U.S. Revolver?

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Keith V, Oct 21, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Flaming Torch

    Flaming Torch Forum Resident

    Answer no. I guess as some tracks had been used on the Yesterday/Today album and there was nothing else to use or add the US album is therefore just a shorter version of the UK one.
     
  2. notesfrom

    notesfrom Forum Resident

    Location:
    NC USA
    It's a straight album release by a crooked record company, isn't it?
     
  3. HfxBob

    HfxBob Forum Resident

    I don't know what the heck category it belongs in, actually, it's sort of a high-class odds 'n' sods or something...
     
  4. brainwashed

    brainwashed Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Ooh, can you imagine Ringo's inventive drumming and those guitars enveloped in a duophonic haze? Yikes! Ron
     
    slane and Keith V like this.
  5. S. P. Honeybunch

    S. P. Honeybunch Presidente de Kokomo, Endless Mikelovemoney

    The Capitol albums were available new on cassette for many years after the 1987 CDs.
     
    notesfrom likes this.
  6. brainwashed

    brainwashed Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Crooked record company?? That's overly harsh. Capitol had EVERY right, by contract, to release THEIR own configurations of albums in the US. While some albums were VERY hodge podge (Capitol Help album with soundtrack songs and Ken Thorne instrumentals lumped together), some work quite well. Yesterday & Today works quite nicely indeed. And let's be honest, Capitol, and nearly all US labels included singles, particularly hit singles, on albums. UK labels typically did not do this, but of course they also did so from time to time. And remember, Capitol compiled Y&T WITH EMI's blessing. Having asked for, AND GIVEN, NEW material to augment the assorted singles tracks and album tracks not previously released in the US. If EMI said they had no new material, it's doubtful Y&T would have been compiled at all, or would have included even more singles not yet on Capitol albums (i.e. I'm Down, From Me To You, Can't Buy Me Love, etc). Ron

    PS George Martin should have withheld the tracks until he finished the stereo mixes. He knew they were intended for an album, not singles, and proper stereo mixes would have been needed.... or would have been treated to artificial processing. It's not like Capitol would have had Martin fired if it took an extra day to prepare stereo mixes. As it was, even the mono mixes for some of the new tracks were "improved" for UK release.
     
    slane likes this.
  7. Wiserforthetime

    Wiserforthetime Forum Resident

    Yes you do. An album is an album. I am not saying that we should not include their UK albums in the way they were meant to be but a release is a release. Even the Beatles agree to that. When they put out the album "1" they included songs that were only released in America such as yesterday so even they understand these albums and singles count. I am just saying that a lot of people prefer the UmS. Rubber Soul over the UK.
    There is nothing wrong with that. If I were making an official release of what the band wanted then I would not include "yesterday and today" however we are not judging what they wanted but rather what has been released.
    Again, the Beatles themselves out "the long and winding road" on "1" but according to you we are not even count that release as something that exists
     
  8. HfxBob

    HfxBob Forum Resident

    Huh?
     
  9. Wiserforthetime

    Wiserforthetime Forum Resident

    The Beatles themselves seem to acknowledge American releases which you are saying we should not.
    If they were not counting American released singles then the album "1" would not contain "eight days a week" "yesterday" or "long and winding road"
    Also you are calling "yesterday and today" a compilation so really you should count the U.S. version of "Magical Mystery Tour" as some U.S. comp but The Beatles themselves actually count the U.S. "MMT" as part of their core catalogolue.
     
  10. Rfreeman

    Rfreeman Senior Member

    Location:
    Lawrenceville, NJ
    Y and T is as much a comp album as UK Revolver is (compiling songs from a previously released US album and a current one).
     
    notesfrom and Keith V like this.
  11. Keith V

    Keith V Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    Secaucus, NJ
    I like the way you think :)
     
  12. HfxBob

    HfxBob Forum Resident

    MMT is a bit of a thrash job, too, absolutely. It was just a bit more above-board about it. Everybody knew what the deal was.

    Look, a lot of my feelings about Y & T go back to when I was 10 years old. I thought there was something not quite right about it, but yes, I bought it and listened to it.

    If people think of it as a true album that's fine.

    Maybe it's all the lads' fault for writing too many top-drawer songs in a short period of time. The record execs were overwhelmed and falling all over themselves trying to figure out how to make the most money on both sides of the pond.
     
  13. S. P. Honeybunch

    S. P. Honeybunch Presidente de Kokomo, Endless Mikelovemoney

    Parlophone sequenced their albums and included singles on albums to compete with other 13 and 14 track albums in the UK market. Neither Capitol nor Parlophone sequenced albums more than the other in the interest of making money. Both were record labels that supported themselves by appealing to the record buying tastes of their respective audiences.
     
    Keith V likes this.
  14. Diego Lucas

    Diego Lucas Forum Resident

    Location:
    Brazil
    UK: albums had 14 tracks, and many times didn't have the last single release (That explains why From Me To You it's not on Please Please Me, I Wanna Hold Your Hand on With The Beatles, etc...)

    USA: 11 or 12 tracks, and have all the singles that was release at the time. (I Wanna Hold Your Hand on Meet The Beatles, I Feel Fine on Beatles' 65, etc.)
     
    Folknik likes this.
  15. Wiserforthetime

    Wiserforthetime Forum Resident

    I respect what the band wanted album wise I just don't ignore the other albums. That's all I meant to say really. And at times like MMT apparently the artists don't mind either.
    I actually really like YAT as well as the U.S. Revolver and Rubber Soul but I do understand those albums were not the true intention
     
  16. tcbtcb

    tcbtcb Forum Resident

    Location:
    sugar hill nh usa
    Not I.
     
  17. feinstei9415

    feinstei9415 Forum Resident

    Location:
    South Bend, IN
    The reason U.S. albums had fewer songs on them was because of the way royalties were calculated, the fewer the songs, the fewer royalties the U.S. company had to pay. In the U.K. as well as in the rest of Europe, royalties weren't calculated on the basis of how many songs were on the album.
     
    Folknik and Keith V like this.
  18. It wasn't like that in the '50s, was it? There was this Sinatra album I can't recall the title of, where the original version had 15 songs on. Then a little while later they chopped off 3 of them.
     
  19. notesfrom

    notesfrom Forum Resident

    Location:
    NC USA
    Was being facetious...
     
    Keith V likes this.
  20. notesfrom

    notesfrom Forum Resident

    Location:
    NC USA
    MMT also served as a movie soundtrack on Side 1, padded out with killer filler on the back nine - not unlike the UK Help! album.
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2016
    Keith V likes this.
  21. Marc Perman

    Marc Perman Forum Resident

    Location:
    Los Angeles
    My first press US Revolver sounds great, more big-boned than the UK Blue Box version I have. It's not better, but it is an enjoyable listen, especially without the distraction of those Yesterday and Today tracks. :) It could be argued that the greatness of She Said and Tomorrow Never Knows are enhanced on the US by being the only John songs AND side closers.
     
    Mickey2 and Keith V like this.
  22. Beatledust

    Beatledust Forum Resident

    Location:
    Salt Lake City, UT
    Nope, can't do it! The U.S. version is way too lopsided for me, since it only has two Lennon tracks. The U.K. version is my go-to copy.
     
  23. musicfan37

    musicfan37 Senior Member

    All I know is that I was very excited when my mom bought me the Capitol Revolver album when we were at Leslies (dept store). I did think it was strange John only had two vocals on the album and George was featured with three. At the time, I had no idea about the UK version.
     
    Keith V likes this.
  24. musicfan37

    musicfan37 Senior Member

    For me, Yesterday and Today was the electric counterpart to the US Rubber Soul.
     
  25. rednoise

    rednoise Senior Member

    Location:
    Boston
    I bought the US "Revolver" not long after it was first released. It may have been the first Beatles record I bought with my own money (but I had been given the US soundtrack of "A Hard Day's Night" a couple of years before.) I had heard some of the previous US releases, but I didn't understand then what the deal was with them. Anyway, I LUV LUV LUVed the US "Revolver"! Would never have found fault with it at that time. It was only a few years later when I started acquiring the UK releases that I got the proper "Revolver"... and I loved it even more. This was different than the US vs. UK versions of, say, "Rubber Soul" or "Help", which were substantially different listening experiences. The UK "Revolver" was a similar listening experience to the USA version, but... more so. More mind-bendingly great songs, more psychedelic sounds, just more of everything that was good about it in every way.

    I still listen to both the US and UK "Rubber Souls", to catch different vibes depending on my mood, but not the USA "Revolver". It's just a degraded version of the UK release, IMO. No advantage to it.
     
    Mark E. Moon., ParloFax and Keith V like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine