So how precisely were decisions made about what singles to release in later years of the Beatles?

I NEVER made the assertion that "HE" and he alone chose the singles - I said he had final say. Why is that so hard to understand? What if the Beatles were tied 2-2 in your assumed "band vote"? Do you imagine Martin (at any point - while on EMI staff or not), just saying "Well, fine whatever, I'm off to the pub, you guys hash it out amongst yourselves - or don't, in which case, I guess nothing will get released as a single, but hey what do I care, I'm only the producer hired by the label to deliver a finished single (possibly to a deadline) to the label for release."

Your burden of proof is to explain why the hypothetical scenerio I wrote in the above paragraph DOES make sense and seems plausible to you.

To me it seems not only implausable, but also highly unprofessional and a complete waste of lots of time and money.

Final decisions need to be made. Where you work, is no-one in charge? Does the buck not stop with someone? If that's the case, how much work gets done? How productive is the team, especially working to a deadline, without some kind of top dog with absolute authority to make a final decision when the team members can't come to a compromise on their own? Should they just be left to argue a point forever, no matter how much it costs the company in lost productivity?

 

I think the crazy guitar gave it more popular appeal. Anyway we'll never know but I think it would've matched Hey Jude's reign.

 

I think Maxwell from MI6 made the final decisions.

 

George Martin seems to have had significant input into choosing singles up to 1967 at least . He was the one that pull SFF and Penny Lane from the album sessions to release as the single

 

What is AYNIS?

 

I'm really hoping the next couple of volumes of Lewisohn's book will shed some light on their decision making process.

 

This is what it could have looked like - despite what one of the bloggers says it was never bootlegged - he did not buy one in Camden Market in 2008.

Frank Daniels who co-wrote the Beatles Parlophone book with Bruce Spizer mocked it up.

http://www.45cat.com/record/gep8968

 

Well I think maybe you're misremembering how successful Hey Jude was as a single. It was released on 26 August, entered the US charts on 14 September, and hit number one in the US on September 28, where it stayed for nine weeks, the most weeks spent by any Beatles song at number one. So six weeks after Hey Jude was released - when you're proposing they could have released Revolution as an A-side - Hey Jude started it's second of those nine weeks at the top. In fact, it was number one until just a couple of weeks before the white album was released, and stayed in the US charts for 19 weeks total.

Regardless of the merits of Revolution, it's hard to imagine it having as big an impact as Hey Jude did. So... Hey Jude was the right choice.

 

All You Need Is Sex?

 

I disagree. i don't think A-side decisions were as black and white.

 

Well phonetically it sounds like something anotomical

 

A few of us in this thread have offered similar theories/explanations to ScottS about why Hey Jude was chosen over Revolution as the A-Side.
He still insists upon Revolution being the better song because it's uptempo. What can ya do?!

 

Hey Jude was a number of things when it was released.

The first Apple release - that had to be a sure fire stunner to justify Apple's existence.

At 7'11" was the longest 45 yet released - another feather in the cap.

It was after a 5 month Beatles release hiatus (longest there ever was) - their next single had to be a big one.

Having Revolution as the A side would have cut out at least 1/2 of the market - HJ was a monster hit cos it was a crossover - appealed to the oldies as well as the kids. The weren't releasing records as artistic statements alone - they were commercial propositions.

And 1968 was the year of revolutions/assassinations - hence Lennon's ambivalence about being counted in or out depending on which version you listen to.
This may have had a decision about whether to lead off with Revolution rather than HJ - HJ was not politically sensitive.

 

It's not that hard to imagine for me. I was in 4th grade at the time and our class played both sides about equally, and the teacher danced to Revolution. heh

 

That's a mischaracterization. and my interest was it should've been released separately.

 

That comment you quoted was about what people preferred. Pay attention.

 

I get a feeling this was a bunch of McCartney fans, it's like how dare you think Revolution could've been as big of a hit.

 

To illustrate the crossover appeal HJ had. My dad was 43 when HJ came out, so by 1968 standards, he was an "old man", what young people saw then as such anyway. And he was definitely normally into older persons music (Broadway, show tunes, etc.). Yet he loved, and he would keep loving, to his death bed, "Hey Jude"! I would help him out on his truck runs during the summer of '69, and every time HJ would come up on the radio, he would lighten up and sing along his heart out... He even liked the last part (what with the screaming and all)!

 

What in the world are you expecting? Your original OP is strident and abrasive and you're taking on, I guess, a huge hit song. I love Revolution, too. Prefer it to Hey Jude. But do not think it is fair, or makes one whit of sense, to start smearing people with that "bunch of McCartney fan" nonsense. The entire band made a ton of money due to that decision...and Lennon gets his name tacked onto it.

 

My opening post was asking a question about how the decisions were made. The strange chorus of people needing to insist that Hey Jude was golden and Revolution wasn't came later.

 

You forgot your first two paragraphs?! Anyway, my main beef with the post I responded to was the "McCartney fan" smear.

Signed: Revolution fan

 

I don't know if this helps, or what it means, but when SFF/PL was re-issued on Apple, SFF got the A-side, or at least the uncut Apple side.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/The-Beatles...9562270?pt=Music_on_Vinyl&hash=item5d521c909e

 

It probably just means poor quality control on Apple's part. They continue to have the same problems today!

 

Nearly every post says Revolution is great. There hasn't been a big Revolution smear campaign. The popular opinion just seems to be that Jude made for the better A side. John himself seemed to agree.

But the "McCartney fans" comment does come off as "... why aren't more people agreeing with me..." bitterness.

It's only rock and roll.

 

John said Hey Jude is a good song but where is he quoted saying it's better or more deserving than Revolution?