Im sure we all know that the Beatles were a musical influence for Neil. To me, that influence is definitely apparent in certain songs, all the way from his split enz days on.
Of course, every artist wants to hear that his style is, in its entirety, uniquely his own, but I dont think anyone is immune to their influences.

What songs do you think have a Beatle-esque sort of feel to them? I could list many, but I'll start with one and see if anyone else comes up with others that have come to mind for me.

'I Love You Dawn' is the first one that comes to mind for me.

Others?

Everything is Good for You---the sentiment, the vocal delivery, the instrumentation...everything and also Not the Girl You Think You Are--all for the same reasons.

I agree about the songs already mentioned. I also think She Will Have Her Way has a Beatle-esque sound to it.

i wonder sometimes how much frank zappa influenced neil...

Uh...probably not a heck of a lot there Mona. Which is not to say that Frank Zappa wasn't a highly influential artist....just probably not in Neil's top 10 LOL

Zappa probably influenced the early line-up of Split Enz more.

Yup, I could entirely agree with that Brian.

I can't believe nobody's mentioned 'Not the girl you think you are'// This is only just short of totally ripping off the Beatles sound. The double tracked vocals are very Lennon.

I remember when it was released the main comment the media had was how Beatle-esque the song was.

Good song.

But very very beatlesque...and I think it's to the songs detriment.

placelikealice

quote:

Originally posted by Half-Full:
[qb]
What songs do you think have a Beatle-esque sort of feel to them? I could list many, but I'll start with one and see if anyone else comes up with others that have come to mind for me.

Others? [/qb]

We might want to define what we mean by Beatle-esque first. Lennon-McCartney recorded such a diverse body of work, it's hard to sum their material up in a couple of sentences. "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" is a far cry from "Helter Skelter" which is much different from "Penny Lane" which has very little in common with "Tomorrow Never Knows."

But if I could take a stab at it . . .

Lennon-McCartney were willing to experiment, in different ways. Songs that were deceptively simple (i.e. "Michelle") are full of complicated chords and time changes, features which were groundbreaking in pop songs at that time (and really, still are). The Rubber Soul album started to introduce instrumentation that was outside the typical guitar-drum-bass rock format. Revolver saw the band playing with tape loops, more aggressive guitars, studio trickery, and drug references. This aethetic was carried further with the single "Strawberry Fields Forever" and the St. Pepper's album and Magical Mystery Tour sessions. Then, they pull back a bit to deliver The Beatles a.k.a. the White Album (their finest recording in my opinion) which contained everything under the sun from pastoral folkie tunes, to proto-heavymetel, to tin pan alley pieces, to wierd acoustic ditties, to straight ahead rock numbers. The Get Back (which became Let it Be ) and Abbey Road sessions saw them take their music in different directions yet again.

So -- to sum up: a willingness to experiment, and a willingness to change directions and try everything. The Beatles took the pop song, essentially a piece of junk, and turned it into an art form, without making their music inaccessable or snobbish. The same can be said of Neil Finn.

Neil Finn's songwriting is easier to compare to McCartney's, in that they're both master songwriters when it comes to melody, and they both often take a mix-and-match approach when writing songs. The transitions in their songs can be dramatic, and while the pieces can be structurally difficult, they come across to the audience as seeming simple. And they both like wierd chords.

There is also a committment to vocal harmony in the McCartney's music, something you find all over the place in Neil's music.

And, as discussed on other posts, they're both experts at writing the perfect Middle Eight.

But there is an awful lot of Lennon field in Neil's music too, most readily apparent in some of the later Crowded House stuff: In My Command and You're Not the Girl You Think You Are .

There are many more examples of Beatlesque tunes in the Finn canon.

Two Crowded House songs that are unfairly dismissed by casual fans, Kill Eye and Love You til the Day I Die , could have come straight off the Beatles Revolver album, and are the most obviously Beatles influenced. From the song structure, to the vocal performance, to the sound of the guitars, to the production values, to the stereo mix -- both songs scream out "Beatles circa 1966."

. . .

Ach! Out of time. I could go on and on here, but I guess I'll leave that to others.

Well Alice, I mentioned Not the Girl You Think You are and I don't think it's a rip off of the Beatles, I think it's a tribute. One man's ending, another one's beginning.

And it may not even have been a tribute, it's done in the 'style of' By 1996 when this song was released, I'm sure Neil was up to here with comparisons of his work to Lennon and McCartney. Had he consciously stopped ---had he done whatever he could to ENSURE any future songs were not styled a la Lennon and McCartney--possibly tons of gorgeous songs just wouldn't have gotten written. The very fact that he's even capable of writing a Beatlesque song is not a detriment to his craft IMHO but a sign of a very skilled writer with many capabilities at his finger tips.

just my two cents.

"As sure as I am" has a Beatles feel to it.

"Its only natural" however, sounds very much like Crosby, Stills & Nash to me.

gph.......what can i say. I just dont have the ability to put it as eloquently as you.

I love this room.......i can always count on someone to take my casual question or comment and turn it into a deeply analytical inquisition. But i love that.....it's all toward my enlightenment. I'm always open to enlightenment.

For myself, i cant always pinpoint exactly what it is about a song.....maybe just a lack of musical knowledge on my part....I just hear a neil or ch song and think 'hmmm that has a bit of a beatlesque feel to it'. Sorry, that's as descriptive as I get. But im glad i can count on some of the people here to spell it out for me

As for placelikealice's comments......I still stand by what i said earlier. I think it's darn near inevitable that a songwriter's musical influences are going to sneak their way into his songwriting. If anyone ever told me that my songwriting had shades of neil finn.....well, that would be a huge compliment

But, of course, placelikealice, we can always count on you to be, shall I say, controversial! Actually, i think a little well placed and well thought controversy keeps people thinking and questioning. Not always a bad thing.

Personally I see a lot of the Beatles influence....rip off....no. No one person is completely original in every single aspect in their writing and all artists have influences that have inspired them to create.

The influence seeps through in varying degrees alongside personal creativity. Music evolves.

Some times I play Squeeze and my dad will say 'Is that Neil Finn?'. That doesn't mean Glen is ripping off Neil or vice versa. It doesn't mean they are both ripping off the Beatles either.

I agree that any recognition of influence by great artists is indeed a compliment.

Good discussion

Groovy thread.

Groovy posts gph (from a groovy town)!

Rambling Shakespeare gets his noodles out:

I sometimes think that if any male singersongwriter has a melody to his tune he is going to get Ye Olde Lennon & McCartney comparison. There's not a lot of ground those two didn't cover, so it's always possible to trace an influence, a sound, a style, a timbre, a chord sequence, a mood, a twinkle, a pickle, a sponge, an inflatable giraffe, to something that one or both of them wrote. I think Lennon said: "all good rock and roll is stolen from somewhere." He probably stole the quote.

Let's face it, a lot of modern "pop" music is groove based and/or recurring chord sequence based. Any three year old can pick out a tune based on recurring chords. Songwriters write melodies. The Beatles forged ground in form and substance but rarely resorted to a plodding thump with noodling over top. They almost never repeated themselves. Neil doesn't do that either. His chord progressions are thoughtful and his melodies stand alone. That is the similarity, to my mind.

Any popular music songwriter worth his or her salt is indebted to L&M (and by the numbers 4 and 6). You can't escape it. They were the original band that was a band. Ringo and Paul are at the foundation of most bass and drum combos. George is the quintessential guitarist who made every boy want to become one (why do you think Neil loves his Gretsch guitar?). John taught us all to say what you think and think what you say (unless you're pissed in L.A. - which is cool if the Mrs. chooses your floozie for you). Paul and John set the standard which every songwriter aspires to whether consciously or not.

Oh sure, there are the not entirely unexpected prats who come along and dis the "Beatles" or Paul in particular. It's easy to get sick of the hype, or the adulation. But the MUSIC. You can't escape its beauty, its truth, its magnificence. These prats don't have ears that hear. The fact is, if you pick up a guitar and try to write or sing a song, you owe your fricken' LIFE to those men. Neil does too and he knows it.

Yeah, I hear the "Beatle-esque" comparison all the time, but to tell you the truth, Neil moments and Paul moments, and John moments, and George moments, and Ringo moments (never underestimate a true Ringo moment, by the way) are very different experiences. I mean, it's in tune, it's meaningful, it's melodic, it's well-crafted, it's beautiful. Those are the similarities. Is that Beatle-esque? OK.

The Finn's tribute to Paul ("Too Many People") and Neil and Liam's tribute to the Beatles ("Two Of Us") let you know that they love the music. In the world of guitar or piano based pop, you can't avoid it. It's part of everything.

Ringo is God.

Shakespeare

Well said, shakespeare. I particularly like your John Lennon quote followed by 'he probably stole the quote'. Well, it made a point lol

Anyway, just thought i would clarify my perspective here. I dont think that its a bad thing for a songwriter to be influenced by another/others. I think its natural and good. Every songwriter that ever was, was influenced by another. We take what we know and have experienced, and we expand on it. And music progresses.

I just think its kind of fun to hear what others see as beatles influences in Neil's songwriting. Just making conversation

Jah mon.

I dig the conversation.

Wasn't there a song that Neil did live where he ended with the "Maori Chorus" from the end of Hello Goodbye?

Well since i only have the best of and the debut, "four seasons in one day" reminds me of mccartney.

I am surprised that noone has mentioned "Now We're Getting Somewhere". That is the song I always think of first. Especially the bass part right before the line "There's money is the Bible Belt, hugs for Daddy too".

I can't remember where I read or heard this, but someone told me that NWGS is what the Beatles would have sounded like if they had stayed together until '86. Who know ? Food for thought I suppose ??? But now I'm getting hungry.

On top of that, I can't disagree with any of your well thought of responses. Good work peoples.. Keep it going....

Well, you're all correct.

But as original as Neil is I think you forget the influences of the fact that Neil Finn was raised in New Zealand. It's a remote place and although he was influenced by the Beatles it is obvious that this included his locale aswell as his brother. Tim is no comparison for talent but when they get together they break ground without doubt. Take Edible Flowers as an example!

I don't think any of us forgot New Zealand or its influence on Neil (and Tim). The topic of this thread is Beatles Influence, not NZ's influence.

Besides, the Beatles performed 11 concerts in New Zealand (specifically Auckland, Christchurch, Dunedin and Wellington) in June 1964 over a period of 4 days. Neil would have been, what about 7? I wonder if his older brother took him?

Shakespeare