Written by: Lennon-McCartney
Recorded: 22, 23 August; 16, 29 September 1967
Producer: George Martin
Engineers: John Timperley, Geoff Emerick, Ken Scott
Released: 8 December 1967 (UK), 27 November 1967 (US)
Paul McCartney: vocals, piano, bass
John Lennon: backing vocals, organ
George Harrison: backing vocals, guitar
Ringo Starr: drums, tambourine
Available on:
Magical Mystery Tour
Anthology 2
Your Mother Should Know was written by Paul McCartney at his home in London. It took its title from the screenplay of A Taste Of Honey, and the music harked back to Busby Berkeley showtunes and the golden age of music hall.
I wrote it in Cavendish Avenue on the harmonium I have in the dining room there. My Aunty Jin and Uncle Harry and a couple of relatives were staying and they were in the living room just across the hall, so I just went to the dining room and spent a few hours with the door open with them listening. And I suppose because of the family atmosphere Your Mother Should Know came in. It's a very music-hall kind of thing, probably influenced by the fact that my Aunty Jin was in the house.
Many Years From Now, Barry Miles
It's likely that the song was briefly considered for the Our World satellite broadcast of 25 June 1967. The Beatles went instead with All You Need Is Love, a simpler message and one more readily understood by a worldwide audience. But the idea of a big old-fashioned singalong clearly stayed with McCartney when planning the Magical Mystery Tour film.
The big prop was that great big staircase that we danced down, that was where all the money went: in that particular shot on that big staircase. I said, 'Sod it, you've got to have the Busby Berkeley ending,' and it is a good sequence. Just the fact of John dancing, which he did readily. You can see by the fun expression on his face that he wasn't forced into anything.
In the studio
Your Mother Should Know was begun in Chappell Recording Studios in Maddox Street, London, as Abbey Road was booked for other artists.
On the first day, 22 August 1967, they recorded eight takes of the rhythm track. The following day – their last session at Chappell – they recorded overdubs for the song. This was also Brian Epstein's last-ever visit to a Beatles recording session; he died on 27 August.
On 16 September they began a remake of Your Mother Should Know, recording 11 more takes. The arrangement was harmonium, piano, vocals and drums, with a military-style snare rhythm. The eighth of these can be heard on Anthology 2.
The remake was eventually abandoned, and on 29 September Lennon and McCartney completed the song by going back to the Chappell tapes and overdubbed organ and bass.
Ahhh this song is amazing, just as every single one on the album. With 12/8 time, like most of paul’s songs. Bloody outstandingm that upright mccarneyish bass, that piano, those beatles-style choruses, yooooooooour mo-ther- shooould., aaaah aaaaaaaaahh.. And that organ on the interlude, so …psychedelic
Beatiful. Magical Mystery Tour is the only album i really cant get tired of listenin to. Along with Revolver maybe
I agree that every song on the album is great. I do not agree that those are the only albums that don’t get old. Rubber Soul? Abbey Road? Come on man…
How did you figure out it was 12/8 time?
It sounds like 4/4 to me…
12/8 is just a fancy way of saying its in 4 with a shuffle… you count 123,123,123,123 instead of 1..2..3..4
I’ve never heard of a thing called 12/8, and it’s definitely not the metrum of “most of Paul’s songs” and definitely not the metrum on this one.
And it’s no shuffle.
It’s like LetsPlayCool says: It’s a simple 4/4.
There are songs with 6/8 metrum, which is a fast waltz. “I me mine” (verses) would be an example.
Maybe not a literal shuffle, but Paul DID do a lot of those 4/4 songs with the swing/shuffle feel, either literal or implied. Most of his “granny” songs do that; also “Michelle”, “Penny Lane”, the middle of “A Day In The Life”, etc.
John & George did this in certain songs too, but less often than Paul.
@PaulsBass, if you’ve never heard of 12/8 you don’t read music. It’s very common, and It is a shuffle. 12/8 is to 4/4 what 6/8 is to 2/4 (March music) Anything that sounds like dot dah | dot dah | dot dah instead of dot dot | dot dot is a shuffle – dotted eight notes. So you take the dotted eighth notes and you get 4 sets of triplets – thus the 12/8 meter. 6/8 is not a “fast waltz” waltzes are in 3/4 so the equiv. would be 9/8. 6/8 is commonly used in MARCH music. Sousa used it all the time. You might want to take a couple music theory classes at your local community college
It is not 12/8. It is actually something called ‘common time’ which essentially translates into 4/4. There are 4 quarters to the measure.
I agree . Never heard of a 12/8 timing, is that a proper thingy Magig or what??
It is 12/8. .. Compound quadruple time, ie: 4 slow beats each subdivided into 3.
Who cares what the time was ?
Now, I clearly think it’s all just fantastic! It’s wonderful, each and every last bit. And people tell me I’m too young to know about any this but when your father sings about anything in the car constantly and he has some of the albums, *_* ,you’re gonna learn about the Beatles and their wisdom and beauty and you have to know about them. They had 5 movies and a cartoon! And then after the broke up Ringo was in Caveman and The Magic Christian and John was in How I Won the War. Plus they are soooo darnnnn cutee! Especially Ringo, so tiny and cute. <3 Bless John and George and keep on reelin' Paul!
Zug-zug.
THOSE WHO NEVER HEARD of 12/8 time signature may be due to the fact that they’ve never opened a piece of sheet music with that time signaturte in their lives, which doesn’t necesarily mean it doesn’t exist…. I did, in fact. The very first time I saw 12/8 that on a sheet music was a BEATLES SONG, called Oh Darling (ring a bell?)
Now, I’m gonna try to settle this topic for good… I came with the answer to this after years of transcribing Beatles songs, specially piano tunes, most of which fit Lennon’s description of ‘Granny’. Everything I’m about to say can be easely verified with sheet music software (namely, Guitar Pro, to cite the simplest)
Most computer sheet music software have a button called ‘Triplet Feel’, that when activated, adds ‘shuffle’ to the beat no matter what the time signature is… The Following beatle songs are all in 4/4, but feature this triplet feel:
1- Michelle
2- Good Day Sunshine
3- Penny Lane
4- When I’m Sixty Four
5- With a Little Help From My Friends
6- your Mother Should Know
7- Honey Pie
8- Maxwell’s Silver Hammer.
Another song that is commonly mistaken all over the internet as being a 12/8 but is actually a 4/4 with Triplet feel, is The Beach Boys’ “Wouldn’t It Be Nice”.
Now here is the magic: Any of this 4/4 songs can be written either in 4/4 or 12/8 in sheet music software, and in both signatures they are going to sound correct and exactly the same as long as they have the above mentioned ‘Triplet Feel’ activated. I admit I do not know what applies to conservatory musicians’ sense of rythm, but at least to computers, 12/8 is virtually the same as 6/4 (which is the same as 4/4 + 2/4), that being the reason why they sound the same.
Oh! Darling, however, is an example of authentic 12/8 blues song, with no triplet feel. (In fact, if you activate the triplet feel it stops sounding right (give it a try).
Hope this clarifies the matter. Cheers!
12/8 time does exist and is usually referred to as a “Compound Quadruple”. Each beat is made up of a “triplet”. (three notes). Any time signature with a 12 on the top is a compound quadruple. 12/8 and 12/16 are the most common.
One thing you’d need to clarify further is:
> Another song that is commonly mistaken all over the internet as being a 12/8 but is actually a 4/4 with Triplet feel, is The Beach Boys’ “Wouldn’t It Be Nice”.
And then:
> Any of this 4/4 songs can be written either in 4/4 or 12/8 in sheet music software, and in both signatures they are going to sound correct and exactly the same as long as they have the above mentioned ‘Triplet Feel’ activated.
If “Wouldn’t It Be Nice” would sound exactly the same notated as 12/8 or 4/4-with-triplet-feel, what makes you say that it’s “actually” 4/4-with-triplet-feel and anyone calling it 12/8 is “mistaken”?
Since this topic is trying to settle the 12/8 and 4/4 debate, I might as well weigh in.
First off, ANY NUMBER over /8 or /4 (or /2 or even /1 or /16 or /32 or /64, etc.) is a real time signature. It just depends on how many counts are in each measure and how you wish to notate the counts for any particular song. You can generally get away with only really needing #/2, #/4, or #/8, which makes are the most common and easiest for a musician to read.
A true shuffle is written in #/8 to give it that bounce feel, but AS A SHORTHAND many people will write the song in #/4, but they will ALWAYS notate that two eighth notes are to played as the first and last eighth triplet. Again, this makes the music easier to read than having to add a rest for the middle triplet every time.
12/8 and 4/4 are not the same, but you treat the eighth notes in 4/4 as the first and last eighth triplet in order to make 4/4 feel the same. That said, you can notate a shuffle song either way, and there is no “officially correct” time signature to use.
It is literally like having an argument about math, about whether 5/5 = 1 or if 7/7 = 1; they BOTH = 1, but it’s a matter of perspective and preference, and you’ll use the one that is easiest for what you’re trying to accomplish (e.g., if you’re adding 2/5 to 1, it’s easiest to think of 1 as 5/5 instead of 7/7).
One more note, 6/4 is NOT always the same as 4/4 + 2/4; it depends where the pulse is within 6/4. It could be 1/4 + 5/4, 2/4 + 4/4, 3/4 + 3/4, 4/4 + 2/4, 5/4 + 1/4, or even 0/4 + 6/4 (when there is no internal pulse, but then that would be easiest to notate as 6/8).
The sheet music is written in 4/4. It has a lot of eighth and 16th notes, along with a lot of “tied” notes making it seem like a shuffle.
By itself, Magical Mystery Tour is a great album, I agree – what makes it even more amazing is that it was released six months after Sgt. Pepper. Most groups today would follow the misguided advice of their management and just sit on such an album until sales of the current release started to die down, a strategy that doesn’t always work. I remember at the time watching the chart position of both albums in 1967 as they had a period of swapping back and forth between #1 and #2.
In typical Beatles fashion at the time, each album had its own unique feel – it was among the reasons why we all anxiously awaited the next release, and provided plenty of material for us to try to figure out “How did they pull THAT off?” in sooooo many garage band jams. There has not been another group since that continues to sell as well as The Beatles over 50 years later, and I doubt there will ever be another.
I feel the same way, I could never tire of this album, and the remastered version is awesome. This song, the organ and the piano work together so wonderfully. Just love it.
Always loved Ringo’s drums on this album. The way the snare cuts through it all- especially on the opening track and Walrus.
Check out the mono version of this if you haven’t. It is completely different. It is phased. More like dance-hall on acid, kind of. Great sounds on this song.
This is probably my favorite of Paul’s “granny” songs!
This is an instantly appealing tune which ultimately goes no where. It’s not like it necessarily should mean anything, right? The Beatles have plenty of nonsense lyrics and this is just another. Yet it ultimately frustrates by pulling the listener in with a compelling melody worthy of a pied-piper and then hits with a repetitive lyric that almost sounds like an insult involving ‘your mother’. She should know. I’ve often thought what stratospheric heights this song could have become if the lyrics had actually be worthwhile, but I tend to think this of a lot of McCartney tunes – especially his solo work. A great tune that becomes dispensible. Sorry, folks.
You got it:
“It’s not like it necessarily should mean anything, right?”
Indeed!
It’s just a fantastic song that doesn’t mean anything!
Well done, Paul, I love it!
It’s kind of meaningless yes, in a “granny shit” kind of way as John might say. But would anyone throw stones let alone pebbles at The Beatles quntessential meaningless song “I Am The Walrus” ?
I agree wholeheartedly. The song starts so well, but it’s not developed, as if PM was saying ‘Where do I go from here?’. I suppose he could have asked Lennon. In fact, the laziest song the Beatles ever produced
Probably the worst Beatles song. It’s like bad fart, just hangs around. Great for pub sing-a-longs when everybody’s plastered
I agree with my wife, Mrs. Mustard, this is also my favorite Paul “granny” song… close second though is “Honey Pie.”
Great song and a great fit to the Mystery Tour album/film. Psychedelic dance hall music is right !
This is one of the weakest tracks ever released by the Beatles. There was no point to this song. I know these types of turn of the century songs were being recorded by Pink Floyd and the Stones during this period, but Paul’s were far weaker. I have put together a list of the 5 worst Beatle songs and this one is number three:
1. Mr. Moonlight
2. Honey Pie
3. Your Mother Should Know
4. Maxwell’s Silver Hammer
5. I Dig a Pony
When I’m 64 escapes the list because its whimsicality sort of fits on Sergeant Pepper, but then Paul went on and did it three more times. The fifth worst Beatles’ song, I Dig a Pony is far, far stronger than Honey Pie, Maxwell’s Silver Hammer or I Dig a Pony (or Good-Night, which is probably 6th–indeed, the White Album didn’t have the greatest ending).
I would call their first four british albums their 55 worst songs. I like Your Mother Should Knows as I like all of Paul’s granny songs (my ranking is
1. Honey Pie
2. Maxwell’s Silver Hammer
3. Your Mother Should Know
4. When I’m 64; these are the four beatles songs which I would call “granny music”)
Are you seriously including the tracks on ‘A Hard Days Night’ in your worst Beatles songs ?
Surely you have unintentionally omitted “Wild Honey Pie” from this list.
Dig A Pony is weak? Wow, it’s one of the best songs on Let It Be. Certainly the best “live” song on the album..
I think it’s awesome this song actually has a video. Also I don’t see what’s the deal with all this worst song rating (why aren’t you guys listning Revolution 9 there for that matter?). I love Paul’s “granny” songs just as much as his heavier tracks like Helter and I’ve Got A Feeling.
Its one of my favorite songs. Not the best song but a favorite. A memory I have is playing it for my mother in my room on a record player when she wanted to know what stuff I was listening to. Guess what? she said it was just ok!
Just to clarify some earlier comments this song is definitely in 4/4 time. But it does have a slight swing in the melody which you would notate as dotted eighths on paper. As for 12/8 – there certainly is such a thing and Old Brown Shoe is a good up-tempo example although you could also just call it a fast shuffle. Many old doo-wop tunes and songs like “The Stroll” are in 12/8. “I Can’t Help Falling In Love With You” comes to mind. ONE two three, TWO two three, THREE two three, FOUR two three. Lots of gospel music is in this signature.
12/8 can be found in bluesier tunes such as the Stones version of Robert Johnson’s “Love In Vain” as well as Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Tuesday’s Gone”.
I never liked this song at all. There was some obvious junk in the later albums…Revolution #9 is absurd. “Dig It” etc. But as far as something that is actually a song, this one I have always considered one of McCartney’s weaker songs. There is nothing about it that compels me to want to hear it ever again. The only McCartney song that is worse, that I can think of, is Every Little Thing. But hey, he gave us like 100 great songs, songs I love to hear again and again. There has got to be a couple throw ins.
Well Bubba, this song is not junk. Neither is Every Little Thing. Paul’s so called “granny songs” like Your Mother Should Know are unique to this timeframe in popular music especially when one considers the other songs on the MMT album. It’s on the same soundtrack as I Am The Walrus and Blue Jay Way!
Paul McCartney (and Ray Davies) were writing several songs that harken back to the days before rock and roll. Pre-rock has its merits as well.
+1
Correct. YMSK is not in 12/8. It is in 4/4 with a bit of swing to the eighth notes.
I think one of the problems in the perception of Magical Mystery Tour is that a few of the songs are sort of re-dos of Sgt Pepper songs. This makes MMT seem a bit formulaic. There is again an introduction song (SPLHCB vs. MMT) and a Paul granny song (WISF vs YMSK) and a dirge/Indian-like George song (WYAWO vs, BJW). So at the time the latter suffered as a repeat of the former.
I was a kid when the two came out and I got to know the MMT songs before I got to know the SP songs, and so I have a particular affinity for the MMT songs. That said, even now in retrospect, “Your Mother Should Know” is really good in any context. A nice melody, nice chord changes, and a cool scene in the MMT movie.
Time to shovel some more spaghetti!
There was no Magical Mystery Tour LP initially released in the UK. Instead, an EP was released with a few songs written for the movie. I agree that Your Mother Should Know is weak, but it fits with the goofy movie scene. The US LP release was a copulation of MMT movie tunes and British released singles.
Lately I’ve been listening to this song a lot and it cheers me up but also I realized how lovely it is. The backing vocals, the lead vocal and bass are perfect
I love playing this song on the piano, so much fun.
Regarding the discussion of time signature: there is often more than one correct method for counting a piece of music. 12/8 is surely a tenuous way to count this one, though. Your foot will be flapping manically, as well as with a two against three polyrhythm, which is surely not the feel of this old-timey two-beat here. 12/8 does apply fittingly to Oh, Darling, which has the familiar blues triple feel, which can also be thought of as 6/8, and is nothing like the two-beat music hall bounce of Your Mother Should Know. This is more of a cut time feel. Imagine trying to count the typical 4/4 jazz cymbal ride if you actually counted the triplet, rolling undercurrent. You can’t practically count it that way.
Here is a good discussion of cut time that I looked up after reading the posts here.
http://www.chuckandersonjazzguitar.com/demystifying-cut-time-in-performing-music/
You don’t count 12/8 in threes – you count it 1-2-3-4 but in triplets. Tuck-a-tuh Tuck-a-tuh Tuck-a-tuh Tuck-a-tuh etc.
An additional comment on the 12/8 time signature: Another example old song with a 12/8 beat is the song ‘Impossible Dream.’
And, have anyone already mentioned “All My Loving” as an example of a 4/4 beat with a triplet feel or swing feel?
The triplet feel on ‘All My Loving’ was made more obvious by John’s “triplet beat strumming” that added thick rhythm / accompaniment to the song.
An example for those who have a hard time understanding all this:
Try saying “another example” two times really quick, and at the same time tap your knee on the “o” in another and the “a” in example, and you will have the 12/8 (triplet feel) in the words (syllables) and the 4/4 on your knee.
The 12/8 in YMSK is just too fast to really work as a time signature, so the more manageable 4/4 is the beat here, and the same goes for “All My Loving”. The opposite goes for “Oh! Darling”, where the 12/8 is slow enough to work as the time signature, while the 4/4 gets a bit too slow and heavy.
I would like tto read opinions about Ringo’s playing I like it ! This song is not one of the best but I like it too
Really great drumming! Ringo keeps the basic beat of the song constantly giving it its characteristic feeling. Effective drummer!
This is the most boring filler song since
Fixing a Hole and Lovely Rita, which were also McCartney songs, and before that
Good Day Sunshine, which was also a McCartney song, and before that I’ve Just Seen A Face, which was also a- ah, you get the point.
LH fan…….are you daft? That’s akin to suggesting that A Day In The Life, Tomorrow Never Knows and Help! were filler songs as well. For crying out loud!!!
I enjoy this song, even my son loves it, but there’s a thing or two that make me react from the comments i’ve read so far. I don’t give a flying monkey wether it’s a 12/8, 4/4, or whatsoever rythm, though I understand it matters to some of you. So my first point is : It’s a good song that serves its purpose in the frame of the Movie MMT, it’s not brilliant, not a masterpiece, but we need songs like that if only to enjoy the masterpieces even better. Second point : in Europe, it wasn’t released on the compilation LP MMT before 1976, and in my opinion, the LP MMT is just a compilation, not a bona fide Beatles album. Third point : It’s a Paul’s song, and what mainly made the Beatles what they were was the partnership between John and Paul. I have always preferred John, but I acknowledge Paul’s work as well, and sometimes their work is so entertwined that 50 years or more later, we’re still arguing over who wrote what. I want to make plain that Paul’s role in the Beatles wasn’t to be John’s sidekick. Paul was chosen by John to be his working partner, even though they were different. Paul’s music sometimes touches me deeply ( with or without the Beatles ) , not always it’s true ( maxwell’s silver hammer comes to mty mind instantly as I’m writing ). But the combination of talent and the love ( yes, love!) they both shared IS the reason why we still love the Beatkles, and always will.
Yeah… Not one of the best, really simple, but well recorded, great bass and harmonies. It fits MMT’s concept and it gives some kind of break before getting into the beautiful vortex of I Am the Walrus
Another little thing I like about YMSK: The verses are 11 bars, a pretty odd length. Yet the strength of the melody makes it sound perfectly natural.
And if I’m not mistaken, there’s a bar of 2 in there as well.
A terrific song by Paul McCartney (I have a soft spot for his old-timey sounding songs like this one and Honey Pie). However, I definitely only like the stereo LP version. The first time I heard the mono mix, it felt like my ears were under attack. The phased/flanged effect on the cymbals are simply horrible, an unnecessary aural assault. I don’t really know what they were thinking when they decided on that stylistic choice. Apologies to those who may enjoy that mix, but to me it’s practically unlistenable.
It is indeed. It’s awful. The only way to hear this song is on stereo.