# Beatles Harmonies **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 23, 2004, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-harmonies/270778 "2004-10-23T17:03:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2004, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-harmonies/270778/1 "2004-10-23T17:03:21Z")
This is probably a music theory kind of question. The Beatles had a really distinctive vocal harmony sound. I’m thinking in particular of songs like “Because.” Is there a name for what they did in that song, or a kind or technique that makes it sound like it does? I’m not sure if it’s a studio thing or maybe it has something to do with the harmony parts specifically. I’ve heard few other bands get a sound like that, and I’m curious to know how it works. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d26b3c/32.png) [@Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Blue_Sky)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2004, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-harmonies/270778/2 "2004-10-23T17:19:40Z")
Simple, really. No tricks involved. From _Anthology 3_: > [@](#): > > …but here it has been stripped away to reveal the nine voices (the vocals were recorded once and then overdubbed twice more by the three Beatles)… ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d26b3c/32.png) [@Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Blue_Sky)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2004, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-harmonies/270778/3 "2004-10-23T17:20:55Z")
Queen had a similar sound, but they multi-tracked their vocals. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2004, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-harmonies/270778/4 "2004-10-23T17:36:13Z")
A lot of what was memorable about the Beatles’ harmonies was not so much the actual intervals or the way they were recorded, but simply the distinctive character of the voices themselves. Lennon, in particular, had a unique, slightly gritty, timbre in his voice which combined in fortuitously pleasing and distinctive manner with McCartney’s smoother, sweeter voice. A lot of the sound was just a lucky chemistry. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2004, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-harmonies/270778/5 "2004-10-23T18:15:21Z")
I wasn’t present in the studio when the Beatles recorded _Because_, but I was not only present but supplied 1/4 of the voices on this “200 Years” song, recorded in 1976. Download it as a 3.6MB MP3 file [here.](http://doorbell.net/sounds/200years.mp3) It’s only a demo, so don’t expect much (we didn’t have a real drummer). But the “Mormon Tabernacle Choir background” was created by recording four of us – 3 guys, 1 girl – 6 times, then putting 3 takes on each side of a stereo mix, with a lot of reverb. And the whole thing was recorded on a 8-track Teac recorder in a 2-car garage in Van Nuys. Neat, huh? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2004, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-harmonies/270778/6 "2004-10-23T19:00:44Z")
> [@Mr. Blue Sky](#): > > Simple, really. No tricks involved. Ah, THAT would do it. It’s got a beautiful density to it. ( **DtC** is right as well.) I guess it’s the multi-tracking, and not the intervals - whichever they may be - that make for that sound? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d26b3c/32.png) [@Mr.Blue\_Sky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Blue_Sky)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2004, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-harmonies/270778/7 "2004-10-23T20:38:28Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Ah, THAT would do it. It’s got a beautiful density to it. ( **DtC** is right as well.) I guess it’s the multi-tracking, and not the intervals - whichever they may be - that make for that sound? The three performances are slightly different from each other. On _Anthology 3_ you get to hear just the vocal track. Queen’s, OTOH, are exactly the same. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2004, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/beatles-harmonies/270778/8 "2004-10-24T04:56:48Z")
Don’t be confusing multitracking with overdubbing. Multitracking refers to isolating instrument(s) or voice(s) on individual tracks, either by acoustic separation when recorded or by recording each track at a different time. In the final mix, various amounts of various tracks are mixed, usually down to 2-track stereo. Overdubbing refers to a “stacking” process where multiple takes are combined to thicken the sound. A single person, recorded many times, becomes a choir, whether they sing the same notes each time or different ones. The stacking may be done by allocating a single track to each take, then combining them later, or combining one live with a prerecorded one “on the fly.” This later process saves tracks (2 takes become 1 track), but makes it impossible to separate later what has been combined. Phil Spector’s “Wall of Sound” effect was done using both techniques. In his day, 16-track recorders were about the max (nowdays, digital tracks can be synchronized so the sky is the limit), so after he got part of what he wanted, he mixed down from several tracks to a fewer number, then began building again.