There is no opinion contained in any of them. I would be most interested to hear how the errors I point out can be called "differences of opinion".
Sounds just the same as Paul to me, but that's just my opinion. It didn't matter how long that sort of thing took, he'd just do it". Geoff in fact states, in an interview from Good Day Sunshine, issues 79 & 80, that George ".was very meticulous. And everyone dreading when he had to record a solo? In all the time I worked with the band I saw absolutely no evidence of this. "Sarcastic" ? Well I can't argue that, except to say it was always with humor. "Dour" ? This is the man that made the Rutles and Monty Python movies possible. To quote a very good friend of his, " He was always called the quiet one, but anyone who knew him knew that once he started there was no way you could shut him up". To see him described the way he is on numerous pages makes me mad. This is exactly the kind of sloppiness and lack of attention to detail that pervades this book. If anyone connected with Geoff had bothered to look properly at what I wrote they would have noticed that all the page numbers given were for the final copy, not the proof copy. Yes, my first reading was that version, but prior to writing my first letter I obtained a corrected copy to check for changes. With regard to Geoff's assertion that my complaints are based on an uncorrected proof, he is totally incorrect. All parties to this publication had plenty of warning and if any one connected with this book were at all interested in the truth they could have made changes before it hit the book shelves not "in future editions". I also have in my possession copies of letters sent to the publishers by other people mentioned in the book, each one complaining of errors. To this date I have still had no response. I wrote to the president of the company, the editor of the book and also to the editorial department notifying them of substantive factual mistakes in the book. On February 10th, 2006, I sent 3 letters to Gotham Publishing. I would very much like to now see Geoff admit, and apologize for, his errors.
Many thanks for allowing me to respond to Geoff's letter (see below).įirst and foremost I wish to sincerely apologize to Geoff for my comment about his employment being only by Paul. Rebuttal from Ken Scott regarding Geoff Emerick's response addressing criticism to his book
I've copied the text from the following link ( ). I believe he got into somewhat of a feud with Ken Scott about some of the factual errors. I have read it, however it has been criticized due to numerous errors in fact in it.
0 kommentar(er)
