# “Sergeant Pepper was rubbish.” Keith Richards.



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/news/sgt-pepper-beatles-was-rubbish-says-keith-richards/

For my part he's right. The Beatles traded the vibrancy they had as a live act, for 6 months in the Studio. Since then many lesser talents have followed them in that self indulgence and popular music has yet to recover.

The beginning of the end. Technology killed the radio stars.

PS Keith and I are serious about this.

She's leaving Home is a fine song (with a rather twee arrangement) and (nearly all of) the rest is awful.


----------



## Dr Johnson (Jun 26, 2015)

I have never thought it was all it was cracked up to be. 

I used to tease a friend of mine (a Beatles fanatic) that it was the most overrated album of all time.

I much prefer Revolver and The White Album.

I do like Joe Cocker's version of A Little Help From My Friends.


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

Dr Johnson said:


> I do like Joe Cocker's version of A Little Help From My Friends.


MMM Joe Cocker not sure about him but...

For my lifetime popular music has been all about 4/4. I love the story that Cocker was sitting "on the throne in the smallest room", when he wondered how it would sound in 3/4. Yes his version is actually a Waltz! A big improvement.


----------



## Dr Johnson (Jun 26, 2015)

^^
I hadn't heard that tale about Cocker on the bog.

His version also spawned a marvellous spoof by Bill Oddie.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Rock is so old fashioned and antiquated. It's hard to get excited about any of it. My praise is reserved for the record labels and marketing geniuses who managed to sell cow dung to the public and get them hooked on it—BRAVO.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

A great, seminal album.
A classic.


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

Itullian said:


> A great, seminal album.
> A classic.


Would you care to elaborate?

I agree it was seminal but not in a good way. Would 'When I'm 64' or 'within you..' have made the cut on Help or Revolver? Take away the so cool story about tripping and even Lennon admits L>S>D> was about a kids drawing. Yawn.

My theory is they knew they had a bunch of s+++ songs (Lovely Rita in anyone's top 10?) and they repeated the Title song thus making it a concept album (no it doesn't)and packaged them aurally more expensively than anyone had afforded before. Most ears have never heard through the production. Something that is ever more true of popular MUSIC.

I mean it man. It prefigured the end of popular MUSIC.


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

Just checked the track list (it's been a while)

Using my test of would any these songs have made it onto Revolver?

Sergeant Pepper 
Getting Better
Fixing a Hole
Good Morning

I conclude no

That leaves Mr Kite which I can take or leave and the quite interesting Day in the Life. But even Day is hugely overrated and was just a studio production number. Please no one on a Classical Music Forum say it's great music!

Something good to say about about Sergeant Pepper? Well none of the songs are as abysmal as Yellow Submarine or Give Pearce a Chance.:devil:


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

I also prefer Revolver to Sgt. Pepper's, but I don't agree with Keef or the OP (nor with Mr. Sunshine above).

It's not like the Stones didn't use the studio. Sometimes they used technology to create a raw, unpolished, "live" sound.



Belowpar said:


> That leaves Mr Kite which I can take or leave and the quite interesting Day in the Life. But even Day is hugely overrated and was just a studio production no. Please no one on a Classical Music Forum say it's great music.


Please don't tell us what we can and cannot say.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Morimur said:


> Rock is so old fashioned and antiquated. It's hard to get excited about any of it.


Wow, I can't believe you said that!

It's true, but I can't believe you said that.

I also can't believe somebody dares to criticize the Beatles. I gave similar sentiments to Mr. Richard's a couple weeks ago to a pompous rock twit, and I got my eyebrows singed. I feel strangely validated.


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

GreenMamba said:


> Please don't tell us what we can and cannot say.


It's a figure of speech. I'm daring you to make the argument...

Mr Sunshine. Like it.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Belowpar said:


> It's a figure of speech. I'm daring you to make the argument...
> 
> Mr Sunshine. Like it.


Just to clarify, you're not Mr Sunshine. It takes many posts to earn that title.

Sgt. Pepper's is great, IMO. It still has some fresh pop\rock tunes (e.g., Getting Better), but it goes well beyond that. Good Morning is, for me, one of the great underrated Beatle songs. A Day in the Life is haunting. You want 3/4, you get a little bit in Mr Kite. Even its "bad" songs (Within You Without You, When I'm 64) add variety to the album and fill a role. John's lyrics in particular are much better than in the past.

I generally don't go in for overly "arty" rock (I dislike Prog), but I think SP is on the right side of the line.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Dr Johnson said:


> I much prefer Revolver and The White Album.


Me too, but SP is still a great album, Keith Richards is wrong and the Beatles were better than the Stones.


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

GreenMamba said:


> Just to clarify, you're not Mr Sunshine. It takes many posts to earn that title.
> 
> Sgt. Pepper's is great, IMO. It still has some fresh pop\rock tunes (e.g., Getting Better), but it goes well beyond that. Good Morning is, for me, one of the great underrated Beatle songs. A Day in the Life is haunting. You want 3/4, you get a little bit in Mr Kite. Even its "bad" songs (Within You Without You, When I'm 64) add variety to the album and fill a role. John's lyrics in particular are much better than in the past.
> 
> I generally don't go in for overly "arty" rock (I dislike Prog), but I think SP is on the right side of the line.


Question can "one of the greatest albums ever" carry even 2 "bad" songs out of 12?


----------



## mmsbls (Mar 6, 2011)

I like the album although admittedly less than many other Beatles albums.



Belowpar said:


> She's leaving Home is a fine song (with a rather twee arrangement) and (nearly all of) the rest is awful.


OK so you think the album is overrated and go further to say that most of the songs are awful. As with all music (including Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, etc.), you could find people who agree with you. The problem is that it's one of the highest selling albums of all time and has gotten a lot of high critical acclaim. According to Wikipedia:

In 2003 it was one of 50 recordings chosen by the Library of Congress to be added to the National Recording Registry, honoring the work as "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant"

In 2003 Rolling Stone placed it at number one in their list of the 500 Greatest Albums of All Time, describing it as "the pinnacle of the Beatles' eight years as recording artists".

In 2006 it was chosen by Time as one of the 100 best albums of all time.

Now as in other threads disparaging music, you could argue that all the 30 million who bought the album as well as all those who praise it are just responding to the hype and not the music. That's an extremely hard argument to make. But, OK you don't like it. Fine.


----------



## Dr Johnson (Jun 26, 2015)

isorhythm said:


> Me too, but SP is still a great album, Keith Richards is wrong and the Beatles were better than the Stones.


I don't agree with Richards' verdict either. I just think it is overrated compared to their other work.


----------



## Dr Johnson (Jun 26, 2015)

mmsbls said:


> I like the album although admittedly less than many other Beatles albums.
> 
> OK so you think the album is overrated and go further to say that most of the songs are awful. As with all music (including Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, etc.), you could find people who agree with you. The problem is that it's one of the highest selling albums of all time and has gotten a lot of high critical acclaim. According to Wikipedia:
> 
> ...


God forbid that we get into another popularity vs quality wrangle!


----------



## bharbeke (Mar 4, 2013)

Sergeant Pepper is an album that I like a few songs of (title tracks, With a Little Help From My Friends, A Day in the Life), but I did not keep the album after purchasing the Beatles catalogue in 2009. Not too much is terrible, but not much is great, either.

Please Please Me and Help! are my favorite Beatles albums.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Belowpar said:


> Question can "one of the greatest albums ever" carry even 2 "bad" songs out of 12?


Sure, especially given I put "bad" in quotes. I don't think they are bad - I never skip past them - though i'd never listen to them outside the context of the album. I also tend to like "flawed masterpieces."


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I remember when Sgt. Pepper came out, Time Magazine and another one which I can't remember reviewed it. I thought it was odd that one magazine said She Is Leaving Home was one of the best songs on the album, and the other magazine said it was the worst. Even then people couldn't agree.


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

mmsbls said:


> Now as in other threads disparaging music, you could argue that all the 30 million who bought the album as well as all those who praise it are just responding to the hype and not the music. That's an extremely hard argument to make. But, OK you don't like it. Fine.


Times change and popularity has never been top of the qualites I look for

This is also from wiki
"Giacomo Meyerbeer[n 1] (born Jacob Liebmann Beer; 5 September 1791 - 2 May 1864) was a German opera composer of Jewish birth who has been described as perhaps the most successful stage composer of the nineteenth century"

That's right more successful than Offenbach, Verdi and Wagner, and who's to say in that in another 100 years he won't once again be regarded as more 'successful' than them.

I'm sorry I didn't say I didn't like St Pepper. I made a case for it being poor music and that if you listen carefully you'll see it was in the vanguard of production techniques that have led to the terrible sterility of modern popular music. Or as 'Keef' has it "Rubbish".

Somone said there were good lyrics by John Lennon - please point to some?

This has caused me to reflect. I'm in my mid 50's now and was about 7 when the following was relaeased but I'm not to old to remember the feelings these lyrics capture perfectly. That spring in your heart I felt the morning after I met S. or C.

It's not a famous Beetle song but its from when John Lennon had something interesting to say. I'm not totally against the Beatles, once they were briliant.

I've just seen a face
I can't forget the time or place
Where we just met
She's just the girl for me
And I want all the world to see
We've met, mmm-mmm-mmm-m'mmm-mmm

Had it been another day
I might have looked the other way
And I'd have never been aware
But as it is I'll dream of her
Tonight, di-di-di-di'n'di

Falling, yes I am falling
And she keeps calling
Me back again

I have never known
The like of this, I've been alone
And I have missed things
And kept out of sight
But other girls were never quite
Like this, da-da-n'da-da'n'da

Falling, yes I am falling
And she keeps calling
Me back again

Falling, yes I am falling
And she keeps calling
Me back again


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

SP is certainly one of my all-time favorite rock/pop albums. I'm remembering back to when it was first released and I was a teenager. I had never heard anything like it before and found it amazing in its impact on me and everyone else I knew at the time. 

Belowpar is treating the album as just a collection of songs. It was much more than that to me. Of course, it's decades later and I listen to very little rock/pop anymore. Regardless, SP was a product of its time; if you were not there, you can't get a handle on its effect on fans.


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

Sgt Pepper is an album I've played hundreds of times and still enjoy, and still find much to admire, and would be quite happy to have it put on again if someone requested it right now, and would doubtless think it still sounded fresh.

I personally feel it takes a very strong album to sustain that much play and scrutiny with out going stale or becoming annoying, even if as GreenMamba says there might be a couple of tracks I would never listen to outside the context of the album.


Should we perhaps turn the spotlight back on Keef? I like plenty of Stones albums, but they all have at least a couple of dud tracks, and many others have only a couple of non-duds.

I'm voting "professional jealousy"


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I've long felt that Revolver was, as an album, superior to Sgt Pepper. But that doesn't make SP chopped liver!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Their Satanic Majesties Request is rubbish.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

SimonNZ said:


> Should we perhaps turn the spotlight back on Keef? I like plenty of Stones albums, but they all have at least a couple of dud tracks, and many others have only a couple of non-duds.
> 
> I'm voting "professional jealousy"


I like the Stones, but they may hold the record for most crap songs all time.


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

starthrower said:


> Their Satanic Majesties Request is rubbish.


A fuller quote from the well informed critic K Richards

"Some people think Sgt. Pepper is a genius album, but I think it's a mishmash of rubbish, kind of like Satanic Majesties."


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

Belowpar said:


> A fuller quote from t*he well informed critic K Richards*
> 
> "Some people think Sgt. Pepper is a genius album, but I think it's a mishmash of rubbish, kind of like Satanic Majesties."


This makes it sound like this is all tongue-in-cheek and you don't believe it yourself.

Kind of like...? Nope, nothing like. I believe they had the same cover designer, and that's where the similarity ends.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

I voted 'Sergeant Who?'
Of course, I know the name, but don't remember ever listening to the album.

I was into the Beatles' early stuff between the ages of twelve and fourteen. To my adolescent mind, they just became weirder and weirder, and when they started chortling about eggmen, they lost me! 

I never tried Sergeant Pepper, but heard lots of people rave about it. So a mean part of my mind is overjoyed to hear it described as 'rubbish'.

But I don't expect that it is. What would a conventional law-abiding grammar school girl with a crush on Paul McCartney have known about music?!?


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Of course, there have been many, many better albums since SP. However, at the time of its release it was a game changer, and certainly one of the best ever released up to then.


----------



## nikola (Sep 7, 2012)

Far from rubbish, but certainly not my favorite Beatles album. My favorite albums are Rubber Soul, Revolver, Magical Mystery Tour and White Album. Abbey Road and Let It Be are also very good. 
SGT. Pepper is different, but still very good album.
I don't care much for albums prior to Rubber Soul. 
I also prefer Joe Cocker's version of 'Friends'.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

I think Keith was honest from his perspective. He a straight forward blues/rock man. Pepper's is not his style. Had the Stones continued in the direction of their satanic majesties request he may have well left the band.

Arrogance? Sure. Like most people he feels the style he prefers has some sort of extra value over other styles.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Seems ironic Keef rubbishing Pepper bearing in mind the Stones' own epic fail with their psychedelic Satanic Majesties album...for which he wrote most of the music, presumably.

Sgt. Pepper is - ahem - stuffed with too much multi-tracking in places but that's because the group could afford to take advantage of the then state-of-the-art technology at Abbey Road by block-booking one of the studios for as long as the liked and also having the luxury of knowing they wouldn't have to do the songs live - despite the fact that it is somewhat overblown I'd still put it in the top three of their albums along with the White Album and Revolver.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

We told the kids the psychedelic movement was rubbish back in '68.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

^
^

WOiIftM is one of rock's great raspberries - someone had to provide an antidote to all that cloying 'hello sky, hello trees' crAp and I'm glad it was the Mothers.

Although I feel I have to say that with the exception of Ian Underwood this has got to be one of the ugliest bands ever.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

elgars ghost said:


> ^
> ^
> 
> WOiIftM is one of rock's great raspberries - someone had to provide an antidote to all that cloying 'hello sky, hello trees' crAp and I'm glad it was the Mothers.


Yeah, then there's the Mothers.

I'm like Ingelou; I didn't like it when the Beatles got crazy. But later when I got more self-aware, I guess my perspective on Sergeant Pepper was spoiled because Freak Out had come out a year before that, containing everything from doo-*** to Edgard Varese. It was too weird for the mainstream, but that was one of those cases where, as they say, "The mind, once stretched by a new idea, never returns to its original dimensions."


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

SP is light pop, but it is one of my top three favourite Beatles albums (MMT and WA are the other two). YS deserves a mention, too!


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

The Mothers weren't any uglier than the Stones. As Zappa said to the audience (on the Tinseltown Rebellion album) "I've got a message for all of you beautiful people out there. There's more of us ugly motherf#ckers than you, so watch out!"


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Beefheart and the Velvet Underground were much, _much_ better acts than the Beatles and Stones.


----------



## nikola (Sep 7, 2012)

Velvet Underground better than The Beatles!? Maybe in some parallel universe they are.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

While I am not a Beatles fan, I have listened to the Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band album and recognize it as a masterful work.


----------



## MrTortoise (Dec 25, 2008)

Just putting in my 2 cents. Sgt. Peppers is a masterpiece of rock/pop with a greater density of musical ideas and musicianship that most albums of that era. It paved the way for so much of the great rock that I enjoy.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Belowpar said:


> Just checked the track list (it's been a while)
> 
> Using my test of would any these songs have made it onto Revolver?
> 
> ...


One of the greatest albums ever. The above quote is pure drivel


----------



## Dr Johnson (Jun 26, 2015)

I shall be giving this a listen later.


----------



## SimonNZ (Jul 12, 2012)

^unfortunately that one was a bit of a step backwards to mere novelty, after their superb and remarkably respectful and inventive album of reworkings of Radiohead's OK Computer:


----------



## Dr Johnson (Jun 26, 2015)

SimonNZ said:


> ^unfortunately that one was a bit of a step backwards to mere novelty, after their superb and remarkably respectful and inventive album of reworkings of Radiohead's OK Computer:


I only know Dub Side Of The Moon. But there is always time to check out more.

Sometimes these japes work, sometimes they don't.

I liked Dread Zeppelin's first album but inevitably the joke wears thin by the second.


----------



## Don Fatale (Aug 31, 2009)

Easy for people to judge 48 year later. To me it deserves its iconic status when you look at what proceeded it. However the big problem with the latter Beatles output is that while the music and production was often pioneering, the lyrics were mostly vacuous, neither relatable or poetic, they were more likely just silly... because they were stoned.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

No, it's not rubbish. Within you without you...wow! It's getting Better...Wow! Lucy In the Sky...wow! A Day in the Life...Wow!


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

nikola said:


> Velvet Underground better than The Beatles!? Maybe in some parallel universe they are.


Yes, in that dark parallel universe that morimur inhabits...


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I always preferred Revolver and Magical Mystery Tour, I must admit. There's a true stereo reconstruction of I Am the Walrus on the "Love" CD. Amazing!


----------



## samsondale (Nov 22, 2013)

Belowpar said:


> This has caused me to reflect. I'm in my mid 50's now and was about 7 when the following was relaeased but I'm not to old to remember the feelings these lyrics capture perfectly. That spring in your heart I felt the morning after I met S. or C.
> 
> It's not a famous Beetle song but its from when John Lennon had something interesting to say. I'm not totally against the Beatles, once they were briliant.
> 
> ...


One of my favorite songs - great harmony singing by John and Paul (channeling Phil and Don?) - but I think Paul wrote it.


----------



## Guest (Sep 23, 2015)

Bulldog said:


> SP is certainly one of my all-time favorite rock/pop albums. I'm remembering back to when it was first released and I was a teenager. I had never heard anything like it before and found it amazing in its impact on me and everyone else I knew at the time.
> 
> Belowpar is treating the album as just a collection of songs. It was much more than that to me. Of course, it's decades later and I listen to very little rock/pop anymore. Regardless, SP was a product of its time; if you were not there, you can't get a handle on its effect on fans.


Everything that others say about SP is a "received opinion". That is to say, whether it is, in fact, generally held to be great or not, it's an opinion held by someone else first.

Alas, I was not old enough to make a judgement for myself about whether SP was innovative, ground-breaking, the best that The Beatles had done to that point, a cultural landmark, a high-point in the evolution of youth culture...etc...etc...

Or any of the opposites - overrated, twee, self-indulgent...etc.

What I can say is that in my family (Mum, Dad, Gran, six children and a brother-in-law) we were all Beatles mad. I remember sitting in the car while my Dad nipped into the shop to pick up a copy of Please Please Me for Mum's birthday (I was about 4). I remember my oldest brother bring SP home and we all listened to it (I was about 7) and it certainly became a cultural landmark in our house.

Clearly, I fell for the family hype - not anyone else's - and I was trapped into loving it ever since. For me, it is a great album, and even at 7, I knew it didn't sound like _She Loves You_ - also a ground-breaker for pop. It was magical and mysterious.

I don't really care what Keith Richard thought about it.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

In a recent interview Richards also said he has always thought of bands like Metallica and Black Sabbath as "jokes", and offered his opinion on rap - "So many words, so little to say."

Richards - the Boulez of popular music? :lol:


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Have to agree with Millions on the excellence of Revolver. Not to sell Sgt Pepper short of course...


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Recently re-heard the Sgt. Pepper album and can´t say that I was actually enthralled by the music itself. It´s importance is more of a culturally-conceptual sort, I think.


----------



## Blake (Nov 6, 2013)

Nah, not rubbish. But hey, opinions... they vary. And I wouldn't think any less of someone who may opine on its apparent staleness. 

Luckily, I'm not convinced that liking certain art is a prerequisite for delight. You've got to find what digs you.


----------



## acitak 7 (Jun 26, 2016)

*sgt pepper*

that's a big legacy to completly ruin pop music forever, but then the beatles only do big. I think maybe the Rutles back catalogue is superior to the stones, just an opinion


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2016)

I own nothing by the Beatles or the Stones so why am I even posting in this thread?


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Professional Jealousy


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

dogen said:


> I own nothing by the Beatles or the Stones so why am I even posting in this thread?


I do neither (except for one 45 rpm EP by the Stones I don't remember buying).


----------



## Guest (Jul 10, 2016)

Casebearer said:


> I do neither (except for one 45 rpm EP by the Stones I don't remember buying).


Yeah if I was forced to own something, it would be an early Stones album.


----------



## ldiat (Jan 27, 2016)

i guess we all forget the "story" about these albums at the time MMT, WHITE, etc


----------



## Guest (Jul 10, 2016)

ldiat said:


> i guess we all forget the "story" about these albums at the time MMT, WHITE, etc


Eh ?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

dogen said:


> Yeah if I was forced to own something, it would be an early Stones album.


This one:


----------



## ldiat (Jan 27, 2016)

MacLeod said:


> Eh ?


remember those albums had the clues that Paul was dead. not true but the clues were in the music and and on the covers/inside the albums. look at "abby road". they are walking across the road and paul is out of step and barefoot, how one is buried in italy or some where. and the car to the left plate reads IF 28 or if he was alive he would b 28. there are more


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

At the end of one song -- Strawberry Fields Forever? -- during the fadeout a slowed-down voice can be heard to say, "I buried Paul." Well, with a bit of imagination it can be heard. One of the Beatles pointed out that the words were actually, "I'm very bored."

Somebody started the story that if you rubbed Vaseline on the Abbey Road cover, the image of Paul would disappear. A lot of people ruined their album covers.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I remember another 'Paul is dead' clue: the scene in Magical Mystery Tour where the band descend the stairs in white evening dress - three of them are sporting red flowers whereas Paul's seems to be black. It was all b****cks but I still found it good fun.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Sergeant Pepper is, in the overall scheme of things, a kind of OK album. To me, albums have little significance other than as repositories for individual songs. First albums can sometimes astound because they can document the seemingly sudden irruption/eruption of a brand-new artist or group that has assembled an initial stock of great songs that--Boom!--hit the eardrums out of the blue: think Led Zep #1, or The Doors, or Are You Experienced? So-called concept albums usually lack any coherent concept that I can discover. So I go by the ratio of songs I like to overall songs per album. Using this measure, SP is 4 for 13 while MMT is a far superior 6 for 11. But since 95% of most everything is crap anyway, Pepper's score of 30.8% usable tunes is actually pretty respectable, though Magical Mystery Tour rates a hefty 54.5%. But I've only ever heard a tiny handful of very high scoring albums--the ascent to the final heights gets harder and harder, and the air grows thin.....


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Strange Magic said:


> Sergeant Pepper is, in the overall scheme of things, a kind of OK album.





Strange Magic said:


> Pepper's score of 30.8% usable tunes is actually pretty respectable,


Oh, Strange Magic! The horror!


----------



## ldiat (Jan 27, 2016)

KenOC said:


> At the end of one song -- Strawberry Fields Forever? -- during the fadeout a slowed-down voice can be heard to say, "I buried Paul." Well, with a bit of imagination it can be heard. One of the Beatles pointed out that the words were actually, "I'm very bored."
> 
> Somebody started the story that if you rubbed Vaseline on the Abbey Road cover, the image of Paul would disappear. A lot of people ruined their album covers.


true about strawberry fields. never heard that about abbey road but if one holds the cover of Srg. Peppers cover up to a black light all the people that have died glow including paul. it was also a clue that holding Magical mystery tour cover the same way a telephone number is readable and one is suppose to call according to the 1st lyric of "shes leaving home" view in the booklet that comes with MMT and the word in front of paul is I WAS


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

GreenMamba said:


> Oh, Strange Magic! The horror!


Tell me about the horror! I want to know about the horror too!


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Strange Magic said:


> Tell me about the horror! I want to know about the horror too!


Just teasing you. It's a great album, IMO, and "30.8% usable tunes" underrates it massively. Do you really think of songs as binary good/bad and come up with percentages that way?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

GreenMamba said:


> Just teasing you. It's a great album, IMO, and "30.8% usable tunes" underrates it massively. Do you really think of songs as binary good/bad and come up with percentages that way?


Absolutely. For me, songs are either worthy of hearing again and again, some better than others, to be sure, or are ignorable. I gnaw at good music as a dog gnaws a bone. The songs off CDs or YouTube are then transferred to the iPod and/ or to cassette tapes (remember them?), to be listened to as huge multi-song playlists, sorted by artist/group; kind of a Best Of compilation. Works for me. Some people may think my tastes are too broad--not discriminating enough-- but I'm actually very picky (aren't we all?).


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

I don't like this album at all, unfortunately we have The Mothers Of Invention's Freak Out for inspiring Sargent Pepper, which was a better album in my opinion. 

I don't think the Beatles are that great but Revolver and Abbey Road have some more likeable music to me. :tiphat:


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

Don't you get tired of the hat?


----------



## Xenakiboy (May 8, 2016)

Casebearer said:


> Don't you get tired of the hat?


 It works its purpose, I'm sure you could ask the mods for more emojis?


----------



## Badinerie (May 3, 2008)

Not keen on any of the Beatles stuff really, I have Rubber Soul and Revolver but I practicaly never play them.
And another thing!
When McCartney was courting Millsy I couldnt get into the concert room of my own Working Men's Club because she took him down for a pint. I peeked through the window if the door and they were and they were at MY table! Sheeesh! and they wernt even members! well played comrades of the comittee. 
One of the lads I know was in, and met him. He wrote a seven minute dirge about how he got to shake McCartneys hand, and insisted on singing it at every bloody open mike night he could. Ahghr!
If anyone fancies making Macca somewhat deceased in retrospect...they wont hear any objections from me.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Badinerie said:


> Not keen on any of the Beatles stuff really, I have Rubber Soul and Revolver but I practicaly never play them.


I had Sgt. Pepper, Rubber Soul, and one other. I got rid of them. Of the three, Rubber Soul was perhaps the best, early bluesier stuff. But my favorite Beatles song and one I found to be very much like a Dylan song is "Come Together."


----------



## Marinera (May 13, 2016)

They experimented with this album, nothing wrong with that. Artists have to explore, otherwise they stagnate, repeat themselves and stew in their own juices. Good album, not my top favourite, but not the least favourite too.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Half of the album is great. The other half is still a million times better than 99% of today's pop music. But like many others, I only put on a Beatles album once or twice a year.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Strange Magic said:


> I've only ever heard a tiny handful of very high scoring albums-


They're out there, but you have to devote less time listening to disco, Phil Collins, and Cher.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

starthrower said:


> They're out there, but you have to devote less time listening to disco, Phil Collins, and Cher.


Believe me, I know they're out there, and I can provide you with the definitive list. But Disco, Phil Collins, Cher are all nutritious parts of a well-rounded musical diet.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

I'll go with Phil Collins when he's behind the drum kit! And just for conceptual continuity's sake, he made a cameo appearance in the Fab Four's A Hard Day's Night film as an adoring teenage fan.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

ldiat said:


> remember those albums had the clues that Paul was dead. not true but the clues were in the music and and on the covers/inside the albums. look at "abby road". they are walking across the road and paul is out of step and barefoot, how one is buried in italy or some where. and the car to the left plate reads IF 28 or if he was alive he would b 28. there are more


This "Paul is Dead" stuff is all well and good, but I think it would be easier to convince people that Keith Richards is dead. :lol:


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

I am a Beatles fan. Everything they recorded is golden. None of their detractors have a clue. Abbey Road is a great album, especially for their final (those following are just gleanings, but even the songs on those are great.) The Beatles, also their contemporaries, provided the music of my halcyon days, and I love them dearly.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

^
^

Don't we all love them - but they aren't effing gods!


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

I feel that Paul McCartney is ruining his former band's legacy with his horrible music and obnoxious personality. Just retire, Paul—howmuch more money do you need?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Morimur said:


> I feel that Paul McCartney is ruining his former band's legacy with his horrible music and obnoxious personality.


Not hardly. Has Led Zep's legacy been "ruined" by the post-Zep careers of Plant and Page? The Police by Sting's later efforts? Not hardly.


----------



## Casebearer (Jan 19, 2016)

^^
Well, that's the trouble with optimists like Paul. They think "it's getting better all the time".


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

elgars ghost said:


> ^
> ^
> 
> Don't we all love them - but they aren't effing gods!


Of course not! But don't we all love them :clap:


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Ironically, I suppose, the magazine _Rolling Stone_ chose _Pepper_ as the number one album of all time since the Rolling Stone named Keith doesn't much care for the record. That's the trouble with rolling stones. They are too unstable.

Perhaps Keith was not "high" enough when I listened to the album. (Though that's hard to believe.) Perhaps he was _too_ "high". (Easier, perhaps, to believe.) In any case, I have enjoyed the _Sgt Pepper _album for decades (along with the other Beatles' works) and shall continue to, I hope, for decades more.

As well, I must admit, I still regularly listen to the Stones music (I have quite a few of the albums, some two dozen or so, on LP vinyl) and I often play Keith's _Vintage Vinos_, his "First Solo Collection" which I have on the 2-LP red 180g vinyl edition from Mindless Records. A stunning disc, really. Three sides of music, the fourth side is blank. And it's some good sounds. But it aint_ Sgt Pepper_. Sorry, Keith. (Though the cover is rather iconic, too, as is the _Pepper_ cover.)









But hey ... to each his own. Right? In the end, after all, it's only rock-n-roll.


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

SONNET CLV said:


> Ironically, I suppose, the magazine _Rolling Stone_ chose _Pepper_ as the number one album of all time since the Rolling Stone named Keith doesn't much care for the record. That's the trouble with rolling stones. They are too unstable.
> 
> Perhaps Keith was not "high" enough when I listened to the album. (Though that's hard to believe.) Perhaps he was _too_ "high". (Easier, perhaps, to believe.) In any case, I have enjoyed the _Sgt Pepper _album for decades (along with the other Beatles' works) and shall continue to, I hope, for decades more.
> 
> ...


That was the big divide in those days - Rolling Stones v. Beatles. I was Beatles all the way, and always somewhat mistrusted the musical taste of those on the Stones' side. For me, the Beatles were the real deal, while the Stones did a lot of posturing. That led to the unfortunate incident at Altamont, where the Stones engaged the Hells Angeles as security personnel for their appearance, apparently under the impression the outlaw motorcyclists were fellow poseurs. Instead, in enforcing discipline, the Hell's Angeles beat people with pool cues and knifed a man to death. When faced with these consequences, Jagger looked, on television, like a bewildered child. While I did like much of their music, I didn't think it had much depth.



> But hey ... to each his own. Right? In the end, after all, it's only rock-n-roll.


For the Stones, yes. The Beatles had substance.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Beatles? Stones? I like 'em both equally, but the Beatles have the edge in breadth, originality, and perceived "wholesomeness", while the Stones produced a more coherent signature sound and one truly great song, _Gimme Shelter_. It's an opinion, folks.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

I liked the Beatles best, probably because of the 'perceived wholesomeness', so being full of self-doubt, I always thought that the Stones must be better *really*...


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Strange Magic said:


> Not hardly. Has Led Zep's legacy been "ruined" by the post-Zep careers of Plant and Page? The Police by Sting's later efforts? Not hardly.


Plant has carved out a pretty respectable career for himself and Page was M.I.A for quite some time - they haven't really given us a reason to take their past accomplishments for granted. Sting and McCartney, on the other hand, have overstayed their welcome. The consistently poor quality of their contemporary material has contaminated the glory of past achievements-at least in my mind.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Morimur said:


> ?..at least in my mind.


My friend, your mind is unique, and a gift to all of us.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Strange Magic said:


> My friend, your mind is unique, and a gift to all of us.


----------



## EarthBoundRules (Sep 25, 2011)

Sgt. Pepper used to be one of my favourite albums. In fact, it was the album that introduced me to rock music. I still like it today, although I've found a lot of albums that surpass it for me since then.


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

It is a great album. I can not say that it is the greatest.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

One of the greatest albums ever still ; leading by a mile .:cheers:


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

Would those who say its great please expand on why they think it's great. 

What are the great songs/lyrices/perfomances/solo's?


I made the case against individual songs early in the thread and the counter argument was, "you're wrong".


For me it's clearly a case of the emperor's new clothes. Listen again and tell me what seems fresh and vital now?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

There are four songs on Pepper that I listen to now and again: the title song, Lucy, with a Little Help, and A Day in the Life. "Great", "Fresh", "Vital"?--not so much, and I never thought Pepper was a particularly good album when it was released (or ever); I found it adequate. I like three of the songs because they connote a druggy/psychedelic/stoned ambience--The Beatles were especially good at such songs, and as a substance teetotaler who can get high on music alone, I found/find such songs to my taste. The title song and With a Little Help have a pleasant oompah-band and Music Hall sound, respectively, that I like.

The Beatles, like most Rock/Pop artists, are best enjoyed, I find, as blocks of songs--"Best Ofs", if you like. I can get then into a Beatles Frame of Mind, over a dozen or several dozen songs; or an R.E.M. frame of mind, or a Rush or Incubus or Laura Nyro frame of mind. Hence my lack of attachment to individual albums, and my interest in songs and blocks of songs by any given artist. It is a rare album indeed that itself contains an overwhelming percentage of excellent songs--Pepper isn't one of them.


----------



## Guest (Jul 25, 2016)

Belowpar said:


> Just checked the track list (it's been a while)
> 
> Using my test of would any these songs have made it onto Revolver?
> 
> ...


It's great music. So you didn't make the case that it isn't, except that you restate your opinion in a slight variety of ways. But then, what do you mean when you say 'great'?


----------



## Johnnie Burgess (Aug 30, 2015)

It came out nearly 50 years ago. Rock was still young then. Since then there has been a lot of great albums.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Johnnie Burgess said:


> It came out nearly 50 years ago. Rock was still young then. Since then there has been a lot of great albums.


Make a poll about great albums I would say.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

There's only one dodgy song on Sgt Pepper, IMO, and it's "Good Morning". The playing around with rhythms/time-signatures is fascinating, but there's little else lyrically or musically to hold my interest for very long. This is in contrast with the other songs on the album, each of which are gems.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Reichstag aus LICHT said:


> There's only one dodgy song on Sgt Pepper, IMO, and it's "Good Morning". The playing around with rhythms/time-signatures is fascinating, but there's little else lyrically or musically to hold my interest for very long. This is in contrast with the other songs on the album, each of which are gems.


God, those distorted saxophones sound fantastic on that song! The guitar solo is killer, too, reminiscent of "Taxman." I like the image of Lennon walking through the old neighborhood…it actually sounds sunny. Hey, what's wrong with this song? The worst Beatles song is better than the best Mungo Jerry song, after all.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Keith Richards face is rubbish...


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

millionrainbows said:


> Hey, what's wrong with this song?


I just find it rather dull lyrically and melodically. Perhaps my negative perception isn't helped by the contrast I mentioned earlier; the other songs are just too good.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

millionrainbows said:


> God, those distorted saxophones sound fantastic on that song! The guitar solo is killer, too, reminiscent of "Taxman." I like the image of Lennon walking through the old neighborhood…it actually sounds sunny. Hey, what's wrong with this song? The worst Beatles song is better than the best Mungo Jerry song, after all.


Alan Pollack makes an inspired (and convincing) case for Good Morning (he calls it "truly, truly, one of the great songs"):

_This is "Nowhere Man" without the preachies; an equally worthy successor to "And Your Bird Can Sing" and warm up for "A Day In The Life". A landmark decision in the art of offering commentary without making direct comment._

and

_The Maureen Cleavian irony that in a life whose ups and downs are as unpredictable as the measure lengths of this song's verse, one can still feel boredom and jadedness as a predominating emotion._

and

_The hidden, and ultimately encouraging, comforting truth ... that if you really want to make it happen, according to John, then "it's up to you." That simple, really._

Plus plenty of muscial analysis.

http://www.icce.rug.nl/~soundscapes/DATABASES/AWP/gmgm.shtml


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

Beatles - 1. Abbey Road, 2. Sgt. Pepper

Now, would someone *please *correct the disagreeable Seargreant.


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

Epiphany time! I listened to "Good Morning" a few times today whilst commuting on the train. I'm happy to say that I now "get it", and my previous low opinion of the song was unjustified. My thanks to millionrainbows and GreenMamba for prompting me to give it a fair hearing.


----------



## bz3 (Oct 15, 2015)

I've always hated Good Morning almost as much as All You Need is Love and Yellow Submarine - but at least with the latter two I recognize their chant-like catchiness even if it bugs the hell out of me. Maybe I'm due for a re-appraisal as well.

As for the balance of the album, it's not even close to one of the best of the band's in my opinion. I liked it a lot as a child but I never listen to it in its entirety anymore, like I do for many actual concept albums. As a collection of songs I will say I like and consider Lucy and Day in the Life as first rate songs. Paul soars on the album outside of that though - Fixing a Hole and Getting Better are kind of mediocre but they have the plush attractiveness of all his songs. But being more of a George and John fan this doesn't rise the album's collection of songs particularly high for me. There are no George songs that rise above mediocre and Mr. Kite, as a weird John song, has many betters.

On the whole I like Abbey Road, the White Album, Revolver, Rubber Soul, Help!, and Please Please Me better than Sergeant. Outside of Abbey Road (and even then only a little) I don't consider any Beatles album as more than a collection of songs though - that was their form and they mastered it. Sergeant's songs were just never up to snuff for me, it remains on the level of Magical Mystery Tour's compilation of songs IMO - some true gems and then filler. In fact I'll take the Strawberry Fields/Penny Lane single over the whole of Sergeant.

That it retains some sort of cultural mystique as the crowning achievement for the band who would then pen the White Album _and_ Abbey Road will forever be a curiosity to me. To me it's only defensible if you're a clear-cut Paul fanboy.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

bz3 said:


> I've always hated Good Morning almost as much as All You Need is Love and Yellow Submarine - but at least with the latter two I recognize their chant-like catchiness even if it bugs the hell out of me. Maybe I'm due for a re-appraisal as well.
> 
> As for the balance of the album, it's not even close to one of the best of the band's in my opinion. I liked it a lot as a child but I never listen to it in its entirety anymore, like I do for many actual concept albums. As a collection of songs I will say I like and consider Lucy and Day in the Life as first rate songs. Paul soars on the album outside of that though - Fixing a Hole and Getting Better are kind of mediocre but they have the plush attractiveness of all his songs. But being more of a George and John fan this doesn't rise the album's collection of songs particularly high for me. There are no George songs that rise above mediocre and Mr. Kite, as a weird John song, has many betters.
> 
> ...


*Revolver* related...

http://www.salon.com/2016/08/05/why...he-50th-anniversary-of-a-beatles-masterpiece/


----------



## Reichstag aus LICHT (Oct 25, 2010)

bz3 said:


> I like and consider Lucy and Day in the Life as first rate songs.


I'd bracket _When I'm Sixty-Four_ with them. I've always considered it one of McCartney's greatest songs, and George Martin's woodwind arrangement is utterly brilliant.


----------



## Guest (Aug 10, 2016)

ldiat said:


> true about strawberry fields. never heard that about abbey road but if one holds the cover of Srg. Peppers cover up to a black light all the people that have died glow including paul. it was also a clue that holding Magical mystery tour cover the same way a telephone number is readable and one is suppose to call according to the 1st lyric of "shes leaving home" view in the booklet that comes with MMT and the word in front of paul is I WAS


All the Paul is dead stuff started here in the Detroit area with a local station, WKNR or Keener radio. It was owned by Russ Gibb who also ran the Grande Ballroom where the MC5 became legend. Gibb said some stoned out kid called the station and started explaining that Paul had died and that his death was being kept a secret and he had all these weird things he noticed on the Sgt. Pepper's album covers as proof.

Gibb and a few others at the station thought it would be funny to make a mockumentary about Paul being secretly dead so they made one using the kid's evidence and throwing in a bunch of their own stuff and aired it a few times on the station and it was really quite good, quite professional sounding (I have a digital copy of the broadcast). So good that it went viral decades before there was any such thing as going viral. Within days, Keener was getting inquiries from news organizations from all over the world wanting to know more about Paul's death--Germany, Japan, the Philippines, South Africa, Brazil.

Gibb said he couldn't believe the publicity and how it got around the world so quickly. It became so persistent that Mike McGear, Paul's brother, had to publicly deny Paul was dead. Even years later, it was a popular thing to talk about in high school study halls. It was ridiculous, of course. There is no way something like that could have been kept a secret. But I knew people who really believed it.

Gibb stated in an interview done a few years ago--he was an old man already--that he was not proud of the caper but never thought it would take on a life of its own the way it did. He was much more proud of the proteges he brought up in the radio and broadcast business who went onto big things. He said, at one point, Paul was playing with Wings at Pine Knob--a concert venue in Clarkston, Michigan (now called DTE Music Theater even though everybody still calls it Pine Knob)--and some of Paul's people went to Gibb's house and invited him to come to Pine Knob and meet Paul in person and prove to him that he wasn't dead. Gibb replied that he never thought Paul was dead and had only made a joke that got totally out of hand. He declined the offer although he made clear that he always loved and respected Paul and his music and never meant him any disrespect.

Gibb said several people have come forward to claim being that stoned-out kid who called the station and that he was able to eliminate all but three as the possible perpetrator.


----------



## Buoso (Aug 10, 2016)

I am going to add my voice to those already gone saying Revolver is exceptional. Sgt Pepper is a very good album but seems a step down from Revolver. Although, I confess that my opinion may really on the fact that some of the songs on Sgt Pepper have never been to my taste while I like all the songs of Revolver even the silly ones.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

millionrainbows said:


> Keith Richards face is rubbish...


You wouldn't say .


----------



## znapschatz (Feb 28, 2016)

Well, I'm the fanboy. I love everything they ever recorded, every song, whichever I'm listening to from any point of their career.
And I don't give a thought as to why. I just do.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

Keith has never spoken falsely


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Sargeant Pooper is grossly overrated, even though I’m a Beatles fan.


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

Let's look at this thing astronomically.

The Beatles were massive stars, no? So their recording path naturally follows the main sequence of massive stellar evolution, for the most part. They start as massive stars, swell to red supergiant status with _Rubber Soul_ and _Revolver_, begin to collapse back in on themselves with _Sgt. Pepper_ and _Magical Mystery Tour_, go supernova with the _White Album_, and then comes the black hole, with _Abbey Road _as one last stellar burst.

Q.E.D.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

^
^ 

Nice way of putting it.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Belowpar said:


> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/news/sgt-pepper-beatles-was-rubbish-says-keith-richards/
> 
> For my part he's right. The Beatles traded the vibrancy they had as a live act, for 6 months in the Studio. Since then many lesser talents have followed them in that self indulgence and popular music has yet to recover.
> 
> ...


Keith does not like Satanic Magistracy, it is a the stones best work. I'd say Keith is consistent. He prefers bluesy rock.

That all I read what he said.


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Totenfeier said:


> Let's look at this thing astronomically.
> 
> The Beatles were massive stars, no? So their recording path naturally follows the main sequence of massive stellar evolution, for the most part. They start as massive stars, swell to red supergiant status with _Rubber Soul_ and _Revolver_, begin to collapse back in on themselves with _Sgt. Pepper_ and _Magical Mystery Tour_, go supernova with the _White Album_, and then comes the black hole, with _Abbey Road _as one last stellar burst.
> 
> Q.E.D.


where about in NC are you?

I just got a place in Raleigh.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Fixing a Hole and Day in a Life are the songs I consider above the rest, which is mainly George Martin’s show, but sounds impressive with Lucy in Sky with Diamonds. I always thought She’s Leaving home is pseudo-Classical rubbish.

Stones’ Satanic Majesties and Flowers were poor attempts at psychedelia to me. They are best with Blues rock, like Beggar’s Banquet, so I’m with Keith there.


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

eljr said:


> where about in NC are you?
> 
> I just got a place in Raleigh.


Ah - city slicker. I'm in the Foothills, 90 miles north of Charlotte straight up I-77, Mt. Airy, Surry County. As you may or may not know, our little burg (I'm not a native, but have lived here for nearly twenty years) was the inspiration for _The Andy Griffith Show_'s Mayberry, the quintessential idyllic small American town. Goober sez hey!


----------



## eljr (Aug 8, 2015)

Totenfeier said:


> Ah - city slicker. I'm in the Foothills, 90 miles north of Charlotte straight up I-77, Mt. Airy, Surry County. As you may or may not know, our little burg (I'm not a native, but have lived here for nearly twenty years) was the inspiration for _The Andy Griffith Show_'s Mayberry, the quintessential idyllic small American town. Goober sez hey!


I passed by your neighborhood once coming from NY (my primary residence is just outside of NYC). 81 to 77 if I recall. I was going to a game, maybe it was at Wake Forest? (my daughter played for NC State)

I recall a beautiful stretch of highway right where you are.

Seems the road climbed and climbed into the hills.

Awesome to live there!


----------



## Totenfeier (Mar 11, 2016)

You recall your Interstates correctly. It _was_ very likely a Wake Forest game you took in, in Winston-Salem, and the highway you recall was very likely U.S. 52, which will take you back to 77 North; the section near where I live is called the Andy Griffith Parkway now. If so, you passed within about two miles of my house. If for some unknown reason you got onto U.S. 89, which would also lead you back to 77 North, and is an even more beautiful ride, you passed within a quarter-mile of my house.

I love it here.


----------

