Its sort of the opposite of the Bonio one really.

Some pictures taken during a get-together in John´s garden in June 65 just before a short tour that took them to France, Italy and Spain. In those pictures you can see how relaxed and friendly they still were at this point, even though the heavy schedule was taking it´s toll. The playfulness was still there, even if not for much longer. Maybe the pot helped.

Any minute now someone will post along the lines of 'actually the stones/who/beachboys/kinks etc were better'. I will then proceed to call them a cretin.

.

A chap we knew as Jesus Jackson who used to run "Jesus Jackson's Progressive Music Society" on a Friday lunchtime told us that, as a student, he was at a party and someone played the brand new first album by some bunch called the Beatles.

His reaction? "I'll give them a year. They won't make a second" apparently.

As impressionable lads we were staggered that our musical guru could have been so wrong as, I suspect, was he.

If anyone's interested, "Progressive" was a relatively loose definition. It was there that I first heard Freebird and Marquee Moon, promptly going out and buying both straight away.

the gist is:
People like the late 60s Beatles (Pepper onwards) because they were "experimental" and don't give the early period enough credit because they were "just" pop then

The re-release of the remastered CDs will precipitate the end of the world (or the music industry bit of it at least)

whoever did the layout doesn't like David Quantick because his article is split over several pages making it almost unreadable

it must be the law in music publishing in the next few months to have a front cover on the beatles, so thanks Word for getting yours over with early doors. At least there's a different slant than the expected mojo/uncut tired biographies. Andrew Harrison's article was interesting and the whole thing more readable than the Bono issue, but still find it impossible to comprehend how any aspect of their career is underrated.