The 5th member of The Beatles, Pete Best talks about being the drummer before Ringo, Mona, & Stuart! He is in town for a show with his band and I was able to ask Pete a few questions.
1039sflem Kind of true considering one was murdered by a rabid/crazed fan and another was stabbed within inches to his life by a lunatic. It's complicated either way.
@grimble Funny thing is, he can buy and sell all of you including this ditz interviewing him. All told, with the royalties he's received are between 8 and 9 million dollars. So Pete got that the last laugh. Beatles weren't stand up men that's for sure, let their manager do the dirty work. But Ringo was clearly the guy for the job.
You probably dont care but if you are stoned like me during the covid times then you can stream pretty much all of the latest movies and series on instaflixxer. Been binge watching with my brother for the last couple of weeks :)
What a true class act and gentleman. God bless Pete Best!!! Pete's a legend AND someone who made the absolute best out of what once was a total disaster of a situation back in 1962. Long Live Pete!!!! Pete of Ringo??? It really wouldn't have mattered in my eyes.
Some seem so cavalier about Pete’s predicament. I believe that if any one of us were in the same situation, we wouldn’t have handled it as well as Mr. Best. He’s one of the last man standing. well done sir.🥁
he does not hold a grudge against the other three even after the disgraceful way they got rid of him what a nice man i am glad he came back to the music scene after years of obscurity .he was once a beatle something that can never be taken away from him
Met Pete several times...saw his band in concert...he's a nice guy. Was with The Beatles from Aug.1960 to August 1962. It was nice that he finally made quite a bit of $$$ from Anthology I.
I really wish we had an idea of how much she actually is making from Anthology because someone said there's actually only three of his songs and it and not 10.. Is there any way to find out how is actually doing financially now because of that anthology ?
Thanks for the upload 2moros. Interesting on the spot type interview. I used to love listening to the early Beatles with Pete. I liked his fast type tempo 'atom bomb' style bass drum, listening to them while in school and emulating Pete's beats on the drums in my barner shed in the back garden and listening to a walkman in the late 1990's. The Sheik Of Araby and Like Dreamers Do are my all time favourites ' not arf!' Also picked up a nice picture 12" record in Dublin once and still play it. Nice tunes like Memphis Tennessee, Sure To Fall(In Love With You), Three Cool Cats, Take Good Care Of My Baby, Love Of The Loved. The songs are really great versions, you could tell they had their own style. Thanks Pete for your inspiring style and I'm glad you got royalties! Have some books also from Pete Best and Roag Best. Just missed your talk from the early days in Lost Lane venue!!
Pete best is part of the Beatles history love the interview in the telephone box Pete comes across as a decent lovely man who doesn’t bear s grudge a very dignified man Pete spoke lovely words for Stuart lovely all the best
Karmically, Pete was taken care of. He's achieved respect and recognition, a million $ net worth, and didn't have to do any of the drudgery Beatle work of touring, dealing with internal band fights, and go through band legal struggles. Pete made out 'Best' in the end, IMO.
Trust me he's been making a good living since he came back in 1988. He's got to be the most famous person who isn't famous. He's in a unique position. Lucky guy and great drummer.
He came to terms with it which is why hes open about it. He quit show biz did his 20 years in the civil service, raised his famiy and has toured the world now. By 1984ish once he began going public again, John was gone, The Beatles had been broken up for more than a decade he was surely over it as much as someone can be. Now he's nearing 80 along with Paul, Ringo just turned 80, George didnt live to see 60 and has been passed for nearly 20 years. In 1995 Paul put 10 recordinfs of his on Anthology which he still to this day gets something from he got his recognition and has been all over the world with his own band for nearly 30 years. Hes fine with being the guy who got fired from the Beatles. As much as he can be. Im sure he still wishes from time to time it was him getting off at JFK in 1964.
Its kind of weird that I always saw him as this guy who got Kicked out of the Beatles before they got really famous but when he started talking about Stu Sutcliffe like that I realized that this guy was friends with him, a guy who was a real person and Astrid and Klaus Voormann. Best was right there really in it. The Beatles on the rise. He was a witness to something that is a mystery and a curiosity to so many people. He was one of those people. The famous Beatles of the mid sixties is one thing but for many hardcore Beatles fans the Beatles in Hamburg and at the Cavern are probably the most fascinating. What a place to have been and a gift to have been there.
Life is not fair. I think Pete understands that. Whatever happened, he had his 15 minutes of fame. We all have to play the cards we're dealt. I'm happy to see he is remembered, and apparently not bitter. It's hard to imagine The Beatles better than they turned out to be, but really who knows?
K C 10 songs...he may get a small royalty rate but still he got a nice payday. Plus, he already had a nice living on appearances at conventions, etc. He is well off and happy.
First time i've heard Pete address this issue of him being "out of sync" with the others, as he responds to what Paul said about him dating a stripper. Then he Turns Around and goes back on auto-pilot to tell about how "Brian was fidgety, etc. etc. that which he's told a hundred times already. That was a good comeback to say "look Paul, we weren't living in different time zones" and that "we were all doing that sort of thing." But Pete clearly didn't want to expand on this topic (about being out of sync with the others), and went back to the same Moment With Brian Epstein, a story that he could tell in his sleep. In any case, Paul was't "singling Pete out as the bad guy." All Paul said was that there was a little dis-satisfaction creeping in, and there was a bit of a Rift between Pete and the other three. Paul was just giving a hint at the Truth: that Pete wasn't really fitting in with the others socially. Sure he was a good guy, and he was *living* close with them, and sharing the same Hamburg experiences, but really wasn't *one of them*, in the same way that Stu or Ringo was. The kept some information from Pete. He started out-- and remained -- like an employee of theirs. Pete's drumming was good enough to get them to the top of the Liverpool Beat Scene, and even Lennon said that some of their best music from that period was never even recorded (with Pete on drums). But Ringo edged him out on drumming talent at that time; also had much more potential, and was a vastly better band-mate in terms of charisma and personality. And then there was the showmanship and malapropisms (Hard Days Night, Tomorrow Never Knows) that Ringo would come up with. The Beatles *made themselves great* (getting Ringo to join them wasn't Brian's idea), and they made the right choice with Ringo, even if Pete was/is a very decent fellow . . .
Sean Newhouse I remember seeing him on some night talk show in America and it may have been David Letterman or possibly Arsenio Hall or Jay Leno but he definitely came across as having some regrets
Pete Best was definitely as much of a 'Beatle' as Lennon, McCartney & Harrison and his position in / importance to, the band in its formative Hamburg / Cavern Club / regional early 'Beatlemania' days, can never, and should never, be viewed as anything less. The Beatles (with Pete Best on drums ) were the premier / extremely popular Rock 'n Roll band in Liverpool / Hamburg ( Clubs and recordings w/Tony Sheridan as "The Beat Brothers" ) long before Pete was replaced and they ( with Ringo Starr on drums ) were introduced outside of Europe to the world on the Ed Sullivan Show on Feb. 9th, 1964. Pete Best, along with Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison, is one of the original "Fab Four" and his rightful place, recognition, and contribution to that historical band cannot be dismissed or minimized.
No he was not. He didn't participate in the song writing, he could hardly play drums, and he had a LOT of luck being a kind of a "leecher" - Not improving, not coming with anything constructive. And the fact that he - on top of that - was very popular with the girls was of course too annoying to the ambitious, hard working other three. Pete was a lazy, amateurish drummer who just HAD to go. Ringo was light years better. No, Pete Best was certainly not "as much of a Beatle as Lennon, McCartney and Harrison." Those three guys were making MUSIC - Pete wasn't.
Pete is a nice and quietly spoken man. Quite a shy individual. I think it would have been harder to sell his personality. Ringo pulled off the acting in A Hard Day's Night etc. I think Pete would have been too nervous.
Not so shy as he comes across,he could take centre stage at the Cavern on lead vocals while McCartney sat in on drums,he did possess stage presence and the very fact he was the most popular member in the band as far as female admirers where concerned would surely have intensified had he remained with them into the big time Hmmmmm
Let us not forget at the time the other Beatles ere good looking but Pete was actor handsome and the others were told to sit down so the girls could look at Pete(while on stage performing) and when off stage the girls flocked around Pete by passing the others!
To me the whole thing was magic..and the most interesting and magical part was the Liverpool years,basically until the end of 1963.And this guy was right there for 85-90% of it.Listening to his recollection is the closest we can get to being there and so he's like a national treasure.He lived it,something we fans can only imagine thanks to his recollections.If you read the book.."The Pete Best Story"..and the book "Shout" up until the end of 1963, that's where the foundation of that magic lies. In 1964 it's really a lot of the songs they wrote in 63' and still a product of they're foundation..and from then on it was mostly money.I recommend to any one who loved this group to go to Liverpool and go to the places everything happened before1964..(while it still exists)..including the Casbah if one can. Also the Walker Art Gallery and the Lady Lever as well. Concerning the drumming,really listening to the old tapes he sounds good but you know Ringo was a drummer with a lot of swing in his style.They probably felt inspired to play that little better because of his particular style and how it affected them. But finally It was only right that he got some money for his contribution, not having given him something for his part before was not right.
He is a nice fellow. His drumming is not as strong as Ringo's, however. "Love Me Do" tells the story: PB - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-e3Oc67FdcpY.html RS - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7uQuX1sOYk4.html Andy White's version, with Ringo on tambourine. Arguably (and ironically) the stronger version, drumming and overall performance excellent - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0pGOFX1D_jg.html
He really is the clearest window into the beginning and formative years of the Beatles..the other guys became just too rich and too far removed from that beginning foundation core. From the other guys it is (and was) just all off hand bull when they talked about that period really.This guy is totally in the reality of it. To me the farther the Beatles got from its core..Liverpool ..the less magical they're songs became. I like it all buut that early sht is what made me fall in love with em.
Ringo was drummer with the best group of Liverpool's past. He was allowed to move up with the group on the rise. It was good for everyone...except Pete...and Roary Storm. But Pete didn't catch on with a top band in town. That should tell you something.
Lovely Guy. Would be something if he and Paul would talk again and reminisce about those days. When you get older you find you have fewer friends from your younger years.
Brian actually made him a business offer too and he refused. I never heard anyone ask him about that because NEMS (Brian's company) ended up with a whole bunch of stars. That might have been his biggest mistake.
Very nice interview. I heard Pete speak at a Beatles convention here in Toronto in something like 2007 or thereabouts,, and we exchanged a nice smile and nod of acknowledgment. He seemed very modest, and gentle, sincere, and quite funny. And I always have that impression of him when I see him interviewed. In terms of his dismissal from The Beatles, it is clear from this interview (and others) that Pete can in no way accept even the possibility that it might have been his drumming which was responsible for The Fabs jettisoning him (and, agreed, they did do that in a cowardly way), but it is, at the very least, a possibility, but one which, sadly, Pete will not countenance. John is on record saying that Pete Best could hold down a straight 4/4 rock beat and that was all; he never improved from there, and that was the reason for getting rid of Pete. And let's not forget that George Martin said to Brian Epstein (at The Beatles' first recording test) that Pete would be good enough for live work, but not for recording. At that point, George M. was informed that The Beatles were planning to find another drummer. Also, George M. accepted Ringo after the 'Love Me Do' / 'P.S. I Love You' recording, and dispensed with the idea of getting other drummers in (as he had done with Andy White on the 'LMD'/'PSILY' session). In fact, George Martin commented extensively and positively on Ringo's drumming many times after that, sometimes in reference or comparison to Pete's drumming. And Pete's remark that Brian Epstein asking him to drum for The Merseybeats in order to make them the "Number One Group", as he had done with The Beatles is not only depriving John, Paul and George of any credit for their success to that date, but also does not prove (as Pete seems to think that it does) that the request to join The Mersebeats meant that he was worthy of staying in The Beatles.
drutget: Saw an interview with George Martin and Martin said he checked out the Beatles previously but didn't offer them a contract because they were not good enough on their instruments at that time. They came to his attention again some time later and he figured they had improved enough to record. During this interview George Martin did not mention Pete Best by name or specify the drums as being most of the problem, but it would fit with your account of how and why they got rid of Pete.
"His account???" No...that's been established by all the 'major figures' with the exception of Best himself...who has never varied a 'jot or a tittle' in his opinions...much like his drumming!
Any time that anyone recounts a story or memory or opinion, it is, by definition, their "account", regardless of whether or not all the accounts are the same.
Great interview. He seems like a nice, calm guy -- he must've gotten used to talking about that terrible day (for him) over 50 years ago. How did you get him to agree to an interview?
If the other guys in the Beatles had stopped for just a minute after they got mega famous and put themselves in his place, they’d have clubbed together and bunged him a few million. I mean, jeez, poor bloke, getting kicked out of the Beatles, don’t know if I could have lived with that. Fair play to the guy, glad he’s now got his fair due after all this time.
????? Why? He had nothing to do with their success. Solely down to the talent, determination and vision of messrs Lennon & McCartney. Best should count himself extremely lucky he received anything from 'Anthology' as he was not under contract at the time of those recordings.
mascara snake It’s all about compassion. Pete Best’s mother gave them their first gigs at the Casbah, Pete helped get them noticed, which in turn brought them to the attention of Brian Epstein. Had it not been for Pete and his Mum, fate could have dealt them a completely different hand. I read that Pete attempted suicide in the 60’s. I can sympathise, doubt if I or many other people in his position could have handled it. Imagine yourself in his position, must have been terrible for him. Fair enough, they wanted Ringo, but turning their backs on Pete without so much as an apology is sad. They could have actually remained friends, life’s too short !
Huge Beatle fan since 1964 with undying love, loyalty and defense of my beloved...but you've got to call a spade a spade. What they did stunk. They had their reasons and their rights to do it and maybe even how they did it was understandable and maybe even their own embarrassment of how to face him again...and maybe even fears of legal repercussions...but poor Pete. I wish they'd have matured enough to face him and also not disrespect him all these years - they've caused him enough suffering. That was simply tragic. At least in Beatlemania history, he has gone down as a loved 5th member after all. Only wish Mona would have seen this part.
Several groups actually got rid of people when they were famous, Tony Jackson from The Searchers, Brian Jones from The Stones are just two , Brian Epstein did offer to manage Pete but he preferred to use his mother who was an agent but didn't have the contacts, he may have been a big star , who knows, he did get a reported £2.5 million from the Anthology albums, back then business was business...
True, but the one thing Pete has never come to terms with is that Ringo was a FAR better drummer. Pete had his fans who stood up for him, but many people recognized that he wasn't very good and that included multiple producers. Check it out ......... ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-jU3a1deif-w.html
John Lennon always said he was the leader of the band. But he acted like a coward in sacking Pete. Brian Epstein had to do it. So far.......leader? I know Pete struggled with the sacking for years, but I am really glad to see Pete smiling, talking about it. A great guy.
One of the three surviving Beatles (there were indeed eight: Stu Sutcliff, Brian Epstein, George Martin).... Billy Preston was not involved in the process of making The Beatles.... a musician, like many others, who played on Beatle records...
had stu not died....and been reborn spiritually.... he would of been part of the band later..... it was his brain injury at the hands of jealous lads that hurt him...that caused him to quit.... he died in Astrids arms... well anyways.... i once had a band named FRIEDCHICKEN in 1981.....the other mates are all dead..Im the only one left...we have about two thousands songs... recorded.... my takes... writing beatle like songs is my specialty.... one of my band members also had strange head aches...he died by his own hands in 2005... doctors didnt know what was wrong with him...so at the hospital after inconclusive tests...he cut his wrists in the hospital.... i was at the other hospital blocks away....i ran fro mayor and got sick...blood in my eyes... hardcore cough... i was placed on emergency room antibiotics pumped into me.... i survived.... lost the election hahahahaahaha
Pete had more female fans than the other Beatles and that pissed them off and that is the real reason they got rid of him. See the DVD Best of the Beatles.
He was fired because he was a lazy leecher - he didn't participate in the creating process, nothing constructive came from him, he could hardly play drums at all, he wasn't fun to be around like Ringo was - AND he also had a lot of girl fans, so he exploited ,and leeched to the maximum. Of course they kicked him out. The girls WAS a part of it, of course, but not THE reason. Please understand - Pete Best wasn't a musician, but he leeched on the 3 best songwriters in the world, bringing absolutely nothing creative to the table himself - and had a good time with the girls, which he could thank the other three guys for, as they CREATED the scene for him to play on. Of course they got sick and tired of him.
The oldest story in music is that great drummers are scarce. When bands begin to hit it big, they typically dump the drummer and upgrade. He is seldom one of the singers. So, there is not much reason not to make the change.
Poor guy ..everybody keeps asking him to relive the WORST most NIGHTMARISH day of his life. wish I didn't have to hear the sound of those cars going by it's making it harder for me to hear him.... that's very frustrating having trouble hearing and talking about Stu Sutcliffe... I'm even having trouble reading his lips... this is so frustrating. .anyone else having trouble with it ?
When he says he was one if the best drummers in Liverpool, that tells me that apparently there weren't too many good drummers in Liverpool if he was one of the best. When you hear his version of "Love Me Do" and then hear Ringo's version the difference in timing is like night and day. Ringo was so much better than Pete. The decision to change was the right one. When you listen to some of the unique drumming Ringo did on some of the Beatle songs I cannot imagine those songs being any better than with Ringo. Ticket to Ride, Rain, I feel fine, Something and the Act Naturally and his hi hat performance. These are just a few to check out and just listen to Ringo's part and you will agree that Pete couldn't have pulled it off like Ringo did.
I've heard that Love me do version with Pete. It seems like a demo, there are parts where all the band is rushing as it was part of the composition. Then back to the verse, the tempo went slow again. ALSO, notice that the main drum pattern and fills were later copied by Alan White and Ringo himself. So.. that says that Pete was a creative drummer.
Pete was a loner type and probably came off to the others like he thought he was better. So when George Martin said his drumming wasn't good enough for recordings, that was it, Get Ringo who they all liked and liked better as a drummer! But I've always felt bad for Pete to have come so close to that kind of stardom to lose it like that. At least, John and Paul both admitted to doing him wrong.
George Martin was surprised when Best was sacked. For him at that time no rock roll drummer was good enough to play on a record in his studio. Thus Ringo didn’t play on their first single Martin did.
@@joesimon2018 What are you babbling about? Ringo played studio drums for the rest of their career. Only on that first recording did Andy White play the studio drums, because he had already been ordered and paid. It was because of Pete Best Andy was hired as a studio drummer. After that, Ringo played drums in the studio, and on stage.
Paul and (especially) Ringo should make a pact to apologise to Pete before they all pass. There's no doubt that Ringo was a better "fit" for The Beatles, but in 1962 who could envisage what The Beatles would achieve? I'm sure that Brian Epstein was very unhappy that he was given the poison chalice.
i love the Beatles but the way they dumped Pete is well out of order. And to never speak to him again seems very cold. Not nice at all. Even if they did think he wasn't a good drummer(doubtful) you would still throw him a bone and see him right.
In regards to him not being a good drummer has you heard is recordings with the Beatles? His drumming on Love Me Do alone should have gotten him fired. The Beatles had 4 different recording sessions with Pete. Each sessions resulted in criticism by the recording engineers. That has to tell you something. I'm sure he's a nice guy, and maybe the other Beatles could have dumped him in a better way but there's little doubt they made the right move.
Andrew * Not really true. Norman Smith (an engineer for the Love Me Do recording) has stated he didn't see a need for a session drummer to be brought in. The reason for the firing had more to do with group chemistry than drumming ability. Also Mike Smith (A&R man from the Decca recordings has stated that the one who was playing the most bum notes was Paul McCartney. On the Decca "Till There Was You" recording Paul even forgets some of the words.
As Lennon stated, Pete's drumming never improved. He didn't grow with the rest of the group. Also all the band members spoke of how the band really swung whenever Ringo sat in. More than following out of love with Pete it was more the band fell in lover with Ringo's playing.
Andrew * Oh yeah that's right I forgot- the Beatles George Martin and Brian Epstein never told any lies either. When the newspaper MerseyBeat first reported the change of drummers they reported that Pete Best left the group by mutual agreement and that It was an amicable decision. And that was a direct press release from Brian Epstein. Then in his autobiography entitled All You Need Is Ears George Martin states on June 6 1962 the first recording session that George Harrison was the most talkative and Pete Best didn't say a word. But he didn't say anything about Ron Richards actually being the producer for Love Me Do/P.S I Love You. George Martin didn't arrive till the 6/6 9/16 recordings were finished. Pete Best, Andy White and Ron Richards all testified to this. When I hear how Pete Best sticks to his story and how the Beatles constantly contradict themselves it seems obvious who should be believed.
The other 3 Beatles should have had a group meeting and told Pete face to face sorry Pete we don't want u in the band anymore. It does not matter who was the better drummer. They had no respect for him as a drummer or as a person. Another way they could have done it would have been to tell Brian Epstein first before they told Pete. And the when Epstein called Pete to the meeting the other 3 should have been there. They each could have told him the reasons why they want him to leave the band. At least they would have briefed the manager first. The other 3 Beatles hid behind their manager to pull the trigger on Pete. Even Lennon said years later we were cowards when Pete was dismissed. Great group, but this was handled very poorly. Respect to Pete for moving on with his life.
Twenty per cent of anything you have to say about Pete Best has to be genuine sympathy, because he was in the Beatles when they made it in Hamburg and when Brian picked them up. Had he been a slightly better drummer, who knows what may have been. However, he never got over being ditched, and whined about for years. John actually said in interview he was a terrible drummer and the plan had always been to get rid of him. Pete has never accepted the basic in-your-face truth of the matter. He didn't go on to become anyone's chosen drummer and didn't even become a jobbing drummer for anyone. Anthology arguably got him 7-figures and that's a good thing. But had he been intelligent enough to think about it when The Beatles hit big, his best option was always to gracefully admit Ringo was just the better drummer and that he held no ill will. That alone would have probably got him a lot more interviews and appearances. But all he did was complain, as though Ringo got the job under false pretences. Pet Best's biggest problem was, he couldn't keep a beat and always played a song differently each time. Watch him play drums - there's no real timing 'pattern' and the fills are random and in the wrong place relevant to the lyric when a verse repeats. Pete got his place in the group because they got free coffees at the Casbah, had somewhere to rehearse, and because they had to have a drum kit to work in Hamburg. He never made it as a great drummer, because he was never a great drummer.
So Pete Best And Stuart Sutcliffe, got shafted, least Pete is still living, Stuart isn’t, had he stayed on Stuart would have been kicked out too, Bummer, Pete’s a great guy, we’ll never know what might have been, had Pete never been fired: He got shafted.!👎✌️🤘😮
Everyone knows 'what happened' courtesy of the internet and RU-vid...the only thing that 'sounds false' is the remark of "I played with 'em for 2...goin' on three-years" and that's a 'gross exaggeration' of reality."Being available' for the odd gig here and there is a LONG way from every single night on-stage! it wasn't until early '62 that dates became a 'regular thing' (other than Hamburg) The 'German era' was when they really became 'pros' at playing anything because there was no other option! You HAD TO play or it was 'out you go then' and by sheer drive on Lennon's part, they kept going on and on...and 'got better'.The problem? 'They' all got more 'in synch' in terms of playing together...and Pete didn't! He never 'experimented' or tried 'different fills' or said "I'm gonna' kick this bit hard on the "Long Tall Sally' number on the snare...it'll really go w/Paul's 'shout' after a verse" and never once tried that (according to John/Paul/George...especially "Mr. Perfectionist" Harrison) Did Pete get 'handed his hat' in a shitty manner? YES! Should 'they' have told him themselves? YES! Was it all 'underhanded'and tantamount to 'backstabbing?' YES! Did Best get 'fucked over?' YES! Was Best 'good enough' to continue as a 'Beatle' at a crucial turning- point of 'being an honest-to-God rock n' roll band that's been 'signed' as 'performing musical artists? NO...HE WASN'T. And his history thereafter proves he 'just wasn't good enough'.(I'm a competent drummer...but nowhere near in Richie's league, and I know it...it irks the shit outta' me that I've never been that good!)
Then surely you should have referred to him as 'Ringo' and not Richie. Who the hell calls him Richie? Except probably a dense drummer who considers himself competent but nowhere near 'Richies' league?? He's certainly not THAT good a drummer so heaven knows what your level of competency is
And if you knew ANYTHING about 'Ringo' at all...then you wouldn't have fucking asked me "Who is Richie?"...would you? And if Ringo wasn't that 'good'...why is it he's had a MORE successful career than any drummer in history? What say you now...fuck-wit?
You 'fucked yourself' and it's 'MY FAULT?' How the fuck could anyone on a fucking 'Beatles' thread NOT know 'Ringo's NAME! (you asked ME! Remember? "Who is Richie?") EVERYONE calls him 'Richie' including Barbara and McCartney because that IS HIS NAME...ya' twat! (he is now 'Sir Starkey'...which would be the proper way to address him in public) AND FUCK YOU and your ass-hole opinions of his 'drumming skills'...as one-fourth of the 'Beatles' he's sold BILLIONS of dollars worth of recordings since 1962! WHO has done better?
when George Harrison was underage in Hamburg.... the creepy German owner of the club the band strayed from for another club...the pissed off owner called the cops...and George wss deported...there was an unintentional fire.... if it had been intentional...the whole grail lot of the buildings would have been torched to the bloody ground.... Mona Best made sure the bands gear was retrieved... She was looking after the band...Brian was a groupie...a sick love sick puppy dog...who wanted to be the KING..... of the band.... it was nonsense...he later paid a serious ill fated price for his ...wroughts....so to speak..when he met the same kind of blokes who stole NEMS from him.... They wanted to be KING of the beatles...but paul didnt sign a contract ... later eastman took over his management...and yoko brought in allen klien.... the king wannabee
Whoever this interviewer is she’s out of order digging deep into Pete’s dismissal asking very personal questions. She’s exploiting his humble nature. She should know better, she probably does but doesn’t give a shit anyway.
Not true. I was invited to interview him in San Diego and he wanted to talk about his story. He said it had been a while since he did talk about it. I document the world one story at a time and Pete wanted to tell me his.
Pete being out of sync with the others shows with his reluctance to change his hair style along with them. There's the famous picture of John, Paul, George, and Pete with only Pete not having Astrid's new hair style. Pete seems like a great guy though.
If Pete could go back with what he know now he would shave his head let the beard grow look ugly somehow and take drumming classes and try to win the respect of the Beatles to the point they would stick out for him against George Martin
