LOVE IT!| FIRST TIME HEARING The Beatles - I Saw Her Standing There REACTION 

I wonder if he knew that there would also be no new music worth listening to in the 2000s?

Yeah, it was actually their press guy Derek Taylor, but close enough. He wrote that as part of the liner notes to the Beatles For Sale album in 1964. Back in the early 2000s, through a series of connections, I taught a course on The Beatles for three summer sessions at the University of Victoria (in British Columbia, Canada), and when I got to discussing Beatles For Sale, I always made a point of reading that paragraph aloud.

I don't think so because if it wasn't for these reaction shows like what Jay and Amber are doing these kids wouldn't even know who the Beatles were let alone listen to their music. You remember when they first did "We Are The World" they didn't recognize none of the artists. And before doing this reaction show they didn't listen to none of the Beatles records. There are still a lot of kids out here that have no idea who the Beatles are. Which is sad because it's also a part of American music history not only England. I just praise God that I had a chance to hear them when they first came out as a child.

Except I see a remarkable number of "reactions" where the person says they know nothing about the Beatles and never heard their music. Sometimes I wonder what rocks they live under, but realize the way the music is distributed now, people never have to hear anything outside their preferred genre: you like something, and the algorithms will keep feeding you similar stuff. At least people are open to learning!

@@chrisoakley5830 your right on with that statement. Music after the 1980s left a lot to be desired. All of it sucks. Okay 90 percent sucks.

had more musical growth and styles than most bands have in 30 years

@@flerbus From "Love me do" to "Across the Universe".

First album was recorded on February 11th 1963. Last time they recorded together was on January 3, 1970 at Abbey Road studios in London. Just shy of 7 years. John Lennon was 29 years old, Ringo Starr was 29 years old, Paul McCartney was 27 years old and George Harrison was 26 years old. That's mind blowing!!

At the time it seemed longer than it actually was. They just had so many hits on the radio at one time.

Actually their first recording was in September 1962 when they recorded their first single Love Me Do. Their last recording session as a group was in August 1969 when they finished up the Abbey Road album. Paul, George and Ringo got together in January 1970 to wrap up the song I Me Mine. John had already quit the band about 4 months earlier.

For sure and well said. We had the best of the best.

Me either. I’m so glad I grew up in the ‘60s and 70’s. No better music than then. ❤

Absolutely!

Imagine having to grow up during this Covid era.

The Beatles and Motown!

Amen brother

Be careful! You could be cancelled like John Lennon was.

@@tzcomp Yeah, I'm not worried about it, because it's 100% true and nobody can change it. The Beatles changed everything culturally in the 60's and revolutionized the way music was recorded, basically it was their music that created mult-itrack recording systems and how they could be used to create new and innovative ways of recording music. (of course that's because of their producer/5th Beatle George Martin)

@@josephtingley654 I was just being facetious. John Lennon got into a lot of trouble in the mid 60s for a Jesus comment. I'm old enough to remember the bans and album bonfires. I didn't agree with them, of course.

@@tzcomp John was correct in the Jesus comment though. :P

He is still looking spry and fly as ever. Happy Birthday Richard Starkey! And many more! He said "Peace and Looove" to everyone.✌

Bless him! ❤

Yep... Saw a photo online of him and Barbara celebrating with his signature ✌️ Congrats Ringo!! 🎉🏎️💥

Actually John, Paul and George were together from 1957 to 1970 and they knew Ringo since about 1960 or so when he was in Rory Storm and The Hurricanes but I'm guessing you mean all four together as The Beatles.

@@mikek5958 Or maybe, in terms of their recording career..?

@@papercup2517 They actually recorded as The Quarrymen in 1958 believe it or not but yeah, eight year recording career as The Beatles works too.

and only like 5 of those years were exploring new sounds

@@mikek5958don’t forget that Ringo only joined the band in 1962. So yeah it would be 8 years

I feel that Russ!😅

Except for the bathroom.... I ALWAYS remember why I went there....

haha, yes!!

This is when we put a nickel or dime in the machine and pushed the buttons to get the song we wanted..... Remember..??

right there with ya

Yeah. I recently saw an interview with Ringo where he said that if it wasn't for Paul's work ethic they would have made three albums and been forgotten to time. It's a shame he gets so much flack since he's responsible for much of their longevity.

@@lia53233 I couldn't agree more!!

Paul gets no flak from me… John Lennon was the Band Killer, only outdone by Eric Clapton who quit 5 different bands

@@LBinsocal if there's one thing the get back documentary taught me it's that they were just done as a band. They were a family, and they had outgrown each other. George was itching to go out and do his own thing. After Peter Jackson heard the audio where George was suggesting that he could do a solo album on the side, he showed that to Paul and Paul said he never knew about that and he wished he had been told about it because they could have stayed together and just done their own things on the side.

@@LBinsocal None of them were the band killer. They all clearly had enough. John never quit the band until the end but George and Ringo did. I still wouldn't say they were the band killer. I think history shows, they were all over it.

I love "Don't Let Me Down"

Not just the top 5, but 7 in the top 10 that were written by John and Paul

Yes, and 14 songs in the top 100 in that same week in April '64.

Yes, and as I sure you know, this has not happened before or since, and will not occur again.

@@memorylane7068 Amazing

@@BobSwartzwelder That is amazing, what were the other two, performed by different artists? The Beatles are in a category all by themselves, I will never forget seeing them in concert in 1965.

Ha, yep! One-two-three-FAH! Nicely referenced by Supertramp at the end of The Logical Song.

and on the last ever beatles song he does the same!

I’ve been obsessed with the Beatles since I was 11, read every book I could get my hands on, and this comment is the perfect summation. Paul counted the world in with this!

Paul isn't going to challenge Little Richard's version, because it is an honour. Context is everything. When asked what Little Richard taught him, he will say that he taught him his pre-concert prep routine. When asked whether what Little Richard said is true, he will confirm it, because it would be an insult to deny it. The truth is that Paul was already doing it before he met Richard, but that of course, he copied it from Little Richard. When Little Richard says that he "taught" it to him [I mean if you listen to some versions of the story they are clearly exaggerated and ridiculous], he is claiming Paul as part of his legacy. He is giving him his blessing and saying this came from me. Little Richard was quite stingy with this blessing, often referring to other artists as thieves. But here, he is saying, I approve of this. I claim Paul.

Well from 1957 to 1970 but famous as a band from 1963 to 1970.

​@@Billp19733not quite. John and Paul started playing together in '58, with George and Pete Best they became The Beatles in '60, and Ringo replaced Best in '62.

@@meredithsmyth7059 I'm only talking about how long they were recording music and famous. I also consider 57 (The Quarrymen) the beginning of the Beatles.

First album. On 11 February 1963, the Beatles recorded ten songs during a single studio session for their debut LP, Please Please Me. It was supplemented by the four tracks already released on their first two singles.

The Beatles first became a rock n roll band in 1960 and they were finally signed in 1962... Officially broke up in 1970. So, about 10 years.

Yeah. I always preferred the early stuff.

In 7½ short years their sound, their style, their clothes, their look evolved and the world changed right along with them

1962-1970

@@ricardo_miguel13 Their last recording sessions were in 1969. Last album was released in 1970. First album was recorded Sep 1962 - Feb 1963. I stand corrected.

​@@mqmichaelonly other band to be together for a shorter time and tons of hits was CCR.

Amber so needs to get lost into I Want You (She's So Heavy)! 🎸

He was at the rootop jam in 1969,too

Upvote for the Long and Winding Road”. I get lost in that song. Every.Time.

Sorry, not much of Abbey Road, but most of the Get Back sessions that became Let It Be.

​@@grantcarl6338 He had absolutely nothing to do with any Abbey Road songs...( 'Something' is from Abbey Road ). Billy Preston only played on some of the Let It Be album songs.

I'm Only Sleeping is one of their best songs. So many people suggest the same ol', same ol'. I prefer many of their more "obscure" songs.

​@@rosek2967My husband's favorite is Norwegian Woods, which is not requested often. 🤠

I’d like to see a psychedelic video for Tomorrow Never Knows!! And one for I Want You(She’s So Heavy)

@@rosek2967 yeah, some people even see those songs as "filler", but beatles just have so much material that theres something for everyone.

@@juliajohnston7145 Paul explained this song in an interview and the "so I lit a fire" refers to setting fire to the woman's flat because she wouldn't have sex with the protagonist.

I always point out to new fans that the next Beatles song you hear will never sound like the last one you heard! So true and absolutely what made them so great. 🌸

and never lost the quality! ❤

YES Please!!!

On their movie channel!

I third that suggestion!

You can see there the first music videos as we know them.

Absolutely ... One of the most fun and funny movies of all time!!!

Me too Same age.

Crazy how many were inspired enough by seeing them on that show that they decided to be come musicians themselves!!

I was 13,didn't cut my hair until the Army did 6 years later.

I was a few years younger . Still , It didn't matter . I was hooked right away 🙂

Same here. 😁

Eight years for some of us.

and voice !

I was gonna comment about the bass on this. It's not complicated, just a pretty standard bassline, but holy fuck it's a WORKOUT!!!

Paul's boogie bass-line is what carries this song. It may be fairly basic to a bassist, but to sing the lyric at the same time, is something else entirely. This is the first track on the first Beatles LP I bought and I was stunned by it. Up until then, the Beatles (to me), was 'Love me do' and 'Please, Please Me'. Lennon's 'Twist and Shout' really put the icing on that LP, that back then, was just them.

And he just kept getting better!

He's so good. I knew he was, but I remember getting Beatles Rock Band back in the day, and some of those bass lines were so fucking difficult. His vocal range is ridiculous, too.

So, if they wrote this in ‘58 John was 18 and Paul was 16! This is innocent love but 17 is a quite appropriate age for a girl that they would be interested in. Plus, so many fans, including me, were adolescents younger than 17, we wanted to hear songs that were youth oriented! I guess I am pointing this out because so many reactors seem to be offended by songs that have 17 year old girls as the romantic interest. Another example: ABBA and Dancing Queen.

@@FavoriteMovieDate This is a modern madness.

@@FavoriteMovieDate "Seventeen" is used a lot because it's the only teen age that has three syllables and flows better lyrically.

@@mikek5958 Huh. Learn something new every day! Makes sense. Although they did use sixteen a lot, as well. Depends on the timing of the song I guess.

@@FavoriteMovieDate Haha yeah you're right, sixteen is used a lot as well. Ah what the hell do I know forget everything I said!

Lol he lifted it from a Chuck Berry song note by note.

Right? It didn't have to be. It was just a potboiler, meant to make noise and make people dance. But Paul went hard!

Try playing it at the proper tempo AND singing lead vocals at the same time. I dare ya.

It's still a difficult piece to sustain for the duration of the song.

@@joe6096no one can. Macca is a musical genius.

HAHA, hope you didn't run off the road lol

Literally the first song on the first LP!

It was shot about two-thirds the way through the first take! Note how he has to settle for a lower note when singing "baby" in the last two repetitions of "shake it up baby now".

I love John's voice on T&S. The cold made it sound earthy.

So amazing that criminals who had never heard a beatles song would stay in to watch them on Ed Sullivan

@gmb858 First song played on Ed Sullivan was All My Loving, not I Saw Her Standing There

I agree.

And definitely a great first track to their first album!

I have to go with, This Boy. As the best early one....but then again, the challenge of choosing the best, is a very hard task. You guys should listen and review the albums...start with please please me and ending with, Abby Road. Just a thought. Love you guys. ❤❤

"One, Two, Three, FOUR!!"

Still have it on my running list.. and have to sing along to it

When I bought the album it was $3.00 stared at it alot

while playing the album over and over

Still have it. Love this lp from me buying it at around 9 yrs.old.

Yes, and after!

Not true I'm afraid. But the Beach Boys were never in the same league as the Beatles. In fact know one was. The Beatles were formed in 1960 in Liverpool. They released their first record Love Me Do in October 1962. The Beach Boys were formed a year later 1961.They also released their first record, in October 1962, Surfin' USA. The Beach Boys were together longer, but with numerous personnel changes due to the death over a period of the two Wilson brothers and others.

@@cliffwheeler7357 The Beach Boys had a hit before The Beatles in the USA

@@clydeb7713 does that count!

@@barriehull7076 My point is The USA heard The Beach Boys before The Beatles.

I was 13. And yes, I've heard those songs and voices every day since Feb 9, 1964. Can't get enough!

I was 9, same here.

​I also was 9@@vicprovost2561

My exact story. 😀

I was only 3 unfortunately. But I finally got to see the Sullivan performance, when I rented a VHS tape called: The Beatles first U.S.Visit.

Well, she was just 17, and she's never been a beauty queen...

Jerry Seinfeld has a really funny bit at the expense of this very same verse and other Beatles lyrics at the Gershwin award ceremony for Paul McCartney at the White House. He said he was worried, and even concerned about some of the lyrics on his songs. "She was just 17, you know what I mean. I'm not sure I know what you mean, Sir Paul. I THINK I know what you mean" lol. It's a funny watch.

I always thought that line was kind of funny. What do you mean, "If you know what I mean"? Why wouldn't I know what "17" means? It's the number after 16 and before 18. And everyone you mean "17 years old". Nobody thinks you mean 17 feet tall or 17 pounds or 17 of anything else.

I was 8 years old when this song came out, and the version my buddies and I liked to sing was: "Well, she was just a hundred and seventeen You know what I mean And the way she looked Was way beyond repair So how could I dance with her mother When I saw her standing there"

@@RobertStallings-kx5ug "...way beyond repair" 😆😆

The song is in the past tense, and as such his age when he wrote it is totally irrelevant.

Pop/rock songs aren't always (or even usually) strictly autobiographical. They're written for an audience that fits into a demographic. It doesn't matter what Paul's age was, what the age of consent in the UK was at the time, etc, because this was a pop song written for teenagers. It's meant for high school boys and girls to listen to and think about the person they're into. It's a song about a teenager seeing another teenager at a teenage dance and instantly "falling in love" the way teenagers are wont to do. Iris Caldwell, sister of Rory Storm of the Hurricanes (who had Ringo as their drummer), claims that Paul wrote this about her, and she was indeed 17 when he wrote the song. And it's possible. She was the sister of another musician, was friends with the Beatles, and had dated George Harrison two years before (George was apparently her first kiss). Supposedly, Paul had seen her at a club where she was wearing a skirt, heels, fishnets, and a spangly top because she'd been hired to demonstrate "The Twist." This wasn't 20 yo Paul perving on a child. It was a group of friends within a couple of years of each other and one of them dated two of the others. Paul and Iris even dated for two years, right up until she broke up with him over a practical joke where he and Ringo claimed to have run over a dog coming back from a show, which made her think he was "heartless." On the other hand, Iris also claims to be the inspiration for "Yesterday," and that Paul told her mother that he was going to be on TV and she should have Iris watch the show to decide whether or not he was really heartless. You know, like a grand gesture of love. The problem? Paul wrote "Yesterday" after dating Jane Asher for over a year, wrote it in the Asher house, and had been on TV plenty of times before then, so, y'know, the "fact" that ISHST was written about Iris should maybe be taken with a grain of salt along with Iris's other claims. Either way, "I Saw Her Standing There," like most songs and many Beatles songs, was a song that came together from multiple inspirations over time. It was partly based on a traditional English song, partially lifted from Chuck Berry, partially taken from life experience, etc. When Paul wrote the initial bit of it, the line was "She was just 17 / She'd never been a beauty queen." Another of his early versions of the lyrics show it as "You're just 17 / You act like a queen," so the idea that he wrote it about someone he was sprung on seems a little iffy. It seems more like he was just noodling around with lyrics and hadn't landed on anything specific. Or particularly lovey-dovey. Eventually, he brought the snippet he had of the first verse to John Lennon and they finished writing the song in 1962 (with John putting the nix on the "beauty queen" lines because he thought it was dumb). According to Paul: "We were learning our skill. John would like some of my lines and not others. He liked most of what I did, but there would sometimes be a cringe line, such as, ‘She was just seventeen, she’d never been a beauty queen.’ John thought, ‘Beauty queen? Ugh.’ We were thinking of Butlin’s so we asked ourselves, what should it be? We came up with, ‘You know what I mean.’ Which was good, because you don’t know what I mean." -- Paul McCartney, Anthology This change of lyrics and even the aim of the lyrics would suggest that the song wasn't being written about anybody in particular, and was just coming together piecemeal. Regardless, pop and rock are historically loaded with all kinds of lyrics that are aimed at teenagers, are about teenagers, etc. And they're often written by people who haven't been teenagers for many more years than Paul hadn't in 1962. I mean, how many middle-aged songwriters were cranking out pop and rock hits about teenage love for teen idols to sing? What Paul wrote is not really that weird when your entire business is selling records to teenagers. Fun side note: McCartney revealed that his bass guitar part in ISHST was lifted directly from Chuck Berry’s song "I’m Talking About You", a single in February 1961 which The Beatles covered for the BBC on 16 March 1963. Paul says: "I played exactly the same notes as he did and it fitted our number perfectly. Even now, when I tell people about it, I find few of them believe me. Therefore I maintain that a bass riff doesn’t have to be original." -- Paul McCartney, Many Years From Now, Barry Miles

@johnplaysgames3120 1. I appreciate all of that info, a lot I actually did not know. I love stuff like this. 2. I agree about the songwriting and ages being meaningless (though I would argue The Rolling Stones "Black Cat" from Beggars Banquet remains problematic) in music, but I have seen people get creeped out. 3. It doesn't help that a lot of rock stars partook of the groupie scene and that a lot of those were underage. Jimmy Page had a relationship with a groupie starting when she was 14. 4. My original extremely brief point was that I had seen others who had this problem with ages. But even if this was actually pure autobiographical, both people would have been consenting adults and close in age, under four years. So, there is no reason for someone to find the lyrics creepy, yet some still argued after this was pointed out. 5. I had to look, but It appears Paul McCartney did not rip off a Willie Dixon bassline. Willie was the head of the Chess house band and played on all of Chuck's 1950s Chess hits. He stopped when Chuck started using an electric bassist. I had no idea until about a decade ago (I'm now 55), that all of Chuck's groundbreaking rock hits were played by absolute blues legends. 6. Speaking of the questionable reliability of Iris' stories, that's one of the things about rock and roll in general. So much of it's history is myth instead of fact. We are losing more and more of those who were there. And since so much of this history was created by often heavy drug users, even they can be unreliable. Crosby, Stills and Nash all agree that the first time they harmonized, that was it. They were a band. But none agree where that happened. Bowie had no memory of recording Station to Station due to his massive cocaine intake at the time. Even my favorite lyricist, Neil Peart, told conflicting stories about a song called "The Trees." 7. Again, thanks for the info, but I almost feel bad you wrote so much when I was simply referring to other people who had those issues.

Let It Be. If you haven’t reacted to this yet, this is on its own level. There’s a religious prayful philsophical heart to it that feels like a rainbow. Nothing like it.

Jeez never ending

@@randyrodriguez1445 It's not religious. "Mother Mary" in the song is referring to his actual mother whos name was Mary.

@@Billp19733 i didnt say it was religious. I said the music presents itself almost that way. And theres a symbolism here that you cant deny. And yes his mother was Mary.

@@randyrodriguez1445 sorry man, I misunderstood

No argument necessary. If you lived through those times as I did (born in England in 1954) the Beatles were the sound and face of a total change in western culture, no understatement. They dragged everything out of post-war gloom into the beginnings of flower-power, the hippy movement, the anti-war movement and upset the establishment to no end. Until the establishment realized how much money could be made....