The beloved 213-song discography of The Beatles has inspired many a barstool argument.  Who was the better songwriter, John or Paul?  Which of the group’s albums best captured them at the peak of their talent and creativity —  Rubber Soul, Revolver or Sgt. Pepper?  What was their best single?  Their most underrated song?  The most obscure?  And so on.

A relatively rare topic of Beatles debate, as measured by Google/Bing search results, is that of their song endings.  Those who, like me, battled their acne listening to Top 40 Radio will recall that most 1960s pop songs ended either by: (a) repeating the chorus and fading out, or (b) building to a climactic finale on the home key.  The Beatles mostly adhered to this formula in their early years, but their creative restlessness led them to explore other ways to end their songs — some for better, some not.  Since you asked, I here offer my take on the nine most regrettable and the nine strongest song endings by the Fab Four.

In the spirit of Fair Use, I have included a sample of each ending to serve as a memory jog.  And for the sake of shorter page-load time, I have split this article into two parts, the first of which (below) deals with the unhappy endings. 

9 Most Regrettable Beatles Song Endings

A regrettable ending to a Beatles song is one that detracts from or is discordant with an otherwise respectable work.  While one could argue that their “bad” songs, by definition, must have “bad” endings, I prefer to make a cleaner distinction.  So this list is mostly a chronicle of dashed expectations in Beatles songs when one compares their beginnings to their ends.

9 • Revolution 9

Revolution 9, from the White Album, is not one of my better-liked Beatles tracks, not by a long shot.  But its ending is on my regrettable list because — even after one accepts Rev 9 as the Lennon/Ono indulgence that it is — its endlessly-repeated-to-fade “block that kick” (with stereo panning no less) is just so boring and anticlimactic after the eight minutes of chaos that preceded it.

I think John and Yoko lost interest in the song and just ended it this way in a drug haze, thinking it was great.  By that time, producer George Martin was not in a mood to argue.

8 • Long, Long, Long

George Harrison’s Long, Long, Long, one of the last tracks recorded for the White Album, was another example of an unconventional song paired with an odd ending.  Recalling that ending, George Martin’s assistant Chris Thomas said:  “There’s a sound near the end of the song which is a bottle of … wine rattling away on top of a Leslie speaker cabinet.  It just happened.  Paul hit a certain note and the bottle started vibrating.  We thought it was so good that we set the mikes up and did it again.”

Okay, a vibrating bottle might qualify as “found music” but the bizarre sonic melding of locomotive effects and siren-like moans in the final 30 seconds all but destroyed the mood that Long, Long, Long had laboriously tried to establish.  No figuring this one.

7 • Dig It

In which the Beatles no longer take making good music seriously.  Hard to imagine that the ending of this John-led jam (from the 1969 Let It Be sessions) could possibly be worse than the crap that preceded it, but the Beatles were just great enough to pull that feat off.  Hearing this one always makes me cringe.

Regarding endings, the Let It Be album was overall a lousy way to end their career.  I have the 2009 box set, and the only time I have played the Let It Be disc was to record this clip.

6 • Her Majesty

It’s not so much the ending of this song  — “an A-natural on the second beat of the final measure” according to Alan W. Pollack — that I dislike, but the fact that a solo snippet of Paul’s would conclude the Abbey Road album and, as such, the group’s recording career.

Besides, everything about this ditty — including the ending — is too cute by half.

5 • Another Girl

Another Girl, a McCartney song from the 1965 Help! album, served as a pleasant-enough addition to the film’s soundtrack, in spite of Paul’s all-too-intrusive lead-guitar noodling.   The dashed-expectations part, and the reason this ending makes this list, is Paul’s insisting on noodling along aimlessly well after the others have stopped playing.  Sure, it’s different, but it wrongly puts emphasis on the weakest part of the song.

4 • I’m A Loser

I’m very partial to I’m A Loser, recorded in August 1964 and released on Beatles for Sale, especially its opening vocal and the driving chorus.  John’s refrain “…and I’m not what I appear to be…” presaged his later introspective works Help!  and Nowhere Man.  But a song of such strength deserved a better ending.  Its relatively weak instrumental bridge, with harmonica wails and country guitar stylings, was simply carried over to the fade-out.  A lost opportunity in retrospect.

Plus: George Harrison hits a note (B-flat) in his solo that, in its musical context (G major), just doesn’t work.  It always sounds jarring and amateurish to me, like something I would have played in college.  I suppose, being that I’m A Loser was recorded in 1964 and George was 21 at the time, maybe I should cut the guy a break.

3 • Tomorrow Never Knows

The old-timey piano part that closes Tomorrow Never Knows (from Revolver, 1966) just doesn’t belong.  Nowhere in the song until the very end does a piano part appear.  And the style of the playing — well, maybe if the piano had been played backwards?  Overall, this was a slapdash way to end such a work, maybe the first example of the Beatles effectively declaring, “Don’t take anything you’ve just heard seriously.”

2 • Within You, Without You

If the Tomorrow Never Knows ending was the first example of the Beatles undermining their own work, then the canned laughter that concluded Within You, Without You (from Sgt. Pepper) was clearly the next.  As to the laughter, I never bought into the explanation  that George Harrison offered Hunter Davies: “Well, after all that long Indian stuff, you want some light relief.  You haven’t got to take it all that seriously.”  My guess is that the group was, at that time, more interested in avoiding pretension than allowing their songs to be what they were.

1 • Glass Onion

The most regrettable Beatles song ending, based on my stark disappointment in how the song grabs you but then drops you like a rock, is the death-march string section tacked onto Glass Onion.  I still find it hard to swallow this act of sabotage.  You ask, how else could they have ended it?  Well, they were The Beatles.  They could have and should have thought of something… else.

So those are my nominees for The Beatles nine worst song endings.  I’ll share my choices for their best endings in the next few days.  Stay tuned — and in the meantime, feel free to share your thoughts.

More in  Creativity, Life | Read 3 comments | Subscribe
Retro Haiku
Black olives swimming
in a pool of French dressing
in a wooden bowl
More in  Verse | Be the first to comment | Subscribe

Asked and Answered: 13.0

Last year, I told you about Spelling Bee, a word game that appears daily in the New York Times.  The point of the game is to form as many words as possible, using any of the seven letters provided, any number of times, as long as the center letter is used at least once.  It is a fairly undemanding diversion which, along with my cup of coffee, helps get me going in the morning.  Plus, it gives me something to kvetch about to my friend Eric, who also plays.

Eric and I often compare notes and complaints about the Bee of the Day.  My usual beef is about the exotic foodstuffs (e.g., BOBA, CALLALOO, GHEE) included in the answer list, and Eric (former chemistry professor) and I both gripe about the chemical words, such as NICOTINIC and PROPANOL, that of course should be accepted by the Bee but are not.

Nonetheless, we were pleasantly surprised by a recent Bee in which BORON (Element 5) and CARBON (Element 6) were among the answers.  This got me wondering: what is the greatest number of element names one can generate from a set of seven different letters?

My first step toward an answer was to create a spreadsheet to count the number of times each letter of the alphabet appears in the list of element names.  Note: I decided to limit the number of elements in my list to the first 100, i.e., from HYDROGEN to FERMIUM.  Elements 101 and beyond — all man-made — are unfamiliar even to Eric and me.  One of those is darmstadtium (Element 110) of which only a few atoms have ever been produced. So it’s not like I’m disrespecting Nature by excluding darmstadtium and its ilk.

Anyway, back to my spreadsheet.  I found that the consonants appearing most often in my 100-element list were M (50), N (36), R (33), L (22) and T (22).  And as you might guess, the most common vowels were I (56) and U (50).  After spending about 15 minutes playing around with frequently-appearing letters, I was able to find two different seven-letter sets which “contain” the names of four elements.  (Before I reveal, would you like to try?)

The first set I found was EIO/BMNR. (I’ll refer to these sets by their vowels/consonants). This set spells the elements BORON, BROMINE, IRON and NEON.  And my second set was AEIO/DNR, which spells IODINE, IRON, NEON and RADON.  Interesting, but…

I was, of course, not satisfied.  Humankind needed to know: are there other seven-letter sets that spell out four element names?  And more importantly, are there seven-letter sets that spell out five (or more) element names?  I did not yet have these important answers.

So, for humankind’s sake, I was obliged to resort to brute-force computation, employing the only modern programming language I know — PHP.  I am familiar with PHP because it is the language used by WordPress, the platform for this and millions of other blogs.  And though I have a PHP reference manual, most times when I want to write code for a new task, I just do an internet search — 99 percent of the time someone has already done the thing that I want to do and has provided functions and/or code for it.

And that is (mostly) how I wrote a PHP program to print out all the seven-letter sets that spell out four or more element names.  I’ll spare you the details, but suffice it to say that before now I had no idea there were PHP functions like count_chars (finds the number of unique letters in a word), array_intersect (lists the items that two sets have in common) and implode (combines a set of individual letters into a single word).  Those functions served me well here, but they (like many other PHP functions) are so special-purpose that I can’t imagine any programmer having good command of them all.

In any case, I ultimately wrote a program that evaluated all 213,333 of the seven-letter sets containing one or more vowels and one or more consonants found in the element list. Without further delay, here are the results.




None.  Zero.  Not-a-single-one-ium.

So there you have it.  There are 15 different seven-letter sets which can be arranged to spell four element names, but there are no seven-letter sets that will spell five element names, at least not with respect to the first one hundred elements.

If some nerd ever uses this edition of Asked and Answered to win a bar bet, I will expect due credit, if not a beer.

More in  Asked & Answered | Read 3 comments | Subscribe