Revolver: How the Beatles Re-Imagined Rock 'n' Roll

If you've read either or both of Rodriguez's Fab Four FAQ books, you already know you're in for a treat with this one. Rodriguez never sounds overly academic or scholarly; he's able to present reams of information in smooth, fun-to-read fashion. Much of the material in this book is already well-known to Beatle fanatics, but his discussions of the culture of the times, the other bands that formed the Beatles' competition, and the details of what went into the recording of Revolver's songs give an overall context that makes for some compelling and enjoyable reading.A few minor quibbles earn this book four stars instead of five. While I enjoyed reading about the Rolling Stones, the Byrds, the Beach Boys, et al., much of that particular chapter in the book seemed to have little relevance to the making of Revolver. The Beach Boys...OK, they and the Beatles kept responding to each other's work by raising the bar higher with each new effort (until Sgt Pepper blew Brian Wilson out of the water). But the connection between Revolver and the songwriting of Jagger-Richards or the folk-rock of the Byrds seems tenuous at best. Very enjoyable reading but a little off-topic in places.I'm also intrigued (bothered?) by a claim Rodriguez makes regarding "Got To Get You Into My Life" where he says that U.S. vinyl reissues of Revolver in the early '70s on the Apple label used a new mix/remix of the song that has Ringo's drums leaping out of the speakers. (It's a claim he also made in the first Fab Four FAQ book.) As a Beatles song-variation fanatic, I was really drawn to the author's comments here. If indeed true, I'd have loved to know his source(s). As far as I know, no other major Beatle historian (Lewisohn, Spizer, Sulpy, Winn, etc.) has supported this claim. Perhaps the author is referring to the version of the song that appeared on the U.S. "Rock And Roll" LP, but that version merely switched the left and right channels, so it wasn't a new mix or remix. Not even Joseph Brennan's "Usenet Guide to Beatles Recording Variations" makes mention of a new mix or remix being used on U.S. Apple-label vinyl reissues. So...true or not true?These points aside, this book is an enjoyable read and deserves a spot on your Beatles library shelf.(After a second reading, I've upped my original 4-star rating to 5 stars -- and would give higher if I could. Robert has given great attention to my question about U.S. 70s Apple-label reissues of Capitol vinyl -- even sending me an mp3 to prove his contention. Also, a more leisurely review of all the book's material prior to the "meat" gives the Revolver story a much more well-rounded perspective than I had at first ascribed to it. THe 5th star is well-deserved! READ THIS BOOK!!!)

Mr. Rodriguez's book,'Revolver: How The Beatles Re-imagined Rock n' Roll' is a thoughtful, insightful and informative book on the evolution, recording and history of the Beatles 1966 album 'Revolver'. There is much to be regarded within the pages of this treatise on an album, which, through a confluence of circumstance and through no fault of it's own, has not properly received it's due as one of the groups stellar works of art. I was particularly impressed with the author's intuitive grasp of some of the sounds produced on Revolver. First; the acknowledgement of how Paul's guitar solo on "Taxman", not only supported the spirit and angst of the lyrics, but also captured the 'eastern' musical implications George had brought to the group That 8 bar solo says as much as can ever be said about Paul's immense musical talent and it wasn't even his song. Nor, was there a sitar or tamboura anywhere to be heard. This was a 'western' 'rock' song hinged, through Paul's solo, to the subtle underpinnings of eastern mysticism and religion. Of course, his bass playing is exemplary, and his harmony singing. But, instrumentally, his playing on the Epiphone Casino literally stole the show on the first track.There are many examples of this throughout the book; Ringo's drumming on"Tomorrow Never Knows"and "Rain"(Ringo's quips were never lost on John, ala "A Hard Day's Night"), The advancement in George's mastery of the sitar on "Love You Too", the backwards guitar on "I'm Only Sleeping", the french horn part on "For No One", the double guitar lead on "And Your Bird Can Sing". the close mic recording of the string parts on "Eleanor Rigby" and the horns on "Got To Get You Into My Life", to name but a few. The Beatles had the material and the time to go after the sounds they were hearing and a new engineer(Geoff Emerick) to help them realize them.Of particular interest to me, were the discussions relative to what other pop/rock artists were doing, namely The Byrds, The Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan and Brian Wilson of The Beach Boys and how they were,with The Beatles, in some way or another, influencing and pushing each other. A substantial book could be written detailing much of what Rodriguez brings forth in this book. A more extended look into what these connections were and how they manifested themselves in the works of the above mentioned artists would be well worth the undertaking.Mr. Rodriguez's dissection of the songs on 'Revolver' brings out not only their high quality and their structures, but also the engagement with which the group, as a whole, threw themselves into the project. Clearly, they were more involved with each other's musical contributions on this album than they would ever be again. And that spirit of camaraderie comes through the tracks in a way that their succeeding albums couldn't always muster. John's involvement in the lyric's of "Taxman" as well as Paul's guitar solo there, the integral interplay of 'sound effects', seaman cantor, and Ringo's everyman's voice in "Yellow Submarine", George's lyrical suggestion for "Eleanor Rigby", the wink and nod between John and Paul on "Dr. Robert". They had to have felt quite satisfied with the result. Whatever they attempted to do, they seem to have nailed and that confidence, along with the abandonment of touring, set the stage for their next work, 'Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band'.And it is here where I take issue with some of Mr. Rodriguez's assertions. I have no problem with showing 'Revolver' to be the great work of art that it is, even the Beatles greatest, if you like. But, I fail to see how trying to sink 'Pepper's' boat raises the boat of 'Revolver'. I feel perfectly capable of seeing both works as outstanding contributions to the advancement of music and as twin peaks in the overall catalog of Beatle music, without the nagging denigration given to 'Pepper' in this book. In fact, one has to wonder, if 'Revolver' is so great, why tearing 'Pepper' down is even necessary. I agree that "Revolver' has gotten overlooked, camouflaged, and been underrated far too long, but, that doesn't mean 'Pepper' is necessarily the lesser by comparison. There are strains of evolution flowing through both these albums dating back to 'Rubber Soul'; the deepening and broadening lyrical content, the introduction of the sitar and the consequent 'eastern' mysticism, and exoticism beginning with 'Norwegian Wood', and the early beginnings of tape and studio manipulation. These are much more on display in 'Revolver', involving all of them in one way or another and continues through 'Pepper' and some of 'Magical Mystery Tour'. Also, the exploration of 'new' sounds' through the unyielding engagement of the studio, probably reaching it's zenith with 'Strawberry Fields' and then the entirety of 'Pepper'. Then, there are the songs on 'Pepper' themselves: the opening trac being covered by Jimi Hendrix literally before the presses had even cooled; Joe Cocker's great 3/4 time rendition of "With A Little Help", (and James Taylor's 3/4 time guitar /vocal on BBC television). Not to mention "A Day In The LIfe", which Mr. Rodriguez excepts from his stinging critique. The remaining songs on "Pepper' do not fall flat and hardly disappoint. The rhythmic, mixed meter tapped into on 'Revolver'("Love You Too", She Said, She Said", "Good Day Sunshine"), is greatly expanded upon in 'Pepper': in "Lucy", "Mr. Kite", Within/Without", "Rita", "Good Morning"(especially lively and exciting here)and, of course, "A Day In The Life". I realize that it was how, and the degree to which these so called 'effects' were used, and the material they were used on that Rodriguez objects to, but, the Beatles never allowed themselves to repeat themselves, and that is why their music stands head and shoulders above everybody elses', not only from that period, but right up until today. And, 'Sgt. Pepper' is every bit an important and lasting part of that legacy, and so is 'Revolver'.Nevertheless, I feel much better informed about 'Revolver' and "Pepper' after reading this book, and Mr. Rodriguez's criticisms of 'Pepper' are well worth consideration. I guess, though, I could have used a lot less about 'Pepper' and a lot more about 'Revolver'. Another book very much worth looking at is Russell Reisng's(editor) collection of essays on 'Revolver' entitled 'Every Sound There Is; REVOLVER and the Transformation of Rock and Roll'. This is a very 'scholarly' book with many detailed and interesting essays on the substance, impact, and musical offerings of 'Revolver'. Both books leave little doubt about the high wave of artistic supremacy The Beatles successfully rode at the time.

Robert Rodriguez's Revolver: How the Beatles Reimagined Rock `N' Roll casts a wide net over a singular moment in the history of the Beatles and he does it well. Much as Mark Kurlansky did in 1968 Mr. Rodriguez weaves social, cultural and musical context in a wonderful tapestry that enlightens beyond the surface of the ostensible event.The book is basically divided into three parts: Pre-Revolver, the making of Revolver and post-Revolver. In the pre-Revolver chapters Mr. Rodriguez gives a clear picture of the musical, cultural, and social landscape of the day and he does this without patronizing a less than avid fan nor dumbing it down for the crazed fan (such as myself). He takes pains to establish the relationships the Beatles had with their peers, the public and their team behind the scenes (George Martin, Geoff Emerick, et al). In the making of Revolver section he gives us a careful analysis of each song both in the creation of the individual songs (whether writing and/or social context) and the recording of said songs. He does this with a sublime touch that's sure to keep all readers interested in the entire process. In the final section Mr. Rodriguez discusses the impact that the album had on the record buying public, the attempts made by peers to emulate the success of Revolver and the Beatles' attempt to top the remarkable effort (Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band).All in all this is an excellent book and a nice, post-contemporaneous, time capsule about the Beatles' remarkable album. It's well sourced and an enjoyable read. Robert Rodriguez easily and adroitly straddles the lines between fan, journalist and historian.

wie o.g.

All is nice:writing,structure,details..With à clever view upon contemporary bands focusing on music between 65 and 67.Better than some books losting themselves,hum,in boring long stories about 67 or 68 ....Nice reading .

Comprehensive and detailed, this book puts the pinnacle album of the Beatles catalog in perspective. Lots of studio specifics as well as the author's own critical assessments to bounce your own off against, makes for an absolute must for anyone who thinks about '60s rock and pop music. A genuine treasure.

The authour Robert Rodriguez looks at Revolver, the 1966 Beatles masterpiece, and opens up a whole universe. Enjoyable and interesting.

I have to hand it to Mr. Rodriguez, his volume on Revolver is very compelling. Before I read this book, Revolver was one of my least favourite of the Beatles' albums, but I now listen to it in a new light. What an astonishing leap they took from Rubber Soul (which, in its own way, was astonishing too). Mr. Rodriguez gives us a great history behind the songs, influences on the Beatles and a detailed discussion on their recording techniques. However, his detailed approach to the creation of the "sound" overshadows any discussion of the actual "music" itself. For example, he overlooks the fact that the harmony in "Here, There and Everywhere" is one of the most sophisticated creations of Paul McCartney, ever. It's a real tour de force from the aspect of composition. Contrary to what Mr. Rodriguez postulates, I think whatever great progress they made in their music revolution with Revolver, it was actually solidified with Sgt.Pepper. Re: the adulation placed on "Pet Sounds" as being the great 20th century rock recording, it doesn't, in my opinion, touch either Revolver or Sgt. Pepper.