Fab Forum
The Beatles' songs – complete A-Z list!
Written by: Lennon-McCartney
Recorded: 30 May; 6, 10, 11, 20, 21 June 1968
Producers: George Martin, John Lennon
Engineer: Geoff Emerick
John Lennon: vocals, tape loops, effects, samples
George Harrison: vocals, samples
Yoko Ono: vocals, effects, samples
Released: 22 November 1968 (UK), 25 November 1968 (US)
Dividing audiences since late 1968, John Lennon's sound collage Revolution 9 was an exercise in musique concrète influenced heavily by Yoko Ono and the avant-garde art world.
The recording emerged from Revolution 1, the final six minutes of which formed a lengthy, mostly instrumental jam. Lennon took the recording and added a range of vocals, tape loops and sound effects, creating Revolution 9, the longest track released during The Beatles' career.
The slow version of Revolution on the album went on and on and on and I took the fade-out part, which is what they sometimes do with disco records now, and just layered all this stuff over it. It was the basic rhythm of the original Revolution going on with some 20 loops we put on, things from the archives of EMI.
All We Are Saying, David Sheff
Although he made no direct contribution to Revolution 9, being in New York at the time, Paul McCartney had made a similar sound collage, the unreleased 14-minute Carnival Of Light, 18 months previously.
Revolution 9 was quite similar to some stuff I'd been doing myself for fun. I didn't think that mine was suitable for release, but John always encouraged me.
The other Beatles and George Martin are said to have persuaded Lennon not to include Revolution 9 on the White Album, to no avail. Although McCartney had long been interested in musique concrète, particularly Karlheinz Stockhausen's Gesang der Jünglinge, it is likely that he was concerned at the effect Revolution 9 would have on the group's public perception.
I don't know what influence Revolution 9 had on the teenybopper fans, but most of them didn't dig it. So what am I supposed to do?
John Lennon, 1969
It wasn't only the group's teenage fans who were confused by Revolution 9. Charles Manson found a wealth of symbolism in the track's loops and effects, and thought that Lennon's shouts of 'Right!' were, in fact, a call to 'rise' up in revolt.
Manson drew a parallel between Revolution 9 and the Bible's book of Revelation. He thought The Beatles were variously four angels sent to kill a third of mankind, or four locusts mentioned in Revelation 9, which he equated with beetles.
Revolution 9 was an unconscious picture of what I actually think will happen when it happens; just like a drawing of a revolution. All the thing was made with loops. I had about 30 loops going, fed them onto one basic track. I was getting classical tapes, going upstairs and chopping them up, making it backwards and things like that, to get the sound effects. One thing was an engineer's testing voice saying, 'This is EMI test series number nine'. I just cut up whatever he said and I'd number nine it. Nine turned out to be my birthday and my lucky number and everything. I didn't realise it: it was just so funny the voice saying, 'number nine'; it was like a joke, bringing number nine into it all the time, that's all it was.
Rolling Stone, 1970
Revolution 9 also featured in the 'Paul is dead' myth, after it was discovered that the 'number nine' motif, when played backwards, sounded like 'Turn me on, dead man'. A number of other elements of the recording featured in the myth, including the sound of a car crashing followed by an explosion.
Join the Fab Forum discussion on Revolution 9 »
mark Friday 20 February 2009
according to karl heinz stockahausen's official website, lennon was inspired by stockhausen's "hymnen" in recording revolution 9.
Ian Tuesday 14 July 2009
The recording of "Hymnen" was first released after "Revolution 9" was recorded, so Lennon would have had to have access to a pre-release version.
Andrés López Umaña Friday 26 September 2014
Stockhausen composition Hymnen was composed in 1966 and was premiered in that year or maybe 1967. There are quotes from Lennon saying this was his source of inspiration. The structure of Revolution 9 is quite similar to Stockhausen's master tape composition.
Timothy Sunday 26 April 2009
What part of Revolution 9 does George Harrison and John Lennon whisper the phrase 'There ain't no rule for the company freaks' six times??? I've listened for it many times, but couldn't hear it. Is it audible at all???
Joe Monday 27 April 2009
As far as I know it's on the four-track tape, but wasn't used in the final mix. Mark Lewisohn mentioned it, but I've never heard it myself. Possibly it's buried deep in the mix somewhere, though.
Sgt. Pepper 67 Monday 27 November 2017
Is It Possible Paul and Ringo appear somewhere in the mix
Richard Monday 3 August 2009
"Revolution 9" : was so far ahead of it's time I was amazed alot of people didn't like it simply for the absolute genius of it? When I bought the 'White Album', I always felt the album would be incomplete without it, being every song has it's genre it represents! This song is the 'Beatles', the creativity, invention and total mystery of it's existence? 'Abstract Expressionism' hanging upon the walls and 'Revolution 9, playing unending! Sometime in the future, folks play the song 9 times in a row, as I did, you'll be amazed how it actually 'sounds' like an actual musical song, exsisting in the Beatles popular catalogue of songs and it's why the 'White Album' is so important to the history of recorded music!
Max Sunday 20 December 2009
I do agree it becomes a song, after all these years I actually expect every hidden sound of it; and when the Ipod plays it randomly I will let it play to the end. (but please: its genre, its existence, it's why. Its and it's are not the same)
Tweeze Thursday 15 September 2011
It's good to hear someone else feels this way. I absolutely understand what John was on about hear. Music is, after all, controlled noise. This piece seems to be a carefully choreographed sound. It sounds like music but defies most people's expectations. Once you get around that, it's a symphony.
Chooch McGuffin Tuesday 21 October 2014
Pretentious much?
dgw28 Sunday 8 October 2017
As with a few other tracks on the White Album, it was an indulgence rather than a true 'Beatles' recording.
Julie Sunday 7 October 2018
OMG! Exactly! Tell me you are not jesting, as this is exactly how I feel about the song. The first time I was like,.. this is really "out there". The second time I found some parts to be musical that I remembered from the first time. By the third time, I loved it and was anticipating certain parts. It is rhythmic, poetic, and just as cohesively put together as any "melodic" song. To me, it is pure genius. And the work that was put into it…. most people have no idea.
Lutfi Saturday 29 August 2009
The singing voice from 7:05 till 7:25 is sung in Arabic, and most probably it's by Egyptian singer Mohammad Abdel Wahab.
Jimmy Wednesday 8 September 2010
Can you tell what any of the Arabic words are? I'd be very interested to narrow down what song it might have been.
Lutfi Saturday 22 January 2011
I've been doing an extensive search to find that song. And I finally did! The original Arabic song is called "Awwal Hamsa" -Arabic for "First Whisper"- sung by Syrian/Egyptian artist Farid Al-Atrash.
Ray Tuesday 11 April 2017
I heard another Beatles song which one please?where the Beatles song has used an Arabic radio station news in the background with the Male speaking in Arabic
RichardZ Monday 14 September 2009
I love this piece but I believe the main inspiration is "The Return of the Son of Monster Magnet" by Frank Zappa on the Freak Out! album
Arno Thursday 15 October 2009
I hear some "War of the Worlds" battle scene sounds in there around 5:30…
This "song" (collage) never ceases to fascinate me. I would have loved to be a fly on the wall while Lennon and his mates going through all those EMI tapes.
Norman Therun Saturday 12 December 2009
Revolution#9, Wild Honey Pie, You Know My Name (Look Up The Number), When I'm 64, Being For The Benefit of Mr.Kite, Lovely Rita, Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds, I Am The Walrus, Strawberry Fields Forever, A Day in the Life, Maxwell Silver Hammer, Good Night, Everybody's Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey, I Want You/She's So Heavy, Because, Helter Skelter, Sexy Sadie, Yer Blues, Long Long Long, Savoy Truffle, Don't Bother Me, Octopus's Garden, Why Don't We Do It In The Road, Rocky Racoon and so many many more are why I love The Beatles. They are so diverse, so talented, so catchy, so deep, so fun and all of them are so unforgettable
Astrubi Thursday 24 December 2009
This song doesn't appear in the track list of your US Discography. Is it a mistake, or was it removed in the US version?
Joe Sunday 27 December 2009
No, it was released on the US White Album. I missed it out of the discography due to a cut and paste error (more cut than paste), but thanks for letting me know about it – I've amended the discog.
SgtPepper1909 Tuesday 19 January 2010
This song is so darn comical.
"So the wife called me and we'd better go to see a surgeon
Or whatever to price it….yellow underclothers
So, any road, we went to see the dentist instead
Who gave her a pair of teeth which wasn't any good at all
So I said I'd marry, join the f?!%$#g navy and went to sea"
What the heck? Not only does he constantly change person, his lyrics are as collaged as the music…There are passages that are slightly related in their subjects, but it is all a big acid trip–sort of fascinating, but also scary—very tense, like it's all about to blow apart in your face.
I'd heard that above phrase said about the Who, but this is entirely different instance.
Anandgyan Thursday 28 January 2010
You know, that was the good thing with a L.P., you sure could spin it backward, and darn, I sure did hear "Turn me on dead man, turn me on dead man, turn me on dead man" when, what was heard forward, was "Number nine, number nine, number nine…". Sure can't do that with a CD!
Daniël Wolfpack Tuesday 2 September 2014
Copy the CD into computer audio-files and use a sound editor to reverse it. No need to destroy record players and needles, anymore!
Marcelo Saturday 13 February 2010
Music is made for create an emotional response in people. "Revolution 9" amazes me and gives me the creeps every time I hear it.
I also agree that it is a "song".
Steve Thursday 25 February 2010
I remember seeing years ago on TV a live performance of this track where the band (can't recall the name) played an impressive percentage of the sounds live, the rest sampled from the CD…
McLerristarr Monday 22 March 2010
John saying the Number 9 part was taken from an engineer saying "This is EMI test series number nine" clashes with the claim it was "culled from examination tapes from the Royal Academy of Music". Which is correct?
Joe Monday 22 March 2010
The Royal Academy information came from tape operator Richard Lush, who worked on the sessions. I suspect the tapes were made for the Academy at Abbey Road, so both could have been true. I don't know for sure. Apparently the tapes no longer exist, and the identity of the person isn't known.
Gustavo Solórzano Alfaro Wednesday 14 April 2010
George Martin didn't produce this track. The de facto producer was Lennon, who also played mellotron. And Ringo Starr didn't participate.
Joe Friday 16 April 2010
You're right that John was the de facto producer, although George Martin was listed as producer on the studio documentation. I've listed them both.
As for Ringo's participation, I'm not sure why I wrote that. I've removed the credit now. Thanks for the suggestions.
Kelvin Tuesday 14 September 2010
Ringo apparently made spoken word contributions, as did George Martin
Source is Wikipedia
Joe Tuesday 14 September 2010
There's a recording of George Martin speaking to Alistair Taylor at the very start, but that doesn't make them contributors as such. I'd need a better source than Wikipedia (!) if I was going to add Martin and Starr to the list, as I'm not sure they did anything during the actual assembly and recording of the track.
In the line-up I'm ignoring various performances that were taken from other recordings, mainly Revolution 1 and A Day In The Life, and concentrating instead on who did what for the actual sound collage.
M. Whitener Saturday 27 November 2010
I've listened to it several times & I don't get it. From a sound experimentation stand point, fine. But it is too far of a radical departure from basic music for my tastes, even in the standards of the White Album.
In their (and I say that loosely, based on the construction of this) entire catalog, I rank this as their worst effort & not even by Beatle standards, just general music.
GniknuS Friday 3 December 2010
So you think this is the worst song ever made? You should check out Carly Simon's version of Itsy Bitsy Spider, that might change your perspective.
M. Whitener Friday 3 December 2010
I didn't mean it in the sense of worst music ever period. God knows much of the "good" music now is way worse than this could ever be. At least Rev 9 is ambitious. I'm just saying that it's not good by basic standards.
A lot of the time some songs are just "Beatle Bad" (Ex. "Little Child" compared "I Want To Hold Your Hand"), but in this case I feel Revolution 9 is a subpar sound in general.
Upsiditus Wednesday 4 December 2013
I've listened to it a few times over the years. It was always a painful experience, so it is the only track on a cannon Beatles LP that I deliberately skip. This is just random sounds.
philmat Monday 5 May 2014
Absolutely agree. Not only can this not be categorized as Beatle, It can't even be categorized as music. It's just noise. Not surprising considering Yoko Ono's influence on John at the time. This is not avant garde, or experimental or anything. This is just John and Yoko telling the world: "We can do whatever we want and get away with it." It's almost as if they're making fun of the entire world, Beatle fans included. Mr. Lennon, if there was ever a Beatle song that was a piece of garbage, or a throwaway, this is definitely it. It should never have been released, at least certainly not on a Beatle album.
robert Monday 5 May 2014
philmat – I respectfully disagree with you on many levels – and I am not a fan of Rev. 9 and usually skip it myself. However, if you were alive at the time it was released (I was and already a Beatles fan) you know how it fit into the times amazingly. Everyone was experimenting with sound – I don't think Lennon ever considered it a song per se – as much as a sound collage. People were throwing paint against canvas just to see what you'd get – this is the equivalent.
Again, I'm no fan of it, but believe it or not, Rev. 9's influence on modern music today is huge. All this sampling and random sounds etc we hear today- this is in part where it came from first.
Pamela Cook Sunday 2 December 2018
Robert, YES you explain this perfectly.
And I feel exactly the same as you having grown up during this time. Playing my new White Album LP in its day, and getting to Rev.9, it definitely got a "WOW, what's this all about?" However having had a steady diet of Beatles music everyday via the radio hearing Revolution 9 was not a shocker, it was just more, it was The Beatles. I guess you had to be there:)
Pamela Sunday 2 December 2018
The avant-garde began with McCartney: 'Carnival of Light'.
Joseph Brush Friday 26 September 2014
How do you know? Have you heard it? What is the basis of your comment?
MikeP Wednesday 19 July 2017
Many sources including Mark Lewisohn's book. Put your Paul-hatred-bias to bed. It's getting old and a bit embarrassing.
Kinnally Thursday 27 June 2019
The avant garde was alive and well in music, art, theater and literature for decades before Beatle Paul was even born (1942). Really, get a grip! The world didn't start with the Beatles, great band and creative force that they were.
As for Revolution #9, I use to listen to it with headphones as a teenager back in the 70's when I was learning classical piano. It's an organized sound collage, not a Buddy Holly song or Love Me Do. It's not a pop song to tap your foot or dance to. It has a kind of structure and cohesiveness and works very well for what it's supposed to be. I always liked it as yet another curve in the road from them.
Some of the more caustic criticisms below seem to come from listeners who just don't know how to approach it. Oh well, you can't please everyone.
Mbook Thursday 2 December 2010
That George Martin and Alistair Taylor exchange is a riot.
Following suit shortly thereafter comes 1910 Fruitgum Co.'s interesting sounding but hardly ambitious 'Pow-Wow', which was really a straight song played entirely backwards. I was never compelled to try and play it forward though.
Buis Tuesday 11 October 2011
"Pow Wow" came from really ridiculous throwaway song called "Bring Back Howdy Doody" which was probably an insider's joke. Some American producers really loved to put those kind of things to single b-sides…
Christopher Hight Friday 10 February 2012
I think Revolution 9 is brilliant and a perfect example of Lenoons genius. Much of the content is bits of classical pieces played backwards or repeated. It took courage for him to insist on its inclusion in White Album. The album wouldn't be the same without it. Not a song for the teenyboppers. It was obvious Lennon was trying to get out of the box. Similar to his posing full frontal on Two Virgins. Biggest pop star in the world at the time. That took some big balls.
Peter Tuesday 19 June 2012
It did take courage. And the sad thing is, one wonders how John's attitude towards the band might have changed markedly if Paul had been more receptive rather than being actively *opposed* to its inclusion on the album.
Moreover, had Paul (and John) been more encouraging of George…
Paul, being the group's control freak (for better or worse) might have helped his cause had he actually loosened, rather than tightened his reins over the band's artistic vision. Of course, then, they wouldn't have been "The Beatles" as Paul wanted Beatles to be…
In any event, the track is brilliant and hints at where the band might have gone had it evolved into the looser, more experimental association John could have lived with.
Also, my five-year-old was just chanting "Number nine, number nine, number nine, number nine…" in the car today, demonstrating to me, without a doubt, that that is as infectious a hook as "Yeah, yeah, yeah!"
Joseph Brush Tuesday 19 June 2012
Lennon also exhibited this kind of artistic courage when he released Some Time In New York City. It took guts. Especially when one considers what was going on in the USA at that time. AND he paid the price for that stance. Of course, Revolution 9 raised its finger and stared back in the face of status quo.
Artistic courage? Now THAT is laughable!
If you want to be accurate, try "self-indulgent", "self-important", and "nonsensical tripe".
Clive Walker Wednesday 30 January 2019
Yet I really like it!
Teddy Salad Wednesday 19 July 2017
Interesting insight into "number nine" being an infectious hook. My sixteen-year-old is just getting into the Beatles and I would wager it would be more recognizable to her than "yeah, yeah, yeah" at this point.
Kalle Thursday 27 June 2019
Or perhaps John eventually realised that Paul may have been right. Lennon could have pursued avant garde sound collages in his solo career but he didn't. He craved artistic recognition thinking at the same time he could hide his "artistic vision" behind the strong Beatles songs that had made their reputation and would sell the album for them. He was as commercially savvy as McCartney, no doubt about it. I'd say McCartney was astute enough to realise the experimental work on Tomorrow Never Knows was taken to the right level. In his own career he had the nous to keep that stuff completely separate, which he did of course, with his work with The Fireman. Maybe Lennon could have had a better attitude and suggested the Beatles do the same.
Mark Sunday 2 September 2012
It has been suggested that most Beatles fans have never listened to this more than once. The irony is that one *has* to listen to it more than once to take everything in because there is so much going on in it.
FrankDialogue Monday 8 October 2012
Let's remember that Paul was the one who first brought the 'musique concrete' or collage influence to the Beatles eith 'Tomorrow Never Knows'…Paul played John a lot of this stuff in 1966-67 & it was something that fascinated John.
I doubt there was much conflict with Paul over the inclusion of this piece musically.
Any conflict was probably due to Ono.
Marcel Tuesday 18 September 2018
Just for the record, "Tomorrow Never Knows" was written by Lennon…
dmarklackeyHappy Nat Friday 21 June 2013
The tape loops named above ("Neville Club," etc.) were not for "Revolution 9" but for use in a Victor Spinetti directed stage production of "The Lennon Play: In His Own Write" based on John's first two books.
Jimmy Sunday 1 September 2013
In the credits, I don't love the use of the word "samples." The tape loops involved already cover the different snippets. "Samples" is a latter-day term usually used in reference to triggered sounds. An all-inclusive "tapes" could be good too, since not all the sounds are "tape loops"; some, such as the original 'Revolution' track, just play straight through or only play once, not being in loop form. Also, Lennon has said that Yoko helped him compile the tapes. Thus maybe more accurate credits might be: "John Lennon: voice, tapes, effects. George Harrison: voice. Yoko Ono: voice, tapes, effects."
Upsiditus Thursday 5 December 2013
This is the only unmitigated disaster in the Beatles standard catalogue.
Dreww Thursday 20 March 2014
This is one Beatles song I can barely listen to. I respect and admire the ambition of trying to create such a project. And the Beatles did their own take on many other genres, often taking those genres to new levels. But this doesn't work for me at all.
I don't think you can even call it a song. It's a sound composition but it really isn't musical.
One thing that comes out of this is I am curious what Carnival of Light sounds like!
Julian Thursday 20 March 2014
That's interesting. I can listen to "Revolution 9" any day of the week & I'm so glad that I like it THAT much. You can listen to it repeatedly & ALWAYS find a new effect or a new sound. Honestly, for me it's one of the top Beatles tracks, up there with "Tomorrow Never Knows".
vonbontee Monday 5 May 2014
It's music because they SAY it's music. That's the way art works. Whether it's GOOD music or not is a matter of opinion.
peopleman Friday 20 June 2014
It's good to see that I am not the only one who loves the track. I spent too many hours with headphones and my mind in an altered state that it is part of a very special part of my youth. Music is emotional, and this one hits some with different emotions.
Paul elliman Wednesday 7 October 2015
The mono mix is different of course but believe it or not there is an entirely different version out there in the ether.try and check it out -a new perspective!,,
David Reynolds Tuesday 24 June 2014
Okay. I'm going to upset a lot of people here. Its a piece of garbage. Waste of space. Just self indulgence. An actual song would have been more appropriate. Another George Harrison song perhaps? Anything but this.
Andrew Davies Thursday 29 March 2018
It all depends if you wanted the Beatles to be what you wanted them to be or what they really were (especially true of Lennon)
Pat Sunday 20 July 2014
I don't believe a higher complement could be made. Great art always brings out strong feelings. Advantage is not foreveryone. I have had many different feelings listening to Revolution #9 over the years. I'm glad it was made and included on the white album and not released as a solo project.
SergioQ Thursday 6 November 2014
This is a "song" in the same way an artist just threw a bunch of those red and white permit round candies in a corner of an art gallery and called it an "art piece". And yes, you were free to take a candy.
In fact didn't someone just open a museum of invisible art in NYC?
I don't get it at all. I'm not judging those of you do….just saying how "I personally" think of this track.
Miroslav Popovic Saturday 15 November 2014
To love this song, a person must have sensitive ears and love the beauty of the sound. Musical beauty is not the mathematics, but principally and above all the sound beauty. Therefore, Rev.9 is of course a song, and to enjoy it, person must relax & look for something different.
Revolution 9 is like a hymn for us, the lovers of fantastic odd sounds and effects in all the Beatles songs!
septodecaphile Thursday 30 April 2015
YES! Not only that, but great to sing-along too. Seriously – try it!
Sam Thursday 20 November 2014
The reality is that there just had to be a song like this. It is, in some ways, absolutely terrifying. It is also sheer genius, and, as with any song, best to seek your own interpretations.
When I listened to it, 40 years ago, it was alarming, and terrifying.
Now, it is a joy, due to its creative value.
Sam Thursday 4 December 2014
I cannot believe, in all these years, that no one has ever identified the infamous segment, where John cries out, Ride! , etc., about 2:40. One of the words, clearly is not 'ride'. You'll have to make your own determination.
Julian Thursday 4 December 2014
I think that's "Right!" from the extended ending of Revolution 1, the song from which Revolution 9 came from.
Walt Borys Monday 15 December 2014
While I respect the opinion of everyone to choose what music they consider inspirational,
my own take is:
It makes it easier for me to dub down two albums of material into one 80 minute mix CD.
Just copy out a 12 second segment that repeats "number nine..number nine" for inclusion.
(then figure out how to shorten other non-favorites like 'Wild Honey Pie' and 'Rocky Racoon')
oldFart Walt
Billy Shears Tuesday 12 May 2015
I have never known what to do with it. They could have left it off and put "Hey Jude" and "Lady Madonna" on in its place and made the White Album even greater, but they didn't. The album is a strange mix of styles and personalities. "Paul is Dead" clues abound and "number nine" backwards certainly highlight the bunch. Greatness is often argued and bantered about. The love – hate of certain "songs" is what makes the Beatles so unique. This "Song" – love it or not – makes the album as mysterious as its blank cover.
LMW28IF Monday 18 May 2015
I've always thought this was John indulging Yoko. I understand The Beatles were needing to get to 30 songs on the White Album to meet the rest of the commitment for their current record contract. They were wanting to complete that so they could negotiate a better contract. So even though the other Beatles questioned the appropriateness to include it on a Beatles album, it did save them from having to write another real song. John and Yoko were both artists, but at opposite ends of the spectrum. John got rich by selling to tens of millions of fans at a few dollars apiece. Yoko priced her art at a few hundred million. Sure it was overpriced, but she only needed one buyer. And give her credit…she found that buyer.
Andrew Gaines Monday 29 August 2016
They didnt need to produce another song to replace Rev 9. They had Harrison's "Not Guilty" . Mind you that would have been a 5th Harrison track which would have "upset the apple cart" as Harrison sang!
Steve Monday 13 July 2015
I'm sure many of you have heard this but if not its well worth listening to. It's take 20 of Rev 9 and reveals Lennon's initial vision. Suddenly it all becomes clear.
MyValentine Thursday 30 July 2015
I had and still have to deal with pieces like R.#9 – often far worse … and the "composers" always regard their creations as "music" – SO WHAT.
It´s a fact that the piece is on the White Album. I´ve listend to it dozens of time, but usually try to skip it. It´s doing almost nothing to me musically (and I´m a musician and musicologist myself), it´s always annoying to me reminding me on the (bad) influence Yoko had on John and the other 3 Beatles – he never would have made it without her, so for me it´s no Beatles-track, more a Lennon-Ono-track and would have better been on "Unfinished music" or whatever …
However – I read that some time ago – it´s BY FAR THE avantgarde piece that´s been sold most – millions of copies!
True also: not too many buyers did listen to it more that once (except by accident) beyond the "number nine" speach … 😉
I much would have preferred to have "Not Guilty" on the album instead, or "You Know My Name" (which I love) – but it´simply like it is ….
No – it´s far from a genial creation, it´s like an infant playing with (sound) toys, it might have been ambitious, brave, even an artistic expression – but it´s NO good music, no good art, certainly not what I would call a "song" (no one sings) … but it´s part of the Beatles catalogue …
(I also much prefert the "Can you take me back" of Paul preceeding it – it´s only improvised, but with enormous musical feeling and fantasy …. )
August lake Saturday 19 December 2015
Awful. Drugs doing what drugs do. Can only equate to a gorilla turned loose in a paint shop with a bare wall nearby. Sorry, sometimes some thing's need to be said. Just an opinion of course. Love Lennon but at best I feel this was a cry for help and everyone missed it. Just calling it as I see it.
jnoble Friday 8 January 2016
What's The New Mary Jane is even worse as far as John's late-period self indulgent trash.
John W Friday 19 February 2016
LOVE this. Always have and always will. Just the concept alone is worth the price of admission. Think of the possibilities.
I was disappointed that John and the others didn't experiment more with this way of composing. Sampling, surreal contrasts, the whole shebang.
Kathleen Friday 20 May 2016
White album would not be complete w/o Rev. 9. First heard it in high school. An eerie piece of work, very original and intriguing. Wouldn't play much of it backward. A little too high-end freaky for me. Interesting to read about all that went into making it. I think Ono really challenged Lennon to expand his creativity in a lot of ways even though he was already an innovative artist to begin with.
McLerristarr Monday 15 August 2016
I know John says that he just took the end of Revolution 1 and put loops over it, but I can't hear Revolution under it. Does it come in at a particular point? It's definitely not there at the start.
Joe Tuesday 16 August 2016
Hi McLerristarr. It really only makes sense if you hear the full 11-minute mix of Revolution 1, which emerged in 2009. You can hear it on this page
J Neo Marvin Friday 9 December 2016
All of the screaming of "right! Right" and other distressed voices are from John's vocal track from the original song. The rest is either buried or mixed out completely.
Wylie Richardson Wednesday 17 January 2018
Well the extended 'rriiiggghhttt' you can hear John singing is part of that track ("Revolution 1").
Rebel No. 9 Friday 26 August 2016
Something that has ALWAYS caught my attention about this is the mumbling/screaming/laughter beginning at the 3:55 mark. Can anyone tell me where that is from? Or at least who that person is? It always terrifies me every time I hear it. Please enlightenment on this.
Aside from that, Revolution 9 is one of my favourite musical creations ever. Not just from the Beatles but from music in general as well. I've listened to Rev 9 ten times in a row today. It's just so captivating to me.
Ms. Lane Wednesday 19 July 2017
Regardless of what John was thinking at the time, it:
1) Creeps me out
2) Seems like the aural equivalent of the Butcher cover
3) Is intriguing
I always hear a snippet of "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" at 6:47 or so, right after "Take this brother, may it serve you well." Does anyone else hear that and what is it really?
PolarOwlBear Sunday 22 October 2017
I also have always heard While My Guitar Gently Weeps at that point in this track.
Paul Thursday 14 December 2017
To me, it's not a song, it's a sound collage. Taken as that, it's fine. Contrary to what some people say it's not just noise, let alone random noise. It's noise, but it has a structure and progression to it due to the way the loops fit together. You may not find it terribly interesting to listen to, but mere noise it certainly isn't.
Gazella Friday 15 December 2017
I've been listening to the Beatles 35 years now, and today I listened Revolution 9 the second time (which means my previous attitude). But for my most surprise it was OK – absolutely relevant.
Gilby Saturday 3 March 2018
Always disliked Revolution 9. Until recently. Now I love it.
S Vaccaro Friday 13 July 2018
I KNEW I heard "bitch" before the beginning of the disturbing piano and creepy voice. Nice to know finally what the heck that was. No one gives this 'song' enough credit. It's actually really well done and put together well. There's the sound of cars driving and horns honking at one point, which is just really cool, then later you hear the car crash with the backwards voice, 'let me out'. I think it's all about paul's death. Just about death. The death of Paul. But no one really talks about how disturbing that beginning is. I don't know, maybe that's why so many people don't like this piece. It's so unsettling. I had nitemares about this song when I was a kid, there's no way I could listen to it or get through it. Usually now when I listen to the white album, I listen to number 9 just to try and understand it more. I used to never be able to get through it because it's so disturbing. But once you get past that beginning, it easier. It's still so weird tho. If you have a really good set of headphones and a good stereo you can hear things you've never heard before. I don't know where that whispering is. Who knows what kind of things are hidden so buried in the mix. I once knew a guy who one day was apparently quoting lines from number 9 all day. At one point he said, 'And now an interview with Paul McCartney: I'm dead'. Whether that's anywhere in the song or he made it up, I'll never know. I always think about it tho haha. Revolution 9 is inevitable. You don't want to it to be there, but it is there. And it's coming no matter what. The white album wouldn't have been the same without it. It's an infamous piece. It like puts the finishing touch on that album, no matter how much people hate it. It always makes the #1 most hated beatle songs lists. Why? No one was doing anything like this at the time, besides Yoko and no one else in the mainstream had anything like this on their album. Only the Beatles could have done this and had a song like this on an album, which is considered by some to be the best beatles album and best album of all time. *rasies hand*
ren castro Saturday 1 December 2018
Is there a piano sample of Martha My Dear here? i think i heard it.
The Beatles announce Let It Be film reissue and new collaboration with Peter Jackson
Geoff Emerick dies
The Beatles' White Album 50th anniversary box set to include remixes, demos and outtakes
Ringo Starr live at Fraze Pavilion, Kettering, Ohio, USA
Ringo Starr live at Century Center, South Bend, Indiana, USA
Sunday 9 September 2018
Buy my book! Riding So High – The Beatles and Drugs.
The acclaimed Amazon bestseller by the creator of the Beatles Bible. Click here for more info, or order now!
On this day in Beatles history
2014: Ringo Starr live at Les Schwab Amphitheater, Bend, Oregon
2009: Paul McCartney live at Citi Field, New York
1969: Recording: Oh! Darling, Octopus's Garden
1968: World première of Yellow Submarine
1967: US single release: All You Need Is Love
1964: Radio: From Us To You
1963: Radio: Easy Beat
1962: Live: McIlroy's Ballroom, Swindon
1961: Live: Litherland Town Hall, Liverpool
1961: Live: Cavern Club, Liverpool (lunchtime)
Want more? Visit the Beatles history section.
From the Fab Forum
Caption It!!! in Forum games
By Father McKenzie, 2 hours ago
Turn it up or down in All together now
By Shamrock Womlbs, 3 hours ago
10 Hint Beatles Song Challenge in Forum games
By The Hole Got Fixed, 7 hours ago
The 50 Best ??? Pictures in Beatles pics
Miscellaneous questions about Paul McCartney in Paul McCartney
By Beatlebug, 13 hours ago
Top Ten Club
The Beatles' songs – complete A-Z list!
Welcome to the Beatles Bible!
The Beatles' albums – complete list!
Days in the life: The Beatles' history
Beatles discography: United Kingdom (UK)
The Beatles and drugs
The Beatles' final photo shoot
Recording: Here Comes The Sun, Something
The acclaimed Amazon bestseller
Riding So High – The Beatles and Drugs
By the creator of the Beatles Bible.
Paperback | Ebook
★ ★ ★ ★ ★
The Bowie Bible
Love David Bowie? Of course you do. Don't miss our sister site, the Bowie Bible, now live!
The Beatles Bible is run for the love of anything and everything to do with The Beatles. If you've learned something new about the band and wish to show your appreciation, why not make a small donation via PayPal? It'll help with server costs, research material etc...
Contact | About | Privacy policy | FAQ
The Beatles Bible Copyright © 2019.
All rights reserved. All images © their respective owners. This site is not associated with The Beatles, Apple Corps Ltd, related organisations, or any members of The Beatles or their representatives.