Do you think The Beatles 1962-1966 "Red album" 1962–1966 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia » and 1967-1970 ("Blue album"). 1967–1970 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia » are good compilation albums overall, and are you happy with them? If not, what would you change about them? Would you remove some songs and add others? Would you add songs to pad out the 1962-1966 CD release? I like them both just fine my only real quibble (which isn't a fault of the compilation itself) is that 1962-1966 should have been released on a single CD instead of two CDs because the entire compilation can easily fit on one CD.
When released in 1973 on LP, they made sense. Of course, there were some omissions (no "I Saw Her Standing There", for example), but they were good overall sets for a beginner's greatest hits collection. The only strange thing was that the Red album had 2 fewer songs than the Blue album, even though the Red album clocked in at a much shorter time than the Blue one (since the songs on the Blue album were from the latter part of their career and they were typically much longer than 2 minutes).
Yes, for instance Side 2 of the Blue Album is the longest side (though all the Blue sides are long) at around 26 minutes (but still has 7 songs, including the 7-minute 'Hey Jude'). Compare that with Side 3 of the Red Album (where all the sides are short), which runs not much over 14 minutes (and only has 6 songs!). I've mused before that maybe a couple of covers were originally slated for the Red, but were jettisoned at the last minute and not replaced with anything else.
IMO the Blue Album is fine, but my main issues with the Red Album are that there's too much Rubber Soul material at the expense of Revolver and no Harrisongs at all- at least "If I Needed Someone" and/or "Taxman" were worthy of inclusion.
I received them for my birthday and Christmas in 1976 as my introduction to the Beatles, and as such they were a great primer. With a catalogue as strong as theirs is, it would be impossible to put on every song that everyone wanted, but it showed the variety of styles they encompassed and was just a great listen. I don't think I paid any attention to how long sides were, or how many songs could fit- I just listened to some of the best music ever made. And I'm still listening. So I think they work just fine.
Another sign of the success of these compilations: Due to the colors of the cover art, these albums are indeed known as the "Red" and "Blue" albums (just like The Beatles album is more often called the "White album"). But imagine if they had used Aquamarine and Mauve instead...
They were my (belated) introduction to the Beatles and I wouldn't change anything. Anyway, you can always buy another comp that has the 'missing' songs you seek.
I like them fine but mostly out of nostalgia I guess. Along with my brother's copy of Alpha Omega, they were my introduction to the music of The Beatles.
I didn't think Revolver and Rubber Soul got enough representation, then there were these out of place songs like Old Brown Shoe.
I grew up on them and they made me a lifelong hardcore fan - they worked! I still hold them in high regard and would get a newbie started on them all over again.
These albums were my introduction to the band. At the time I thought it odd that there were many songs I'd never heard of but some quite famous tracks (Good Day Sunshine, Got to Get You Into my Life, Twist and Shout, Do You Want to Know a Secret) were missing. I agree that everyone will have their own opinions as to what should or shouldn't have been included but, in terms of impact/historical importance, I find it hard to fathom how the first three of those failed to make the cut. Given, also, that relatively obscure songs like Old Brown Shoe made it, it's hard to see how something like She's a Woman (which was a hit in its own right - even though not an official A side in the UK, it still had a lot of radio play) missed out. Of course, things have changed since 1973, and many Beatles songs have become more well-known than they perhaps were back in 1973, in no small part due to other people having hits with them, so it's hard to be too critical.
Klein had already ingratiated himself with George by 1969-70. By 1973, Klein was being shown the door.
I got these when i was a kid when I could only afford one LP every 6 weeks or so from my pocket money. It would not be until many years later that I started picking up any of the proper albums . The red and blue were such an important part of my growing up that I wonder how different everything would have been with this “soundtrack” being different. What if Twist And Shout, No Reply, I’m Looking Through You, Tomorrow Never Knows, Blackbird, It’s All Too Much (and many others) had been included? I can't really imagine it now but I almost feel I would have been a more developed teenager!
Rubber Soul had 6 songs - it was, if anything, over represented with songs like Girl, while Revolver was very much lacking with only 2 songs. That and no George Harrison on the Red was unforgiveable to me.
I would probably leave the Blue album alone, but I agree with the others that say the Red album has some notable omissions that there is definitely room for.
Overall I think they did pretty well, but like everyone else I have my own favorites. I would add two George songs to the red album and I would drop Old Brown Shoe and Octopus's Garden from the blue album and replace them with something else. I respect the idea of including a Ringo song to get him a writing credit, but I think there are probably thirty better songs to choose from for the blue set.