[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]
The Beatles — Dig A Pony
Album: Let It Be
Avg rating:
7.6

Your rating:
Total ratings: 838









Released: 1970
Length: 3:34
Plays (last 30 days): 1
do a road hog
Well you can penetrate any place you go
Yes you can penetrate any place you go
I told you so, all I want is you
Everything has got to be just like you want it to
Because...

I pick a moon dog
Well you can radiate everything you are
Yes you can radiate everything you are

Oh now
I roll a stoney
Well you can imitate everyone you know
Yes you can imitate everyone you know
I told you so, all I want is you
Everything has got to be just like you want it to
Because...

Ooh now
I feel the wind blow
Well you can indicate everything you see
Yes you can indicate everything you see

Oh now
I dug a pony
Well you can syndicate any boat you row
Yeah you can syndicate any boat you row
I told you so, all I want is you
Everything has got to be just like you want it to
Because...
Comments (183)add comment
But, but my teenage daughter wants a pony!
 kingart wrote:

I love opinions. So easy to ignore. Like this one.
 

You're welcome!
 

Not bad, this band.
 BCarn wrote:
 Posted 6 years ago by helgigermany:

bachbeet wrote:     One of their weakest.

helgigermany wrote:

agree!

 
I love opinions. So easy to ignore. Like this one.
 

 Posted 6 years ago by helgigermany:

bachbeet wrote:     One of their weakest.

helgigermany wrote:

agree!

 
I love opinions. So easy to ignore. Like this one.
Is this the Knickerbockers?
 
 Sweet_Virginia wrote:
St Vincent does a killer version of this - on youTube if you want a look....

 
She can swing that axe.
St Vincent does a killer version of this - on youTube if you want a look....
 drsteevo wrote:
Gotta agree with what Bill said when he played this a few weeks ago; It is probably John Lennon's best vocal performance in a Beatles song.

PA1749, I can't even respond to someone who would compare The Beatles to NKOTB. 

However, to respond to the other folks here, I don't think you had to grow up with the Beatles to appreciate them.  I was a small child when they broke up but I don't think they are over-rated in any way.



 
his vocals on "don't let me down" are a few notches above this imoho...... here it's a 9.5, "don't" is a 10
 h8rhater wrote:

I'd give you A LOT of heat but, seriously, there is really nothing to say in the face of utter clueless-ness.  Your own words speak for you and OF you.



 

I usually disagree with your attacks for someones personal opinion, but this is a fair attack and though the poster has every right to say it, his words speak for themselves.
Not complex or profound or even especially hummable..

But just a great fun tune - where the boys took on the blues and showed they could play them like the best of them.
 bachbeet wrote:
One of their weakest.
 
I would say not one of their catchiest or most melodic, but that's kinda why I like it.

Everybody in my churches digs this song...
 
One of my fave Beatles songs.  WTG Bill!!
 joelbb wrote:

Dear PA and midreaming,
1.  They were not a "Boy Band".  They were in their mid-20s when they took off in '63, not mid-teens,  They'd played in the rock dungeons of Liverpool and Hamburg for several years before becoming popular.
2.  The band contained significant musical talent:  2 terrific and one mediocre song writers, 4 vocalists and one of the best rock drummers going.  Do recall that McCartney eventually wrote classical pieces performed by the London Symphony.  Also note that Ringo still tours w/ Starr's All-Stars, an ad hoc group of superstars who are chosen from the many who desire to play (non-Beatles) music with the man.
3.  They were graced with an extraordinary supporting cast, first their early manager Brian Epstein and later George Martin, possibly THE best rock-pop producer ever.
4.  If you really think they wrote/sang/performed bubble gum, you've obviously never listened to "Revolver", many critics' pick for best pop album ever cut. It's filled with complexly arranged tunes that often spoke pithily to the cultural realities of the time.
5.  Also please recall that, as cliched as they seem to be 40 - 45 years later, along with "Revolver", "Rubber Soul" (their C&W album), "Sgt. Pepper" and "Abbey Road" were monstrously influential, an influence which reverberates in music that you actually like quite a lot.  However, you lack the historical referents to perceive that influence (i.e, you are ignorant twits).
6.  Finally, note that from the time Hendrix went to London in '65 to the time he died in '70 was only 75% of the longevity of the Beatles;  Janis Joplin's popular career was about the same; Kurt Cobain's even shorter.  Meanwhile, Barry Manilow has persisted for decades.  Obviously, much like penises, it's not the length but the quality of its employment that marks a good musical career.  I suspect you know little about either.

 
Joel, you pretty much nailed it apart from the snarky bit at the end. The Beatles paid their dues in Hamburg (Ringo aside). They were tight, professional band. Brian Epstein cleaned and polished them up for the Brits and American audiences, but he just helped them get their collective foot in the door. The Beatles' talent, discipline and drive put them on top. Remember that Epstein killed himself in part because he realized the lads no longer needed him--they'd taken control of their careers and music. 

I'll bet that every success in rock, pop and rap is due to a mix of hype and talent. People will always debate about which musician or band got by on hype only and which had lasting talent. The Beatles were lucky in part because they showed up near the beginning of mass-marketed rock and youth culture and part of their fame was probably partly due to being one of the first superstar bands. Admittedly, they were famous for being famous.

But the Beatles set trends and changed the rules of popular music and their impact has lasted for decades. Overhyped bands don't get to do that. 
 bachbeet wrote:
One of their weakest.
 
agree!
 midreaming wrote:
 PA1749 wrote:
I expect to take A LOT of heat for this but....

Ok, I like the Beatles. I think they made some great music. But, I just don't understand the magnitude of the hype. 

1. Boy band from England makes it big doing teeny bopper bubble gum rock.
2. Boy band discovers drugs.
3. Boy band gets experimental and goes off the deep end.
4. Boy band falls apart.
5. The longevity of the entire band was only 7 years. (even New Kids on the Block was together for 10 years)
h8rhater wrote:

I'd give you A LOT of heat but, seriously, there is really nothing to say in the face of utter clueless-ness.  Your own words speak for you and OF you.
  PA, you're not alone. oh, except I think most of the JPG Ringo Jingo music sucks. I call it free thinking. These people are sheep. Especially this pathetic self h8ing h8r that h8s h8ers
 
Dear PA and midreaming,
1.  They were not a "Boy Band".  They were in their mid-20s when they took off in '63, not mid-teens,  They'd played in the rock dungeons of Liverpool and Hamburg for several years before becoming popular.
2.  The band contained significant musical talent:  2 terrific and one mediocre song writers, 4 vocalists and one of the best rock drummers going.  Do recall that McCartney eventually wrote classical pieces performed by the London Symphony.  Also note that Ringo still tours w/ Starr's All-Stars, an ad hoc group of superstars who are chosen from the many who desire to play (non-Beatles) music with the man.
3.  They were graced with an extraordinary supporting cast, first their early manager Brian Epstein and later George Martin, possibly THE best rock-pop producer ever.
4.  If you really think they wrote/sang/performed bubble gum, you've obviously never listened to "Revolver", many critics' pick for best pop album ever cut. It's filled with complexly arranged tunes that often spoke pithily to the cultural realities of the time.
5.  Also please recall that, as cliched as they seem to be 40 - 45 years later, along with "Revolver", "Rubber Soul" (their C&W album), "Sgt. Pepper" and "Abbey Road" were monstrously influential, an influence which reverberates in music that you actually like quite a lot.  However, you lack the historical referents to perceive that influence (i.e, you are ignorant twits).
6.  Finally, note that from the time Hendrix went to London in '65 to the time he died in '70 was only 75% of the longevity of the Beatles;  Janis Joplin's popular career was about the same; Kurt Cobain's even shorter.  Meanwhile, Barry Manilow has persisted for decades.  Obviously, much like penises, it's not the length but the quality of its employment that marks a good musical career.  I suspect you know little about either.
One of their weakest.

This song is soooo good it puts a spring in my step this autumn day...

 


This song is soooo good it puts a spring in my step this summer night...

 
 unclehud wrote:
 PA1749 wrote:
I expect to take A LOT of heat for this but....

No heat from me, bud.
 
No fault of yours, but you weren't around to feel the global effect they had on those living during the 1960's and 1970s — whether we were old or young back then — and that global optimism is a major reason they are still so widely accepted.
 
You're an English teacher, so I'm a bit surprised you don't appreciate the poetry that serves as most Beatles lyrics, but, hey, to each his own.
 
Here's how I would judge them, using your NKOTB comparison: in 50 more years, which do you think you'll hear on the radio, in elevators, on movie soundtracks, re-recorded by big-name music acts, or covered by honky-tonk bar bands?  ("They say it's your birthday, da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da ...")

 
I guess others had a different, literal interpretation of PA1749's comments than I did.  Mentioning that "even NKOTB lasted ten years" is only comparing the time difference in their existences, not making a material-based, or cultural comparison between the two musical acts.   He diminished the mention of NKOTB by preceding their name with the adverb "even", and prefaced his comments by stating his admiration for The Beatles' music.  Of course, many people want to make their own translations of someone else's words, ignore contexts, and devise illogical and specious conclusions (straw-men), which is part of the reason we have what passes for "journalism" and "politics" these days.
 I don't agree with his assertions, but he is entitled to them, and it does not make him a "moron" (as one response chides) to have his opinions.  Why so many people desire to take PA1749's opinions as a personal assault is more puzzling, but I guess we all can get defensive about our heroes or idols sometimes - myself included.  Still, doesn't anyone here have the slightest notion of reading comprehension?
 PA1749 wrote:
I expect to take A LOT of heat for this but....

Ok, I like the Beatles. I think they made some great music. But, I just don't understand the magnitude of the hype. 

1. Boy band from England makes it big doing teeny bopper bubble gum rock.
2. Boy band discovers drugs.
3. Boy band gets experimental and goes off the deep end.
4. Boy band falls apart.
5. The longevity of the entire band was only 7 years. (even New Kids on the Block was together for 10 years)
h8rhater wrote:

I'd give you A LOT of heat but, seriously, there is really nothing to say in the face of utter clueless-ness.  Your own words speak for you and OF you.
  PA, you're not alone. oh, except I think most of the JPG Ringo Jingo music sucks. I call it free thinking. These people are sheep. Especially this pathetic self h8ing h8r that h8s h8ers


half as nice!
Comparing The Beatles to NKOTB is like comparing Chuck Yeager to Flash Gordon. Yeah, they both went fast, but one looked a bit hokey (can you guess which one?)

This post apparently contained an image that was dragged into the post editor. Sorry, but any text contained in the post after this point has been lost.
"Like"

2cats wrote:

Bill, we need a "Like" button on here.

 




This song is soooo good it puts a spring in my step this spring evening...

 
 On_The_Beach wrote:

Hopefully there'll be an official release of the Let it Be movie on DVD soon, if only for the rooftop concert footage. As I understand it the versions that are floating around are well-packaged bootlegs or VHS to DVD transfers.
 
I have had the DVD for years.  Ordered off eBay but was shipped from Europe.
 drsteevo wrote:
Gotta agree with what Bill said when he played this a few weeks ago; It is probably John Lennon's best vocal performance in a Beatles song.

PA1749, I can't even respond to someone who would compare The Beatles to NKOTB. 

However, to respond to the other folks here, I don't think you had to grow up with the Beatles to appreciate them.  I was a small child when they broke up but I don't think they are over-rated in any way.
 
Bill, we need a "Like" button on here.

Gotta agree with what Bill said when he played this a few weeks ago; It is probably John Lennon's best vocal performance in a Beatles song.

PA1749, I can't even respond to someone who would compare The Beatles to NKOTB. 

However, to respond to the other folks here, I don't think you had to grow up with the Beatles to appreciate them.  I was a small child when they broke up but I don't think they are over-rated in any way.


 PA1749 wrote:
I expect to take A LOT of heat for this but....

No heat from me, bud.
 
No fault of yours, but you weren't around to feel the global effect they had on those living during the 1960's and 1970s — whether we were old or young back then — and that global optimism is a major reason they are still so widely accepted.
 
You're an English teacher, so I'm a bit surprised you don't appreciate the poetry that serves as most Beatles lyrics, but, hey, to each his own.
 
Here's how I would judge them, using your NKOTB comparison: in 50 more years, which do you think you'll hear on the radio, in elevators, on movie soundtracks, re-recorded by big-name music acts, or covered by honky-tonk bar bands?  ("They say it's your birthday, da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da ...")



Everybody in my hotel room loves this song...


 
 kaybee wrote:

{#Clap}  I must agree with much of what you say Rooney.

A lot of what the Beatles did was deceptively complex.  I tried singing along with this and it's really, really hard to sing this song!  Maybe that's why no-one else has covered it! {#Smile}
 
Paul's harmonies are relatively easy to sing.  But trying to sing like John is rough!

The other benefit to RP: wildlife photos
 kaybee wrote:

{#Clap}  I must agree with much of what you say Rooney.

A lot of what the Beatles did was deceptively complex.  I tried singing along with this and it's really, really hard to sing this song!  Maybe that's why no-one else has covered it! {#Smile}
 
...some can !




 Rooney wrote:


We were all young once, wanted peace and harmony and the best of everything for the world, but could not apply it to our own lives because you have to acquire wisdom as you grow older.  Forgiveness?  That comes again with time and with experience.  But to have vision when you're young is quite normal, and in the Beatles musical case, extraordinary.  To remain visionary as you grow older is the tricky part. ....The Beatles were the 60's.  They changed music. 
 
{#Clap}  I must agree with much of what you say Rooney.

A lot of what the Beatles did was deceptively complex.  I tried singing along with this and it's really, really hard to sing this song!  Maybe that's why no-one else has covered it! {#Smile}


There is no reason for EMI-Music to "downgrade" to arm themselves in disgust neter on the Web, claiming rights and censor these bits of video. It's a bad output, with poor results and that reflected negatively on their image, and should have other concerns more important than constantly teasing and pestering with the users of large YT channel. Then do not complain of rejection and boycott the products of your label. Lately, we've seen big monopolies fall to the ground. The music industry is changing, and should be reviewed the processes that lead to greed for obtaining high profits at the expense of exploration of art and artists, from the sale at exorbitant prices of their work. If the winds liberators and reformers that we see, for now, other parts of the world, reaching the heart of the Western-World, you will see how useless and ridiculous the gesture of censoring litle pieces of video.

—————————————————————————————————————————
Quote an excerpt from an interview of Francis Ford Coppola talks about copying, copyright and file sharing, recently given by the director to the site The 99%:

"I once found a little excerpt from Balzac. He speaks about a young writer who stole some of his prose. The thing that almost made me weep,  he said, "I was so happy when this young person took from me." Because that's what we want. We want you to take from us. We want you, at first, to steal from us, because you can't steal. You will take what we give you and you will put it in your own voice and that's how you will find your voice.

And that's how you begin. And then one day someone will steal from you. And Balzac said that in his book: It makes me so happy because it makes me immortal because I know that 200 years from now there will be people doing things that somehow I am part of. So the answer to your question is: Don't worry about whether it's appropriate to borrow or to take or do something like someone you admire because that's only the first step and you have to take the first step. 

We have to be very clever about those things. You have to remember that it's only a few hundred years, if that much, that artists are working with money. Artists never got money. Artists had a patron, either the leader of the state or the duke of Weimar or somewhere, or the church, the pope. Or they had another job. I have another job. I make films. No one tells me what to do. But I make the money in the wine industry. You work another job and get up at five in the morning and write your script.

This idea of Metallica or some rock n' roll singer being rich, that's not necessarily going to happen anymore. Because, as we enter into a new age, maybe art will be free. Maybe the students are right. They should be able to download music and movies. I'm going to be shot for saying this. But who said art has to cost money? And therefore, who says artists have to make money?

In the old days, 200 years ago, if you were a composer, the only way you could make money was to travel with the orchestra and be the conductor, because then you'd be paid as a musician. There was no recording. There were no record royalties. So I would say, "Try to disconnect the idea of cinema with the idea of making a living and money." Because there are ways around it."


https://the99percent.com/

 calypsus_1 wrote: 

 PA1749 wrote:
I expect to take A LOT of heat for this but....

Ok, I like the Beatles. I think they made some great music. But, I just don't understand the magnitude of the hype.

1. Boy band from England makes it big doing teeny bopper bubble gum rock.
2. Boy band discovers drugs.
3. Boy band gets experimental and goes off the deep end.
4. Boy band falls apart.
5. The longevity of the entire band was only 7 years. (even New Kids on the Block was together for 10 years)

The same thing happens today. Except when it happens today, the band dries up and blows away, Then is quickly replaced by another money generating act. Also the fact that they had so many opportunities to get together for a reunion and never did, makes me question the purity of their "we are all one", "come together" facade. They tried to teach the world to forgive but couldn't do it for each other?
 

Damn you did get a lot of heat for this. I think part of the reason they were so big is that they were the best at #1. and the "first" to do #2 (they were the first HUGE band to do it anyway). So all these people lost their innocence right along with the Beatles — all the way to the end of John Lennon. Also they were really really good at #3, as you can find them influencing new bands even today, 50 years later. Thankfully, the New Kids have no such legacy.

As far as longevity goes, NKOTB or whatever the kids called them for short put out 7 albums in their 10-year reign. The beatles put out 12 LPs over 7 years (with 7 Grammys in their belts). That earns you a rep.

Both bands are emblematic of a decade — it's just that a lot more happened during Beatles' decade.

One more thing to consider is that the individual members of the band each proved their individual talents for years following the breakup of the band. That had to help keep the Beatles fresh in peoples' minds for a long time.

To paraphrase Dennis Miller, which would you rather have, 7 Sammy Davis Jr. years or 10 Kenneth Starr years? Incidentally if you think Sammy Davis didn't have fun then you are hopelessly lost.
 PA1749 wrote:
I expect to take A LOT of heat for this but....

Ok, I like the Beatles. I think they made some great music. But, I just don't understand the magnitude of the hype.

1. Boy band from England makes it big doing teeny bopper bubble gum rock.
2. Boy band discovers drugs.
3. Boy band gets experimental and goes off the deep end.
4. Boy band falls apart.
5. The longevity of the entire band was only 7 years. (even New Kids on the Block was together for 10 years)

The same thing happens today. Except when it happens today, the band dries up and blows away, Then is quickly replaced by another money generating act. Also the fact that they had so many opportunities to get together for a reunion and never did, makes me question the purity of their "we are all one", "come together" facade. They tried to teach the world to forgive but couldn't do it for each other?
 

Wow, and I'll bet you honestly feel like you actually thought the whole thing out, huh?

..BTW, I think it's a good bet they probably WOULD have had a reunion if not for a lunatic looking for his 15 minutes....moron...
 On_The_Beach wrote:

Hopefully there'll be an official release of the Let it Be movie on DVD soon, if only for the rooftop concert footage. As I understand it the versions that are floating around are well-packaged bootlegs or VHS to DVD transfers.

 
It's on Netflix.

 PA1749 wrote:
I expect to take A LOT of heat for this but....

Ok, I like the Beatles. I think they made some great music. But, I just don't understand the magnitude of the hype.

1. Boy band from England makes it big doing teeny bopper bubble gum rock.
2. Boy band discovers drugs.
3. Boy band gets experimental and goes off the deep end.
4. Boy band falls apart.
5. The longevity of the entire band was only 7 years. (even New Kids on the Block was together for 10 years)

The same thing happens today. Except when it happens today, the band dries up and blows away, Then is quickly replaced by another money generating act. Also the fact that they had so many opportunities to get together for a reunion and never did, makes me question the purity of their "we are all one", "come together" facade. They tried to teach the world to forgive but couldn't do it for each other?
 
I'd give you A LOT of heat but, seriously, there is really nothing to say in the face of utter clueless-ness.  Your own words speak for you and OF you.


 PA1749 wrote:
I expect to take A LOT of heat for this but....

Ok, I like the Beatles. I think they made some great music. But, I just don't understand the magnitude of the hype.

1. Boy band from England makes it big doing teeny bopper bubble gum rock.
2. Boy band discovers drugs.
3. Boy band gets experimental and goes off the deep end.
4. Boy band falls apart.
5. The longevity of the entire band was only 7 years. (even New Kids on the Block was together for 10 years)

The same thing happens today. Except when it happens today, the band dries up and blows away, Then is quickly replaced by another money generating act. Also the fact that they had so many opportunities to get together for a reunion and never did, makes me question the purity of their "we are all one", "come together" facade. They tried to teach the world to forgive but couldn't do it for each other?
 

You're right.  You don't understand.  The Beatles had a short, memorable and creative seven years. That you can even mention them in the same breath as New Schmucks on the Block is astounding.  Nearly every musician I know, or knew relishes the idea of playing Beatle music. 

We were all young once, wanted peace and harmony and the best of everything for the world, but could not apply it to our own lives because you have to acquire wisdom as you grow older.  Forgiveness?  That comes again with time and with experience.  But to have vision when you're young is quite normal, and in the Beatles musical case, extraordinary.  To remain visionary as you grow older is the tricky part.  Are you saying the Beatles were hypocrites, then?  But aren't we all at  18 - 35? Just shrugging my shoulders here.  To this day, I've yet to know a group as prolific and with as much creativity in one catalog
.  Nobody comes close, except Stevie Wonder, or Buddy Holly.  But they were the 50's, 70's and 80's.  The Beatles were the 60's.  They changed music. 

I expect to take A LOT of heat for this but....

Ok, I like the Beatles. I think they made some great music. But, I just don't understand the magnitude of the hype.

1. Boy band from England makes it big doing teeny bopper bubble gum rock.
2. Boy band discovers drugs.
3. Boy band gets experimental and goes off the deep end.
4. Boy band falls apart.
5. The longevity of the entire band was only 7 years. (even New Kids on the Block was together for 10 years)

The same thing happens today. Except when it happens today, the band dries up and blows away, Then is quickly replaced by another money generating act. Also the fact that they had so many opportunities to get together for a reunion and never did, makes me question the purity of their "we are all one", "come together" facade. They tried to teach the world to forgive but couldn't do it for each other?


Oh. It's them?
One of the most straightforward and rather pedestrian songs ever recorded by the Beatles.  But still a 9 because their least is still better than the best of most.

 parrothead wrote:


I would love that too. However, I once heard in an interview with McCartney that a DVD release would not be coming any time soon if ever. The powers to be that control the catalog are not interested in a release for what ever the reason. They sure don't need the money.
 

paul doesn't want anyone to see him and george arguing about the guitar solo on "let it be" - or see that he had become an intractable despot trying to lord over john and george who had no interest in the beatles anymore 
 On_The_Beach wrote:

Hopefully there'll be an official release of the Let it Be movie on DVD soon, if only for the rooftop concert footage. As I understand it the versions that are floating around are well-packaged bootlegs or VHS to DVD transfers.

 

I would love that too. However, I once heard in an interview with McCartney that a DVD release would not be coming any time soon if ever. The powers to be that control the catalog are not interested in a release for what ever the reason. They sure don't need the money.
 parttime wrote:
Anyone ever hear a cover of this, I feel this is one of there best blue's songs
 

Your question intrigued me, so I went to AllMusic and checked.  Answer, No.  No other artist has ever covered this.
 Tim_in_N_FL wrote:
Perhaps my FAVORITE Beatles release.  I know this CD front to back and just love to put it on when I'm working (writing).
Thanks Bill! {#Dance}
 
I think if one could pick a favorite Beatles tune ... this might be it...{#Jump}

 a_genuine_find wrote: 
that was written 8/18/09

wow!  it's like deja vu all over again...........................that's some endless loop, bill!   {#Tongue}
 sirdroseph wrote:


I think it is one of their top 5 albums (prolly 5). I have always loved it!
 
Not me, although this and Dig It are favorite tracks from this release.


Aaaaaand so to bed
 copymonkey wrote:
I know a lot of people aren't fans of this record, but I've always loved it. It's loose, rockin' and has some real soul that a lot of their more heavily produced efforts lacked. Aside from a few unnecessary Spector flourishes—it's a pretty awesome testament to all of the lads abilities.

 

I think it is one of their top 5 albums (prolly 5). I have always loved it!
 parttime wrote:
Anyone ever hear a cover of this, I feel this is one of there best blue's songs
 

Yes I have. It was a band that I was in, I was one of the guitar players and the song sounded like shit.


This song is soooo good for the ears...



Anyone ever hear a cover of this, I feel this is one of there best blue's songs
 ThePoose wrote:
Boys: You passed the audition. You are now a Wii game.
 

AHhahahaaa {#Lol} !
Boys: You passed the audition. You are now a Wii game.
I know a lot of people aren't fans of this record, but I've always loved it. It's loose, rockin' and has some real soul that a lot of their more heavily produced efforts lacked. Aside from a few unnecessary Spector flourishes—it's a pretty awesome testament to all of the lads abilities.

Wow, remastered version on AAC - just remarkable. I feel like I'm lying on the floor of my bedroom with the speakers of my stereo system on either side of my head once again, just like I did when I was 15.
 calypsus_1 wrote: 
Hopefully there'll be an official release of the Let it Be movie on DVD soon, if only for the rooftop concert footage. As I understand it the versions that are floating around are well-packaged bootlegs or VHS to DVD transfers.

 calypsus_1 wrote: 
Totally unbelievable that they just laid that one down like that.
PS. I so disagree with the naysayers of this tune...Those four had such a full sound sound, please get over yourselves.


{#Mrgreen}


"I Dig A Pony" (1969)  
 keller1 wrote:
If this wasn't The Beatles you'd never hear it. That would be fine with me.

 
Actually, the Rheostatics make excellent use of this song in the chorus of a tune on Whale Music, so I can say I've 'sort of' heard this song, but never by The Beatles.  To be honest, I had no idea they'd ripped this off until this moment.

i love love love this. thank you!
 gjeeg wrote:
You can radiate everything your are.
 
I left a tuna fish sandwich on a radiator one time. 
 On_The_Beach wrote:

I agree, and I would suggest that their 1st or 2nd solo albums were their best; George with "All Things Must Pass" (easily his best album and arguable the best by any of the Beatles), John with "Imagine", Paul with "McCartney" & Ringo with "Ringo". John and Paul both produced some good work later in their careers but nothing to compare with the Beatles or these early solo albums.
 
Well, I'm going to disagree. George's Cloud Nine and Brainwashed, as well as his work with the Wilburys, were/are outstanding recordings. Similarly, Ringo's Ringorama and Choose Love plus the various incarnations of his All-Starr Band are excellent. I'm still not a fan of Sir Paul's output after McCartney and Ram.



love it...


 ThePoose wrote:
John's best work was John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band.
You cannot listen to that and not feel the hair stand up on your neck.
It was a heartbreaking gutslammer.
 
Right. Not exactly "easy listening", which is (part of the reason) why it was great.



always nice to hear from the best...


 japanmoran wrote:
I was conceived to this album.
 

Then your mother laboured under a misconception.
 On_The_Beach wrote:

I agree, and I would suggest that their 1st or 2nd solo albums were their best; George with "All Things Must Pass" (easily his best album and arguable the best by any of the Beatles), John with "Imagine", Paul with "McCartney" & Ringo with "Ringo". John and Paul both produced some good work later in their careers but nothing to compare with the Beatles or these early solo albums.
 
John's best work was John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band.
You cannot listen to that and not feel the hair stand up on your neck.
It was a heartbreaking gutslammer.

 macadavy wrote:

And I agree with you.
Abbey Road is a feast -
Let It Be is mostly leftovers, IMHO.
 

Leftovers that take one back to one's roots—which is always a good thing from time to time.

Perhaps my FAVORITE Beatles release.  I know this CD front to back and just love to put it on when I'm working (writing).
Thanks Bill! {#Dance}


I really dig this song...


 japanmoran wrote:
I was conceived to this album.
 
"I dig a Pygmy by Charles Hawtrey and the Deaf Aids... Phase One in which Doris gets her oats." {#Propeller}

You can radiate everything your are.
40,000 songs in the RP library, and we get this, which is a throwaway if there ever was one.

It's not like the Fabs need the royalties.
eskles wrote:
Don't think I agree, and I was there. This song and album were proof to me that Lennon and all were quite correct in thinking that they were done. There were many at the time who grew tired of this after a few listenings. The best band of all time, but as George said, all things must pass. By extension, I don't think there's a single artist who has reached a peak and continually stayed there for the remainder of their artistic career. Certainly, none of the Beatles maintained those lofty earlier standards in their solo careers, although they recorded many classic songs.
And I agree with you. Abbey Road is a feast - Let It Be is mostly leftovers, IMHO.
There is no such thing as too much Beatles. P.S. My wedding march was Something from Abbey Road. :cheers:
siandbeth wrote:
Crickets chirping
:high-five:
For the most part I liked it when John experimented, but this was a dud. Sorry.
I love this song!! Such a great passionate vocal by John in the chorus. Great harmonies. Great guitar parts. Totally kickass.
I liked this song more before my 2-year old fell in love with this album and I had to listen to it every day. Day after day after day. Still, it's better than Barney. Wow, that's the most backhanded compliment I've ever given a song.
dot digs a puny, cheap beer. reminds steve this is live. dot.
Totally satisfying. Thank you.
6:39 am - Beatles - Dig A Pony 6:35 am - Cowboy Junkies - A Horse in the Country I like this. :mrgreen:
Play those keys funky, Billy. RIP.
eskles wrote:
. . . I don't think there's a single artist who has reached a peak and continually stayed there for the remainder of their artistic career. Certainly, none of the Beatles maintained those lofty earlier standards in their solo careers, although they recorded many classic songs.
I agree, and I would suggest that their 1st or 2nd solo albums were their best; George with "All Things Must Pass" (easily his best album and arguable the best by any of the Beatles), John with "Imagine", Paul with "McCartney" & Ringo with "Ringo". John and Paul both produced some good work later in their careers but nothing to compare with the Beatles or these early solo albums.
UltraNurd wrote:
my dad still keeps his Beatles record collection, but those are Not For Playing.
Shame on him...they are to be played, he's denying them the opportunity to fulfill their purpose in this world.
keller1 wrote:
Did you study at the Dick Cheney Debating School? "Belittle your opponent".
I'm sorry for the comment. It was just to easy that I had too. I feel bad now.
milehighYinzer wrote:
Taco Bell is probably your employer......
Did you study at the Dick Cheney Debating School? "Belittle your opponent".
keller1 wrote:
If this wasn't The Beatles you'd never hear it. That would be fine with me.
Taco Bell is probably your employer......
tony620d wrote:
anyone else thinks RP plays too much beatles??
Crickets chirping
Thank God for RP. How come the Beatles' best songs are almost always NOT their #1s?
haha, 12 people rated this a 1. One thing the Internet has taught me is there are a lot of weirdos with absolutely no music appreciation out there.
If this wasn't The Beatles you'd never hear it. That would be fine with me.
One of my all time favorite Beatles songs. Well one of my all time favorite songs for that matter.
woozurdaddy wrote:
You had to be there. An 8 for me. And I think Elenor Rigby would have been a 2 if done by, say, Van Halen or Iron & Wine...see the point?
Don't think I agree, and I was there. This song and album were proof to me that Lennon and all were quite correct in thinking that they were done. There were many at the time who grew tired of this after a few listenings. The best band of all time, but as George said, all things must pass. By extension, I don't think there's a single artist who has reached a peak and continually stayed there for the remainder of their artistic career. Certainly, none of the Beatles maintained those lofty earlier standards in their solo careers, although they recorded many classic songs.
JerseeeGirl wrote:
Great song, great record. I used to have this record and haven't heard this song in ages.
This was our family's first CD; my dad still keeps his Beatles record collection, but those are Not For Playing.
You know, I've always wanted to hear the non-existent "Dig a Pygmy", as mentioned in the background during one of the track interstitials.
Good stuff. :clap:
Great song, great record. I used to have this record and haven't heard this song in ages.
japanmoran wrote:
I was conceived to this album.
I am so happy that my parents have never shared this kind of information with me. :eek:
japanmoran wrote:
I was conceived to this album.
:lol: I hope that doesn't bother you as much as my son is bothered by being conceived after a Journey concert!
MickMan wrote:
This album brings me back to Christmas time back in about '76 when I discovered my brother's copy of Let it Be. My favorite Beatles Album. I have it here at work and will listen to it shortly.
So you have a record player or an 8-track at your office? Cool. :sunny:
I was conceived to this album.
This album brings me back to Christmas time back in about '76 when I discovered my brother's copy of Let it Be. My favorite Beatles Album. I have it here at work and will listen to it shortly. HAPPY HOLIDAYS !!!!!!!!!!
please, MORE beatles!
tony620d wrote:
anyone else thinks RP plays too much beatles??
? anyone ? anyone at all ? ? Guess Not ! Roll a Stoney John... !
QueenLucia wrote:
Don't think of it as OLD--just as having had more time to enjoy great music like this!
Exactly! I am glad I was growing up when this was all taking place. What an influence on my life!
cattgirl813 wrote:
Make that two people. I find it fascinating how they changed and evolved musically over the life of their careers together and apart.
Damn shame you've never heard let it all the way through. It's a classic. Bill, although I love the stuff from Love. It's nice to hear the originals. Thank You
anyone else thinks RP plays too much beatles??
Gawrsh! I had no idea that was the name of this song. Love John.
laozilover wrote:
Makes me feel old.... :confused:
Don't think of it as OLD--just as having had more time to enjoy great music like this!
This is the kind of Beatles I really dig. The kind my parents never played when I was a kid. Weird how that works, but there ya have it.
olsaltybastard wrote:
This is pretty good. Never heard it before, so I'm not sick of it.
Make that two people. I find it fascinating how they changed and evolved musically over the life of their careers together and apart.
Dang! :eek: Sometimes hearing an old Beatles number takes me right back. This was one such time. :biggrin: Makes me feel old.... :confused:
Always happy to hear John.