|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Oct 3, 2006 1:32:38 GMT
Exactly, Unrepentent. Too much monkey business. True solutions to mysteries are usually very parsimonious. A too complicated explanation is likely incorrect. As for Dino Danelli, unlike Phil Ackrill, Mr. Danelli is never shown as being miked for vocals in any images of The Rascalls or The Young Rascalls that I've seen on YouTube or images.google.com Heck, he even doesn't sing along on choruses when there's no microphone in site, as in this video: youtube.com/watch?v=cT-yjiSSQjYOh, and if you're wondering whatever happened to Dino, here's an undated, but obviously more recent photo of him and some guy named Danny:  If Dino Danelli ever were used as a Paul McCartney replacement, it would have been a failure as soon as he opened his mouth to speak, let alone sing. Why? It's easy to do deduce that the guy wasn't a singer. Also, he probably had the same thick New York accent that Young Rascal lead vocalist Felix Cavelliere often demonstrated. Danelli was (and probably still is) a smokin' drummer, though, and would have been great as a Jimmy Nichol replacement. Speaking of "monkey business", here's the group playing "Mickey's Monkey", with Dino drumming like a machine gun: youtube.com/watch?v=d5M1TP4UJAYIn my opinion, Dino Danelli was probably never even considered as a Paul McCartney replacement, unlike Denny Laine who might have been considered, even confided in and consulted with (yet ultimately rejected in favour of Denny's likely recommendation, Phil Ackrill). Paulythene Paul |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Oct 3, 2006 18:54:52 GMT
If Dino Danelli ever were used as a Paul McCartney replacement, it would have been a failure as soon as he opened his mouth to speak, let alone sing. Why? It's easy to do deduce that the guy wasn't a singer. Also, he probably had the same thick New York accent that Young Rascal lead vocalist Felix Cavelliere often demonstrated. Danelli was (and probably still is) a smokin' drummer, though, and would have been great as a Jimmy Nichol replacement. Speaking of "monkey business", here's the group playing "Mickey's Monkey", with Dino drumming like a machine gun: youtube.com/watch?v=d5M1TP4UJAYIn my opinion, Dino Danelli was probably never even considered as a Paul McCartney replacement, unlike Denny Laine who might have been considered, even confided in and consulted with (yet ultimately rejected in favour of Denny's likely recommendation, Phil Ackrill). Paulythene Paul There is no need to comment that sequence of photos. Paulithene ..... Paulithene..... There was a "U.S. - Capitol" way in building Beatles repalcement. Don Knotts belonged to that "U.S. -Capitol" team of replacements. So Dino Danelli was. It was told that "Paul McCartney" was on drums for "Back in the USSR" "Back in the USSR" belongs to the Whit Album. Now we know the truth. Credits to Apollo C. Vermouth |
|
|
|
Post by Forum Manager on Oct 3, 2006 19:35:57 GMT
There is no need to comment that sequence of photos. The only comment I can make is WOW!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Oct 3, 2006 21:51:08 GMT
...hmmm.......that is an interesting post SK
|
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Oct 3, 2006 23:17:31 GMT
The timing doesn't work for Dino Danelli, Sun King. Look at The (Young) Rascall's discography: Discography Albums * The Young Rascals (1966) US: #15 * Collections (1967) US: #14 * Groovin' (1967) US: #5 * Once Upon a Dream (1968) US: #9 * Time Peace: Greatest Hits (1968) US: #1 * Freedom Suite (1969) US: #17 * See (1970) US: #45 * Search and Nearness (1971) US: #198 * Peaceful World (1971) US: #122 * The Island of Real (1972) US: #180 Singles * "I Ain't Gonna Eat My Heart Out Anymore" (1966) US: #52 * "Good Lovin'" (1966) US: #1 * "You Better Run" (1966) US: #20 * "Come On Up" (1966) US: #43 * "I've Been Lonely Too Long" (1967) US: #16 * "Groovin'" (1967) US: #1 UK: #8 * "A Girl Like You" (1967) US: #10 UK: #37 * "How Can I Be Sure?" (1967) US: #4 * "It's Wonderful" (1968) US: #20 * "A Beautiful Morning" (1968) US: #3 * "People Got to Be Free" (1968) US: #1 * "A Ray of Hope" (1969) US: #24 * "Heaven" (1969) US: #39 * "See" (1969) US: #27 * "Carry Me Back" (1969) US: #26 * "Hold On" (1970) US: #51 * "Glory Glory" (1970) US: #57 * "Love Me" (1971) US: #95 (Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rascals ) Two members of the band remained in the group from their first release (1966) to their last (1972); Felix Cavaliere and Dino Danelli. Dino just wasn't available to play the Faul game. Phil Ackrill, on the other hand, left the music biz at the end of 1964, and was available. Also, Dino was too famous to play the Faul game. To replace Paul, the powers that be needed someone who was a relatively unknown musician. Phil matched the obscurity criterion as well. Forgive me for repeating myself, but it's an important element in my argument; Dino's not a singer. A non-singer is not someone to be brought in to replace a singer. Yes, there is a remarkable physical resemblance, but that's where it ends. The resemblance between Dino Danelli and the late James Paul McCartney was only skin deep. There was not even the charm quality present, unlike with Phil Ackrill who presented that sweet smile that Phaul often shows. Phil has that buoyant "Phaul feel". I, a spiritual person, can sense the match of the soul of the smiling man second from the left in the photo of The Diplomats here (Phil), and the soul of the man in the beard (Phaul).  Dino may not even know how to smile properly, judging by all the photos we've seen of him looking so serious. (Dino, man, if you're reading this, when you smile, the corners of your lips are supposed to move upwards towards your ears. That photo of you and The Rascals and the accordian may pass for a smiling pic, but you could do better.) This is what a smile should look like. Not even a beard or cheek filler injections can obscure it:  I'm not saying that Dino could not have been brought in for a day or something to act as a visual decoy. I understand that is a reasonable possibility, based soley on his looks and the point well taken about the label affiliation (Capitol/E.M.I.) but there's no way that I can accept that Dino Danelli was working within the Beatles on their music. The drummer for the Ballad of John and Yoko was Phaul (i.e. Phil) and on Back In The USSR, if it wasn't Ringo, it would have been Phaul (i.e. Phil) as well. Dino Danelli ain't got the same soul! I need that old time rockin' Phaul. Paulythene Paul |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Oct 4, 2006 6:07:58 GMT
This is what a smile should look like. Not even a beard or cheek filler injections can obscure it: I'm not saying that Dino could not have been brought in for a day or something to act as a visual decoy. I understand that is a reasonable possibility, based soley on his looks and the point well taken about the label affiliation (Capitol/E.M.I.) but there's no way that I can accept that Dino Danelli was working within the Beatles on their music. The drummer for the Ballad of John and Yoko was Phaul (i.e. Phil) and on Back In The USSR, if it wasn't Ringo, it would have been Phaul (i.e. Phil) as well. Dino Danelli ain't got the same soul! I need that old time rockin' Phaul. Paulythene Paul  We are saying the same Paulythene. Dino was set up as a Paul repalcement. Photos tell it so clear. That was in 1965/1966 BEFORE Bill/Phil choice.   Dino's HALF face close to Bill/Phill FULL face on the White Album Poster tells that. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Oct 4, 2006 9:30:29 GMT
Dino must've been a busy man.
But it's been implied by an "insider" or two that there has been more than one Faul until things properly settled down.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Bearer on Oct 4, 2006 9:36:35 GMT
Neil "as in Paul" - was Neil Aspinall even a real person's name or a made-up one?
|
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Oct 4, 2006 22:01:34 GMT
Neil "as in Paul" - was Neil Aspinall even a real person's name or a made-up one?   A made up one ..... Phil with Danelli eyes ... |
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Oct 5, 2006 0:35:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Oct 5, 2006 1:58:31 GMT
Dino must've been a busy man. But it's been implied by an "insider" or two that there has been more than one Faul until things properly settled down. THe photo record implies multi-Fauls to me as well. e.g. I consider "Faul" not a name for William per se, but a generic term covering anyone who subs for Paul for any length of time, hence in AHDN where the Fab 4 are running around the field, Paul was too hung-over to show, so they had Lester I think it was run for him, making Lester a one-time Faul, or lol "monofaulic' as it were. I can't resist. Super-cali-fragile-istic, MONO-FABRICA-CIOUS, Even though the sound of it is something quite mendacious, If you say it loud enough, you'll always sound bodacious, Super-cali-fragile- Is this song a bit faul-acious? Hum-diddle-iddle-iddle, Hum-diddle-aye......... |
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Oct 5, 2006 4:03:21 GMT
I consider "Faul" not a name for William per se, but a generic term covering anyone who subs for Paul for any length of time.... William? Aren't we past this William theory? The idea that Paul was replaced by someone from Canada named William (or Bill for short) seems like such an obsolete theory to me now. The only connection to it that I can see is the similarity between the name "Bill" and the name "Phil". As for useage of the word "Faul" as defined by Doc, to refer to any fake Paul, that's a good one, in my opinion, with potential open ends (does one include the "Pauls" in Beatle Tribute bands like 1964, The FabFour, and Rain as bona fide Fauls?) but it is an innovation, and as a recent innovation, not widely accepted at this point in time. When looking at the "Irrefutable Evidence" and "Ortho-Comparison" pages, the word "Faul" is used to refer to one person who replaced Paul in the main. Those were the mind-blowing pages that turned me on to the dead man. It's hard for me to move past such heavily impacting impressions I saw there. Nevertheless, I can do so. I claim to be the first to have used the word "Phaul", and for the record, I assert that it refers soley to Phil (Ackrill) after taking on the persona of James Paul McCartney. It is a poetic coincidence that I coined the name in the Fall. (Although, it might have been the case that the true originator of the name "Phaul" was John Lennon. I understand people have stated that John Lennon used the word Faul, and I took that as a given, but no one really knows for sure whether John was saying the nickname with a capital F at the beginning or a capital P followed by a small h there, do they?) |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Oct 5, 2006 4:56:05 GMT
I consider "Faul" not a name for William per se, but a generic term covering anyone who subs for Paul for any length of time.... William? Aren't we past this William theory? The idea that Paul was replaced by someone from Canada named William (or Bill for short) seems like such an obsolete theory to me now. The only connection to it that I can see is the similarity between the name "Bill" and the name "Phil". As for useage of the word "Faul" as defined by Doc, to refer to any fake Paul, that's a good one, in my opinion, with potential open ends (does one include the "Pauls" in Beatle Tribute bands like 1964, The FabFour, and Rain as bona fide Fauls?) but it is an innovation, and as a recent innovation, not widely accepted at this point in time. When looking at the "Irrefutable Evidence" and "Ortho-Comparison" pages, the word "Faul" is used to refer to one person who replaced Paul in the main. Those were the mind-blowing pages that turned me on to the dead man. It's hard for me to move past such heavily impacting impressions I saw there. Nevertheless, I can do so. I claim to be the first to have used the word "Phaul", and for the record, I assert that it refers soley to Phil (Ackrill) after taking on the persona of James Paul McCartney. It is a poetic coincidence that I coined the name in the Fall. (Although, it might have been the case that the true originator of the name "Phaul" was John Lennon. I understand people have stated that John Lennon used the word Faul, and I took that as a given, but no one really knows for sure whether John was saying the nickname with a capital F at the beginning or a capital P followed by a small h there, do they?) All that is well taken, polythenepaul, I see your points very one. Now, the Liverpool "P" versus the Liverpool "ph", is there a possibility that this Liverpool hard "p" is sometimes aspirated in a way that makes even a word like "pool" sound ALMOST like "phool", or "peel" almost like "pheel"? So, if John were 'three sheets', or a little bit tired one day, he may have said something in between "p" and "ph" like "phaul" that perhaps George or even Ringo heard? Just an idea. Not exactly the best one I ever had, but, I place it on the table. But, yo know, Ackrill, and Bill, or even "Phill" (this is tricky to speak of) is a close ringer for each other, with certain modifications, that strike me as possible, for the most part. I think that the foreheads don't match all that well, but maybe they've changed Ackills forehead in all of the early photos to avoid suspicion. But, where is Ackrill today? Also, from some above pics, billy seems to have a much shorter, wider cranium than Phil. But that could be angle. It's all relative. |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Oct 5, 2006 5:31:09 GMT
I'd like to know who really sang "Back In The U.S. - S.R." ..... Yes the real "Phaul" was Phil/Bill. But I'd LOVE to have more documentation about Ackril (or Ralston) of The Diplomats en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denny_Laine"However, he (Denny Laine) continued to record music and has appeared at Beatles conventions and on tributes to both The Beatles and Wings. He is currently working on an autobiography."myspace.com/dennylainePaulythene ... what are you saying? Denny singing voice DOES fit in "early Faul singer"... listen to the start phrase of "Go Now" |
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Oct 5, 2006 6:38:10 GMT
But, yo know, Ackrill, and Bill, or even "Phill" (this is tricky to speak of) is a close ringer for each other, with certain modifications, that strike me as possible, for the most part. I think that the foreheads don't match all that well, but maybe they've changed Ackills forehead in all of the early photos to avoid suspicion. What Bill? There was no Bill. There is no Bill. Bill is a figment of a collective imagination going back to the late 1960s. Bill was a dead end theory. Forget Bill. But, where is Ackrill today? He is in the process of divorcing Heather Mills. Also, from some above pics, billy seems to have a much shorter, wider cranium than Phil. But that could be angle. It's all relative. What Bill? There is no Bill! <tearing at hair> |
|
|
|
Post by Paulythene Paul on Oct 5, 2006 7:19:17 GMT
I'd like to know who really sang "Back In The U.S. - S.R." ..... The voice is the same as the man who sang The Long and Winding Road during the "Get Back" sessions. It is Phil Ackrill in the role of Paul McCartney (i.e. Phaul). Yes the real "Phaul" was Phil/Bill. I'm sorry, Sun King. "The real 'Phaul'"? I feel like I'm writing and re-writing the same thing over and over again in different ways and no matter how I put it, and no matter what evidence I present to back up what I'm saying, my views are not being understood, let alone agreed with and adopted. But I'd LOVE to have more documentation about Ackril (or Ralston) of The Diplomats I'm pretty sure that Ackril with one L is a mispelling, and that Ackrill with two Ls at the end is correct. However, I admit, I'm not certain about that. One thing I am certain of, and I've mentioned it before, Sun King, but you seem not to have noticed my saying so, is that the name Ralston was a pseudonym adopted by Phil Ackrill and Bev Bevan when they wanted to pretend to be be brothers. It was a gimmick to get more publicity. Like when the members of The Ramones all adopted the same last name, or like when the members of the Travelling Wilbury's pretended to all be so-and-so Wilbury, and such-and-such Wilbury. I don't know what led Phil and Bev to do such a thing. Maybe they thought it was a real attention getter, like the Wilson brothers in The Beach Boys (who were current then) or the Everly brothers (who were already big successes by the time of the early 1960s). Thank you for the link to Denny Laine's MySpace webpage. I'm really glad to read he's working on an autobiography. Maybe this will eventuate in a lot of answers about Phil Ackril(l). Paulythene ... what are you saying? About what? What have I said that was not clear? I'm not sure about the folks on this site. I think I write very clearly. I have noticed that a lot of times what I write is ignored (e.g. having to repeat myself about the name "Ralston" being a put-on, an assumed stage-name). I'm thinking of taking a break from this forum, and if people want to understand what I've written in the past, they can re-read it, preferably while sober. ;D  Denny singing voice DOES fit in "early Faul singer"... listen to the start phrase of "Go Now" Sun King, I did listen to the clip. Most of the time he sings throughout his career, Denny Laine puts something singers call "heat" on his voice. Robert Wyatt, when he was singing (and drumming) with Soft Machine and Matching Mole, likewise was well known for it (i.e. "heat" on his voice). At the start of Go Now, in this recording you've presented, Denny Laine holds back on "the heat". It's more his natural, pure voice. Phaul, and JPM before him, often sang with an open, "unheated" throat. If you are trying to persuade me, based on the evidence of two words, ("We've already"), sung in open throat fashion, that Denny Laine ever posed publicly as Paul McCartney, I'm not buying it. For one thing, it's not enough to pursuade me. Secondly, even in the opening line of Go Now, some heat gets put on. Listen to the word "said" in "We've already said". The boy can't help himself. He's hooked on heat. "So long." I am going to take a break. I'm getting too worked up about all these misunderstandings due to what I believe are people hanging onto old, disproven theories, and not paying attention to the logic of the arguments I have recently made, and I'm getting close to taking out my frustrations in the form of aggression. That's not good! Not for me. Not for the other posters. Not for the lurkers. I don't want you to see me this way. I'd "better go now". |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Oct 5, 2006 8:50:41 GMT
Well, polythene, why should you leave? Yes, you have a right to feel frustrated by the "slowness" of which these new ideas are taking hold, but perhaps it's just a matter of some
careful, thorough, and oh yes, sober revisiting of all the applicable posts. This thread in particular.
"Bill", "William", has been a somewhat "borrowed" name, or assumed name, we use resulting from the great number of times that it has appeared in Beatle matters. Need I list?
No, I thought not.
But, as you suggest, perhaps "Wiliam" was always a "collective" fiction that served people at the time, formerly, back in the 60's, as a reference for communicating ABOUT things--while the name itself applied to no person directly. A name of convenience, an "inside" name.
Perhaps during John's "Imagine" when George says "Beatle PHIL" to table guest Phil Spector (poor man), he is intentionally playing off Phil's presence in order to cover his real intended use of the nominative Beatle PHIL."
There is perhaps much more to all of this. hence, don't vanish just yet. Long held ideas require longer time to repair. This is a truth central to this whole study.
If PID/PIA/PWR never achieves any other result, it will achieve this: teach those who have
"played a few rounds" at the table how discussion, study, and open thinking can affect a "fixed population" (our varied membershiop) in it;s core beliefs about figures and institutions that they have long held certain immovable ideas about.
I was once immovable about PID, because I was PIA (once I forgot about Hey Jude) from 1970 until 2003, August in fact. I was immovable. Of course, it seldom came up as an issue.
But when it did, I was as--------firmly PIA to whomever spoke it, as fp and KHAN are today. (with all respect to fp and KHAN's dogged dedication to the PIA position...)
And now, I sleep.
Adrenal glands. Shot, you know.
|
|
|
|
Post by latvietis on Oct 5, 2006 18:32:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Manager on Oct 5, 2006 18:51:11 GMT
Perhaps during John's "Imagine" when George says "Beatle PHIL" to table guest Phil Spector (poor man), he is intentionally playing off Phil's presence in order to cover his real intended use of the nominative Beatle PHIL." Good call Doc! |
|
|
|
Post by Forum Manager on Oct 5, 2006 18:58:17 GMT
One thing I am certain of, and I've mentioned it before, Sun King, but you seem not to have noticed my saying so, is that the name Ralston was a pseudonym adopted by Phil Ackrill and Bev Bevan when they wanted to pretend to be be brothers. It was a gimmick to get more publicity. That is a good point, thanks for bringing it up again Paulythene  I am wondering though, is Phil Ackrill a real name or just another pseudonym? |
|
|
|
Post by Sun King™ on Oct 5, 2006 19:54:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by unrepentant on Oct 6, 2006 1:16:19 GMT
there's PAUL....looking two inches taller than both george and john. was that the "our world" special??
|
|
|
|
Post by latvietis on Oct 6, 2006 11:30:59 GMT
Well, it looks very Bill (or Phil, etc.) to me  |
|
ilras
Contributor
Posts: 62
|
Post by ilras on Oct 8, 2006 3:58:33 GMT
Everybody in those years had that look...
|
|
|
|
Post by latvietis on Oct 8, 2006 7:03:52 GMT
So that picture (from the Our World special) could be doctored...
|
|
?? 
