fake tree, and bags full of clothing that our daughters have outgrown and some of my wife's castoffs as well. The main thing was this etagere that looked stylish in the 80's. It is huge, much taller than me, and it has lots of heavy glass that goes with it.

The garage sale is supposed to start at nine a.m. So I pull up to her Dad's place at about 8:15 to set up. But apparently nine means 8:15. As soon as I pull up and start unloading, the vultures start circling. The customers at garage sales come in waves. The true Professionals, I'm talking about the people who check the papers every week and hit every garage sale in town, are there at the start. And they have no time for chit-chat, because they've got to hit all of the sales in town early before the good stuff is gone. My wife did some research and found that you should ask for about 25% of whatever the item would be worth new, and then you can negotiate down to 20-15% (or whatever you are willing to go to). A lot of these people buy garage sale items, refurbish them and then turn around and resell them at flea markets.

So I am unloading from the car and this lady approaches purposefully and asks, "how much for the globe? What about the edger? What about the tables?" I had not even calculated what they all should go for yet. Her fat partner is in a truck waiting. "Are these for sale?" She points to framed pictures my father-in-law has on his garage wall. "No." I ask for $25 for the globe (I probably bought it for $80 new). She shouts out "25" to the fat lady in the truck. Fat lady shouts back "15!" "20!" I counter. "18!" Really? I said 25, you said 15, so we meet in the middle at 20, right? Fine. Take it for 18. The whole purpose of this sale was to get rid of stuff in the garage that has been taking up space for years. They are rapid fire with some other items and are gone within about two minutes. I still need to unload the car but they keep coming. Nine o'clock, you bastards!

Things finally get set up and I'm a bit more relaxed. Fat lady and her partner caught me off guard. But I'm ready now. I'm going to be tougher from here on out. My wife thought highly of her clothing, apparently, because her instructions to me were $5 per item of hers. When people ask how much for the clothes and I tell them five bucks each, they either stare blankly at me for a few seconds and then walk away or say something along the lines of "for this?" I quickly text my wife and tell her that she cannot sell her clothes for $5 each item. She reluctantly gives me permission to sell them at $3, and they start selling slowly but steadily.

I am really unsure on what to ask for the bike. I've had it since middle school, but it is a good Schwinn mountain bike. For several decades it has resided in various garages and storage units, and it is in OK but not great shape. New bikes online that look like it vary widely in price. Anyway, I sell it for about $40, and then a woman comes up to me and says "I would have paid you more for it. You need to be patient. You got taken" and walks off. Bitch. Now I'm on tilt, like I just lost a bad hand at poker.

The Professionals are gone by now, and then come the Specialists. These are people looking for only particular items. "Do you have any jewelry?" "Do you have clothing for five year old boys?" "Do you have medieval weapons?" I am able to satisfy people looking for clothing for girls 0-6 months old. I've got a lot of that.

There is a steady stream of cars that slowly cruise by, checking out your wares in the driveway. They look like they are either casing the house out for robbery or looking for hookers. It is rather insulting when they don't stop, though. They slow down, look over your merchandise, and then speed off. I know they are at a distance, but I swear I can see disdain on their faces for my items. I take it personally each time someone doesn't stop to look around.

After the Specialists are done, then you have your more casual folks just checking things out. They are the nicest. They actually will engage in casual conversation. What I cannot understand, though, is why nobody wants this amazing etagere. By noon, I have sold all of the major, large items. People come with trucks and trailors to load huge amounts of stuff. All I've got left are a bunch of clothes and the etagere. For each person who comes by, I explain all of the great things you could do with this etagere. Repaint it and it looks like new. It would look fantastic in the entry of a Chinese restaurant. I have to leave for an hour to help my wife with something, so I leave my father-in-law and his caretaker in charge, with instructions to ask for $35 but go to $30 on the etagere. And be sure to explain how awesome it is. I desperately want to sell this thing, because if I don't, I have to lift this monstrosity, strap it back to the top of my car, and take it back to my garage. When I return an hour later, it is still there. The caretaker tells me someone offered $25, but since I said $30, she said no. Dammit, I would now pay somebody to take it.

Around 2 p.m., it is all over. We got several hundred bucks for things that we didn't want anyway. I guess that is what a garage sale is for. And the buyers know you don't really want this stuff.

Anyone need an etagere? It looked really good in about 1987.

Hell Finally Froze Over

Dez Record Guides: Jeff Beck

Through my years of trying to spread the Gospel of Jeff, I have come to the realization that you either get Jeff Beck or you don’t. I think that it is mostly musicians who truly appreciate him. The word “genius” is thrown about way too liberally in rock music, but Beck is a sonic genius guitar player. From the beginning people recognized it. He was one of the few contemporaries that Hendrix really admired. He did things that Clapton and Page could not or would not. He is perhaps most famous to the general public as one of the three British guitar gods to come out of The Yardbirds, replacing Eric Clapton and getting booted and replaced by Jimmy Page. Comparing each of their tenures in The Yardbirds is instructive. Even then, Clapton was a musical conservative (leaving in part because they wanted to move beyond playing strictly high octane blues). It is Jeff Beck’s tenure in the Yardbirds that is most daring, most exciting, most challenging.

What makes him, in my view, the greatest living electric guitarist? His greatness is not as immediately obvious as other guitar icons. But if you listen closely, his tone, his feel for notes (nobody bends like Beck), his complete mastery of the entire instrument (and I mean entire instrument, when I saw him live I saw him play most of a song with a slide on the strings just above the pick-ups…nobody does that), his use of effects, his placement and choices…just unmatched. He can play fast and impress you with technique, but he often doesn’t go that route. He is much more interested in sounds and textures that he can conjure than just playing a fast solo. I saw Beck and Stevie Ray Vaughan on a co-headlining tour in 1989. At the time I came away thinking that SRV definitely bested him. I didn’t really know what to think of the Beck set. First of all, it was about twice as loud as SRV’s. He works with volume too. I love SRV, and to my young ears his speed, grace and bombast were more obvious than Beck's talents. Now, though, I would rather listen to Jeff Beck play over SRV nine times out of ten.

He has always had a tough time keeping groups together. He notoriously cannot keep singers around. Some of the music he plays on (his own or as a guest for others) is honestly mediocre, but even there, his playing can be genius. It will be a completely mediocre song, he will step up and solo and blow you away, then step back and the song becomes mediocre once again. He is a cagey fellow with a wicked sense of humor. He enjoys restoring classic cars as much as playing, and will disappear from the music scene for years at a time to tinker in his garage. When he was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame as a member of The Yardbirds (years later he went in again on his own), he gave the funniest speech I have ever heard given at the Rockhall inductions. “I should be honored to be up here but I’m really not. They kicked me out of the band (turning to his former bandmates and Clapton and Page), so f*** you guys.”

Note: Jeff Beck was the lead guitarist for The Yardbirds from 1965-66, taking over after Eric Clapton left. There was a brief period where Beck and Jimmy Page shared lead duties, but then Beck was sacked. This discography begins after the Yardbirds.

Truth (Jeff Beck Group) (1968) ****
Beck-Ola (Jeff Beck Group) (1969) ****
Beck’s original line-up for his Group is the most celebrated, featuring Ron Wood on bass, Nicky Hopkins on piano and a young, gritty singer by the name of Rod Stewart. They had the chops and attitude to match the other classic rock groups of the day, like Zeppelin, Cream or The Who. But the Achilles Heel was lack of songwriting. Both records are full of covers, although they are appropriately turbo-charged, much like the blues numbers on early Zeppelin records. Truth, especially, is held up as a foundational record for hard rock and metal, although I personally prefer the ramshackle, offhanded, heavy yet loose Beck-Ola. With some more time and stronger material, this group could have been one of the giants.

ABOVE: The original line-up of The Jeff Beck group also featured Ron Wood and Rod Stewart.

Rough and Ready (Jeff Beck Group) (1971) **
Jeff Beck Group (Jeff Beck Group) (1972) **
After the disintegration of the first line-up, Beck organized mach II of his Group. A bit more faceless, although Max Middleton brings some songwriting and a jazzier influence to the table. It is a shame that this material is generally so mediocre and features vocals from third rate Robert Plant wannabes Alex Ligertwood and Bobby Tench, because Beck’s playing is more adventurous and interesting on these records than on the more celebrated first two releases under the Jeff Beck Group banner. They also explore some jazzier and funkier directions vs. the blues rock of the previous two records. “Ice Cream Cakes” from JBG is the perfect example of great yet crappy. A funky groove is ruined by generic cock rock lyrics and vocals, while Beck is throwing out killer licks and using subtle feedback brilliantly. I’d probably give these records at least an additional star each if they would just strip off the vocal tracks.

Beck, Bogert & Appice (Beck, Bogert & Appice) (1973) *
Live in Japan (live) (Beck, Bogert & Appice) (1973) *
Beck enters the power trio sweepstakes to leaden, dull hard rock effect.

ABOVE: Get Blow By Blow now.

Blow By Blow (1975) *****
Wired (1976) *****
Jeff Beck with the Jan Hammer Group Live (live) (with Jan Hammer Group) (1977) **
There and Back (1980) ***
Beck always had problems with vocalists, who tended to just get in the way. Even when it was Rod Stewart. So the solution is obvious - jettison the singer altogether. Beck would hardly ever work regularly with a vocalist again. This is his most celebrated period, and Blow By Blow is an undisputed fusion masterpiece. It all comes together on BBB, Beck’s brilliant tones and playing, and a backing band that matches his complexity, along with 5th Beatle George Martin producing. This stands up with any of the essential records of jazz/rock fusion. While most essential entries in that genre come primarily from the jazz side of the ledger, Beck approaches it from the rock side. “Scatterbrain,” “Cause We’ve Ended As Lovers” (the solo at the end is just gorgeous)and the immortal “Freeway Jam” are Beck’s most lasting works. Wired is almost as good, less jazzy but with a harder edge and much funkier. His live hook up with Jan Hammer and his group is pretty bad, but it is all Hammer’s fault, with his cheeseball bumblebee keyboard lines. Even Beck’s brilliant playing can’t save most of that record.

Flash (1985) *
Beck tries for mainstream rock/pop/hair metal success, and the results are predictably bad. Here he has a legion of faceless hair metal vocalists/screamers to get the songs on the radio. Only his gorgeous hit cover of “People Get Ready” with Rod Stewart on vocals is worth salvaging.

Jeff Beck’s Guitar Shop (1989) ****
I have spent many hours of my life listening to and thinking about this record. It is either a subtle, quirky masterpiece or a missed opportunity. Critics seem to be similarly split. Hooking up with keyboardist Tony Hymas and drummer Terry Bozio, you’d think it would be all hard rock bombast, but instead it is an eclectic mix of styles (reggae here, atmospherics there, hard rock and then a ballad…) Beck is uncharacteristically restrained on many tracks too, just playing fragments and laying back. Is he a bit timid since he has been out of the game for several years, or is he so confident that he doesn’t need to wow you every second? That is the thing, the record never really answers that or any other questions. So, I’ve decided that I love it. The fragmentary “Where Were You” may be the most beautiful thing Beck has ever recorded.

ABOVE: Jeff Beck's Guitar Shop features one of the coolest album covers ever.

Beckology (compilation box set) (1989) ***
Frankie’s House (soundtrack) (1992) **
Crazy Legs (1993) **
Best of Beck (compilation) (1995) ****
The high profile he gained from Guitar Shop (and the accompanying co-headlining tour with Stevie Ray Vaughan) turned out to be a false dawn, at least for another decade or so. He was relatively quiet in the 90’s, recording an atmospheric soundtrack (Frankie’s House) and a note for note covers tribute album of the songs of Gene Vincent (with Beck meticulously recreating the solos of his hero Cliff Gallup) (Crazy Legs). Other than that, it was only a couple of compilations. Box set Beckology is fantastic for his early career with The Yardbirds and the Groups, but misses the mark when covering the fusion era, while Best of Beck is a necessarily scattershot single disc sampler that nonetheless does the trick for neophytes. The primary downside to both of these collections is that they were released before what is arguably his most exciting period.

Who Else! (1999) ****
You Had It Coming (2001) *****
Jeff (2003) ***
Live at BB King Blues Club (live) (2006) ***
Live in Tokyo ’99 (live) (1999/2006) ****
Official Bootleg USA ’06 (live) (2006/2007) ***
Live at Ronnie Scott’s (live) (2008) *****
Emotion & Commotion (2010) ***
Live and Exclusive From the Grammy Museum (live) (2010) ***
Rock and Roll Party Honoring Les Paul (live) (2011) ***
From 1999 forward, Jeff Beck has had his most prolific and many could argue (I would) his most interesting and daring period. Emerging from seeming oblivion, he came back with Who Else!, a record that explores modern electronic music with his guitar slashing, stabbing and darting every which way. He sounds completely at home in this completely modern environment. Those first three studio records form a trilogy of sorts and are a peak only matched by Blow By Blow and Wired. I think You Had It Coming is the most daring and best of them all. Live at Ronnie Scott’s is the definitive modern live Beck and is probably the best place to start for this period. But, since he is not shy about playing around with effects in the studio, in the live setting he is somewhat more limited in the sounds that he can conjure. So the Ronnie Scott’s set is not as sonically interesting or diverse as those studio efforts from 1999-2003. On the other hand, the band he has for the Ronnie Scott's set is out of this world good, and the setlist is fantastic.


ABOVE: Here is "Scatterbrain" from Live at Ronnie Scott's (also available on DVD)

Bottom Line: Beck has one of the more challenging discographies because of his own sporadic work habits, his inability to keep steady line-ups together beyond a couple of records, and the varying degree of quality of his material. While his playing is almost always brilliant, it is sometimes above the material. Truth is essential early blues rock (although I prefer the more fun Beck-Ola) from his initial Jeff Beck Group. Blow By Blow is his masterpiece and one of the finest fusion records ever made, and follow-up Wired is also essential. Who Else! and You Had It Coming are musts, and Live at Ronnie Scott’s is his best live outing. After you try those, head to Guitar Shop. None of the compilations do him justice simply because they are all pre-1999.

Rockhall Called Out on Its Own BS

Anyone who has followed Rock and Roll Hall of Fame news this year has witnessed a spectacle of dysfunction. When KISS's induction was finally announced, hell truly had frozen over. The KISS haters were still out in force. Blowhard critic Dave Marsh (who famously while on the Nominating Committee swore he would do everything in his power to keep KISS out) was still railing against reality this week. He asked readers of his blog to list bands not in the Hall but still better than KISS, inspiring invective from Gene Simmons, who questioned everything from Marsh's credentials as a critic to his penis size.

The drama really got started early on when it was announced that only the original line up (Simmons, Paul Stanley, Ace Frehley, Peter Criss) would be inducted. Frehley and Criss left/were booted in the early 80's, and since then Stanley and Simmons have soldiered on with various replacement drummers and lead guitarists. Soon after the announcement of their induction, all four original members seemed open to performing together at the ceremony. But nothing is easy with KISS. Simmons and Stanley soon started making noise about wanting to honor all eras, past and current members. Ace and Peter refused to perform with current members (understandably so, as Tommy Thayer and Eric Singer both don the make-up of Ace and Peter, respectively, it would be a bit ridiculous with multiple Catmen and Space Aces sharing the same stage). Gene and Paul finally declared there would be no performance at all.

ABOVE: Ace and Peter's perspective - They do not want to perform with current members of KISS at the ceremony who wear their make-up. It was Ace Frehley who first broke the news that the original KISS would not be performing at the ceremony. In an act of kindness, he broke the news in an open letter right before tickets went on sale for the ceremony at Barclay's Arena, saving KISS fans lots of money.

My take:

If the Hall had been consistent all of these years, then they would be right to only induct the original four. It is the 70's work that got them here, they aren't going into the Hall of Fame for "Lick It Up". (No, it is the much deeper and mature work of their early days, with tunes like "Cold Gin," "Hotter Than Hell" and "Love Gun" that really made the impact).

So if the Hall treated every band this way (as in their stated position on the KISS issue: we only want members inducted from the most important eras), then fine. But that is not the way they have done business in the past. When the Grateful Dead went in, they asked the band who should go in. The Dead got about 257 people in, including lyricist (but non-band member) Robert Hunter and people who played very minor roles in the Dead's history. When Metallica went in, new bassist Robert Trujillo (who had played on one irrelevant album) was inducted. The Red Hot Chili Peppers got in most of their guitarists, some of whom were in the band for a short period of time during less significant periods. (On the other hand, fairly important members of Fleetwood Mac and Jefferson Airplane were omitted). Point is, there has been no rhyme or reason for how the Hall decides who will and who will not go in for any given band.

Paul Stanley's point is that while Nirvana's pre-Dave Grohl drummer (Chad something, who was in the band for two years and only played on Bleach) will be inducted this year with the rest of Nirvana, Bruce Kulick, Eric Carr, Tommy Thayer and Eric Singer are all being passed over in the KISS induction. These guys all played with KISS for about a decade or more. Why Robert Trujillo for Metallica but none of these guys, who played substantially larger roles in KISS than journeyman Trujillo has in Metallica? Why was The Grateful Dead asked to more or less submit a list of inductees, yet Simmons and Stanley were never consulted?

It has also come to light that the Hall told KISS that they could only perform in make up and only with the original line up. The Hall has never dictated a dress code to anyone else as a condition of performing, or told them who they could bring with them onstage. (Recall the notorious Blondie induction, where Debbie Harry performed with her hired guns, as some of the inducted/former members of Blondie heckled her from the audience. Yet the Hall did not tell her she could only perform with inducted members.)

The Hall has also supposedly restricted each member of KISS's acceptance speech to four minutes. As far as I know, that is unprecedented as well (although some speeches from the past could have benefited from a time limit). Undoubtedly this is in part due to very public criticism from Simmons and Stanley so far of this whole process, and the Hall wants to avoid prolonged rants from them at the self-congratulatory ceremony.

ABOVE: Gene and Paul's perspective - All significant members of KISS should be inducted, and they only want to perform if current members Tommy Thayer and Eric Singer are up there as well. Ace and Peter are significant historically to the band as co-founders, but are impossible to work with. Also, Gene insists that critic Dave Marsh is not well endowed.

In sum, I understand Ace and Peter's refusal to perform with posers like Thayer and Singer in the make-up and "characters" that they created (but the rights are now owned by KISS, Inc., which is Simmons and Stanley). They are the only good guys in this fiasco. Gene and Paul, as usual, are a-holes and have been basking in the public war of words with both their former bandmates and the Hall itself. They should just suck it up and play with Ace and Peter for one night for the fans. (Simmons says it is like being honored with your ex-wife but being unable to bring your current wife to the ceremonies). But they also are right with pointing out the Hall's hypocrisy and inconsistencies in inductions. If the Hall had been consistent in inducting only crucial members of bands all along, I would get it. But they haven't.

This reeks of sour grapes and reluctant acceptance of KISS, never a critical favorite, into the cool kids club. The Hall accepts them with disdain, demonstrated by their unprecedented stubbornness and "conditions" that simply have not applied to more critically beloved inductees. One thing is for sure, I will be interested in hearing the truncated speeches from Ace, Peter, Paul and Gene, as the sparks will be flying in all directions. At each other. At the Hall. At the critical establishment. It will be entertaining, for sure.

ABOVE: Dave Marsh's perspective - KISS sucks. Marsh is notorious for trying to influence the Hall's decisions. A hater of everything West Coast (although KISS hails from New York), he argued against The Doors, The Grateful Dead...many significant West Coast bands. Along with KISS, he is also a well known vocal despiser of Journey. Steve Perry of Journey has called Marsh an "odd little man" who tries to rewrite rock and roll history.

UPDATE: it turns out that early Nirvana drummer Chad Channing will not be inducted after all. He mistook an invitation to the ceremony as notification that he would be inducted. In a move that exudes class, the powers that be informed him via a curt text message to Nirvana management along the lines of "please tell Chad..." He had been telling news sources that he was being inducted along with the classic line up.