Just a couple of thoughts on Geoff Emerick’s quote about Revolution 9 and some of the comments…
There is an idea, I think, that Paul hated Revolution 9 for what most fans do: its weirdness and un-beatleness.
While Paul may have seen Revolution 9 pointless at that phase, or too a spurious example of ‘avant-garde’, or simply trash, it certainly wasn’t anything alien and utterly anti-musical to him, as there even wouldn’t have been that element in the Beatles’ work without his direct input, not to that extent, anyway.
Interesting how Paul credits himself for this maybe too much (see the quote posted next). Hmm… Paul introduced John to Stockhausen and musique concrete. He ‘went too far’ with loops and sound collages and gave John a great deal of the technical know-how. John takes this, makes it a self-indulgent litany and vehemently credits Yoko for innovating his/Beatles’ music. I see a pattern.
It’s just tricky to say it wasn’t ‘Beatles music’ (it could be argued about a lot of it, then). Paul in particular had been unironically enjoying doing ‘very similar stuff’ - in his own words (although by 1968 he had probably grown bored with it). It is what the Beatles had long been messing around with, both serious and frivolous. Carnival Of Light, almost released but vetoed by the others, by Paul’s accounts was pretty much in the same vein for whole 15 minutes. (Maybe I’m going on a limb here, but I do think many fans actually don’t like the Yoko-ness of Revolution 9 (fair enough!), but they would regard this beatlesque “obliteration with noise” differently.)
But here’s the thing with the Emerick quote (or rather, how it gets interpreted, not to be unfair to Emerick): his recount of Paul’s reaction gives the impression that Paul was offended by the track as if the issue was the music (“you’ve got to be kidding”, which are here Paul’s thoughts paraphrased). It can suggest the old tune that John was the daring, experimenting one, and Paul a square, albeit with taste. Geoff Emerick of course knew there was no such distinction, and he said so many times, yet some of these quotes are taken wrongly, or used whenever John gets the credit for pushing for the experimental and Paul getting in the way of it. Revolution 9 is even believed to have been composed as an antidote to Paul’s granny shit. False, false.
A whole ‘nother point and context to Paul’s reaction is the fact that John edged him out (although he did involve George and Ringo) and showed him, maybe for the first time, that he was ready to substitute him - which must have been a far greater shock for Paul than the ‘muzak’ itself.