The Beatles before 1967: Am I the only one who who thinks it's mostly better than what came after?*

The meaning of the word "ballad" has shifted over the centuries.

 

Track listing from Beatles Ballads

 

Of course it's ridiculous to think maybe The Beatles outdid the Beach Boys in terms of vocal harmonies at any one point in their career. I am the one who should be say LOL!!

 

I much prefer The Beatles Ballads to Love Songs.

 

Great song selection and much better cover - would love to get this on CD. Made it to number one down under

 

I'm sure it's loads better than what came after. The White Album is poor for me, as they themselves admitted it's all one guy & his backing band. I only like about 6 tracks on it. Three or four good tracks on Abbey Road, then on to Let It Be......best thing about that album is that they quit whilst they were ahead.

 

I can listen to all of their album right up to and including Magical Mystery Tour. For The White Album I have had to compile a 16 track compilation, which maybe reflects George Martin's idea, as I find I need to skip tracks all over the place. On Abbey Road, I have to skip I Want You (She's So Heavy) and on Let It Be on the few occasions I put it on, I skip Dig It and I've Got A Feeling. So no, you're not really alone.

 

I like them all, their songs on the first six albums I feel are certainly more 'accessible' than what came later but I rarely skip tracks (maybe, Revolution no 9 - scary!)
However, after having the Magical Mystery Tour album for nearly thirty years and loving it, I finally got to see the MMT movie and for the first time I thought that this is a Beatles fail and I love 'A Hard Days Night', 'Help!' and 'Yellow Submarine'...

 

The word "filler" and The Beatles should never be in the same sentence.

 

When you boil it down to why things changed...perhaps it was a combination of elements. The most popular rock band in the world was actively using certain substances to expand their minds. At the same time, their record company and studio weren't making too many drastic changes to the equipment or the environment in which the songs were recorded...
...maybe The Beatles were so limited by the number of tracks (only finally getting 8-track machines in '68 was surely a pain for The Beatles, Martin, and the engineers, who were already squeezing every last reduction mix out of the tapes as they could. For all of the charm that the post-Revolver albums offer, I can only imagine what Pepper and the White Album would have been like with 'more capable' multi-track machines and a comfortable studio.

 

I've always considered their musical output as being well-balanced.

 

My favorite songs on the Red and Blue albums all seem to be on disc 2 of the Red album. So I guess I like their "middle period" (65-66) the best.

 

I tend to agree When Beatles music gets played around here it usually is pre-'67 stuff. I've never really been a Magical Mystery Tour fan (and though I saw the movie over twenty years ago I still want that hour back). And these days it's like I have to be in the mood to play the White Album. Now that I think about it, it's been a while since I've put on Abbey Road or Let It Be as well...

Respectfully, I disagree. Two reasons, mainly- I've been listening to The Beatles on just about a daily basis for thirty years and right from the beginning for me there's been songs on every album I tend to skip. Sure, The Beatles' albums (pick your catalogue, UK, American, Djibouti, wherever...) have some great songs on them but I imagine even Lennon and McCartney would concede that some are not that great. Hell, I don't have to imagine it; yeah, John Lennon said a lot of things, but even he derided a few of his songs as "pieces of garbage" in interviews. Which leads me to the second reason: in spite of the fact that The Beatles records arguably do have a lesser amount of 'filler' tracks than other artists -and as I've said before one man's 'filler' is another man's 'classic album track'- no musical artists' catalogue is going to be 100% spot on, be it The Beatles or Beethoven...and I can say that as an artist myself (even if it's strictly on an amateur level)

Side four of the Red album for me, although I still think it wouldn't have killed them to swap out, say, "Girl" for "If I Needed Someone" or "Taxman"!

 

A long time ago I lost the ability to separate the Beatles music from their cultural and societal impact. And I think I can honestly say that my enjoyment of them grew exponentially. By knowing the stories behind individual songs and albums I grew to appreciate how and why the music turned out the way it did. Really, this is the greatest story ever told and with it the most fabulous soundtrack.

 

I kinda sorta feel the same way.

My enthusiasm stops with Revolver. George's meditation-themed sitar type music turns me off. I skip those tracks. I enjoy and appreciate individual songs after 1966, but not the entire albums. Sgt. Pepper is fun up to a point, but it's not their best songwriting and it's wildly over-produced. The "white album" depresses me. Even the cute little ditties by Paul are depressing. John is angry, at odds with himself and temporarily lost his mind. I can't stand Number 9. Still, there are so many virtues scattered in the later albums I couldn't live without them particularly Abbey Road and Let It Be.

Take my poll:
Bob Dylan -- Live 1965 - U.K. tour poll

 

Someone else in this thread might have mentioned this observation, but I read somewhere years ago a beautiful summation of The Beatles' impact: '62-'66 they defined the times, '67-'70 they were defined by the times.

I love all their music, but find '62-66 (and '67, honestly) the most compelling period. The "Hey Jude/Revolution" single is the last place I hear/feel the four-as-one power and commitment... though some of the seeds of the solo-plus-three model also appear there, as well.

 

yes and no The White Album is better than Abbey Road

 

The White Album to me is so important, even with songs like ObLaDi that have annoyed me since 1968 lol
....but it crosses so many genres of music it can be forgiven any shortcomings after all, we're all human.
Revolver to me has their strongest and most cohesive songwriting. Mostly dealing with death. More a concept album than Pepper. Ha.

 

Even though I was of prime age for Beatlemania and loved the early Beatle songs it was strictly a radio listening experience for me. Abbey Road was my first proper Beatle's album and has remained my favorite album along with tThe White Album, Let It Be and the Capital album Hey Jude. Of course I have and love Sgt Pepper's, Revolver and Rubber Soul along with earlier albums but the later period is really the one for me.

 

Outside of Sgt. Pepper, the White Album, Let It Be, and Abbey Road, I agree.

 

John and George said they were at their best as a live band pre-1963.

And not just because of Pete Best.

 

I do love their entire output but for me the most interesting material is from Revolver through 1970.

 

I like it all.

 

Other than Yellow Submarine, I like all The Beatles' albums (although some more than others).

 

I've always found the Rubber Soul era onwards as far more interesting than the "Mop Top" early years, but that's not to say that there wasn't some dynamite material being created during the early years. But, overall, my favorite albums are Revolver, The White Album and Abbey Road; with nudges of Beatles for Sale, Rubber Soul and Let it Be included as well.