U.S. Revolver?

That would of been a neat compilation featuring the best of the first UK album.

 

No I Saw Her Standing There?

 

"I Saw Her Standing There" and "A Taste Of Honey" are the only Please Please Me tracks missing. Also note the inclusion of "Misery" which was inexplicably left off The Early Beatles when it appeared six months or so after the Best Of... comp was to come out. Personally for that Best Of I would have cut some of the lesser PPM and WTB songs and added a few from A Hard Day's Night/Something New. It does seem kinda silly to lash together a double album comprised of material mainly culled from two albums, plus a single or two (and "Long Tall Sally", the 'newest' song to be featured)

Know what I find equally perplexing? That Capitol never released A Collection Of Beatles Oldies in the U.S., or at least a variation thereof.

 

Me too!

 

The only US version of The Beatles I like better than any U.K. counterpart is The Beatles Second Album. Just a rocking pick of songs.
Revolver US is just less.

 

And in this case, less is not more

 

I think if this album would be release, Capitl wouldn't release The Early Beatles, we have 11 of 14 tracks of Please Please Me album, the 3 that is not, 1 (ISHST) is on Meet The Beatles, and Anna and A Taste Of Honey would recive the credit that Misery and There's A Place recive before 1980's Rarities album, the Beatles lost tracks.

 

I don't think there's any doubt that had Capitol released this Best Of there'd be no Early Beatles LP (but then, knowing Capitol, you never know...) I couldn't see them putting "Anna" or "A Taste Of Honey" on Rarities though...but then they did put "Sie Liebe Dich" on there, so...

 

And no I'm Down on rarities either.
One of us should compile a U. S. Past Masters playlist pretending that the U. S. Albums were still the standard in America

 

"I'm Down" already made an appearance on Rock And Roll Music (its first appearance on an album, if memory serves, in stereo no less) so no need for it to appear on Rarities. The point of the U.S. Rarities was collecting together all the stray tracks/alternate mixes that hadn't appeared on Capitol at that point...they were mostly successful in that regard. I gave Rarities a spin on the weekend, actually, it's definitely one of the better Capitol compilations.

 

One of my gripes with the 2014 box is that they included the superfluous "The Beatles Story" instead of Rarities. If they hadn't released it separately (as they did with TBS), I'm sure many people would have bought the box only to have it.

 

No question. I mean, I get why they included The Beatles Story (60's authenticity- quite possibly the only time the U.S. Albums box truly succeeded in that regard), but Rarities is worthy of an official release- even more so than, IMO, Rock And Roll Music or Love Songs. Or Reel Music

 

I personally don't like the U.S. configuration near as much as the U.K. 'Revolver' for one primary reason: John is less represented than George. There are only two songs sung by John versus the 3 by George. The three songs missing from the U.S. version are all sung by John. It's kinda like John has almost left the group with only 2 songs... I wonder if any one at the time thought this was odd?

 

Oh I know. It just made me mad that some of us had to buy R&R music after rarities.
And yes, I always liked the Rarities album. At the time I first heard it, I felt I was listening to stuff I wasn't supposed to hear. Of course I was a preteen at the time, but still, I miss that feeling.

 

I've often wondered what the Canadian configurations for Beatles albums would have looked like after the lp 'Long Tall Sally' in 1964. After that lp, Capitol USA sent a memo to Paul White to have the Canadian albums fall in line with the US configurations. Paul White should have told them to bugger off!

 

An underlying part of the Capitol modus-ethos was that you had to own all of the albums to get the full Beatles picture. Thus, you weren't really deprived of songs if you had the US Revolver, since logic would hold that you would already own those 'missing' songs on Yesterday & Today - if you were a real Beatles fan, that is.

Nor did we complain about the steering wheel being on the 'wrong' side or having to drive on the right. It was just the way things were, and they were pretty darned good.

 

I have no idea what other Canadian Beatles albums could have been like- sort of a potentially head exploding kinda question, full of possibilities. What gave the edge to the Canadian albums over their American counterparts was the Canuck albums used UK master tapes as the basis for their versions- no Dexterization here! Unfortunately Paul White (head of Capitol Of Canada for those who don't know) probably wasn't in a position to tell Capitol USA where to go.

I do know this, though: I can remember my mum insisting that her old copy of Revolver, purchased in 1966 in Regina, Saskatchewan, no less, was the fourteen song UK version. I remember when I got the US cassette for Christmas in '87 she looked at the track listing and she said "This one has less songs on it than I remember." A few months later when I bought the UK LP she said "This is the one I had, I'm pretty sure". She specifically remembered "I'm Only Sleeping" and "And Your Bird Can Sing" being on her copy of Revolver. She said she never owned Yesterday And Today.

Were the UK versions available in Canada in the '60's as imports or otherwise? How the hell would a UK copy make it's way to the Great White North?

 

I don't think anyone noticed. The Capitol Albums threw up odd configurations all the time. TWO Ringo lead vocals on Yesterday and Today, ONE Paul lead vocal on Second Album, etc. And after all John's voice is pretty noticeable on Yellow Submarine, Good Day Sunshine, even Taxman. They were just thought of as 'The Beatles' at this stage.

 

You Mom must have been one of the very few in Canada who the UK 'Revolver'in 1966! Must of been a real head scratcher for her friends to compare their copy to hers.

 

If, of course, she wasn't just misremembering twenty years later. Of course if she was still around now I'd be asking her, "Was it on the Parlophone label or the Capitol label?" That would solve the matter. There is NO Canadian release of the UK Revolver listed on Discogs prior to 1987, at least...

 

On the subject of the Canadian releases, I've been trying to figure out why I knew from the start that Yesterday and Today was not a regular album. Maybe it was because there was very little hoopla surrounding the release. I remember being surprised to come across the album in a hardware store that sold some records. Also the title seemed very hokey.

 

I just noticed this thread this morning and have read through the latter half or so of it. If you will permit me, a few thoughts....

I grew up at the younger end of the original Beatles generation, saw them first on Ed Sullivan, etc, and so my initial introduction to their recorded works were the Capitol releases. The first single I owned was Can't Buy Me Love. One of the first LPs I ever played was The Beatles' Second Album.

First, on the Dexterized sound of the US releases: Looking back, there were more than a few tragedies, including the infamous I Feel Fine/She's A Woman echo-drenched monstrosities, but on many songs, the slight addition of echo gave, to my ears, a "live" impression. This is something I didn't consciously think of at the time, but when the US LPs were released in recent years, after decades of listening to the UK releases, that 'live' feeling struck me quite palpably. To a first generation listener, who perhaps first really "got" the Beatles from those fleeting TV images, that bit of echo brought to mind a vision of the Beatles in a hall singing their hearts out. (Keep in mind that at the time, the words "double tracked" didn't really register to us.)

Now, the Second Album, worked for us, and for me still does, because that's just the way, and order, we heard those songs first. And it does work as a solid Rock 'n' Roll album. As to John singing lead on more of the songs, keep in mind that in the early days, John tended to write, and thus sing, more of the hits, Paul seeming to come into his own more in late '64. Something New didn't seem like a rip off because for me it was very late in the game before I bought the United Artists Hard Day's Night, so the songs on SN worked just fine. As to the other US 'bastardizations,' again, that was just the way we first heard them and the idea that Capitol had jiggered the mix/distribution didn't register. We didn't think to ask why Hard Day's Night, Help, and Yellow Submarine had all that orchestral music thrown in - they were 'soundtracks.' (My only qualm at the time about YS was why the instrumentals were all shoved onto side 2.)

As to The Beatles Again (original title for Hey Jude), when that came out it was obviously adding to the LP collection songs Capitol had either previously had not had the rights to (I Should Have Known Better) or had only released on singles (Hey Jude, etc) so it was okay. (And keep in mind, Again/Hey Jude was, historically, an Allen Klein project, not one dreamed up by US suits.)

My first serious introduction to the UK releases came in the early '70s. I don't remember the company, but I somehow got this cheep paper booklet catalogue with a few hundred LPs of various kinds/genres, and decided to order a new copy of Rubber Soul. The prices were very competitive and I noticed a bunch of Beatles LP titles I didn't recognize (PPM, WTB, etc). When it came, I discovered I had purchased my first UK Beatles LP. The "extra" songs, cleaner stereo, and slicker cover fascinated me. From that day on, I began systematically replacing ("adding to" - who would get rid of even an overly played used Beatles album?) my US collection with UK.

I mention, particularly, the Rubber Soul purchase because the difference in the running order struck me very much. While I adore the UK RS because that was the LP the Beatles made, the US version will always have a soft spot in my heart because the woodsy acoustic sound of THAT selection of songs in THAT order seemed to fit at the time it came out. Similarly, Y&T felt like a coherent LP reflecting what was going on the US record market at the time. And if I recall correctly, Revolver did win a Grammy, didn't it?

I appreciate it that those in this discussion who will ever prefer the UK releases have a point in saying 'that's the project they were working on at that time, so the UK version is superior.' On the other hand, as George Martin said, no one was thinking in terms of an album as a coherent entity. They recorded singles and "the ones that weren't too good we wouldn't put out as singles." And wasn't Wait a leftover from the Help sessions?

On balance, when I listen to the Beatles on vinyl, I always reach for the UK LPs, but when I have iTunes on shuffle and a US track comes on, a) I immediately notice it, b) I get a wistful smile as I'm also immediately connected to a time long ago when the world was new, the Beatles were going to be around forever, and the sky was the limit (especially with Lucy!).

If nothing else, what the US catalogue shows us is that with the Beatles (no pun) you can at least get two different incarnations of Rubber Soul that each work on their own merits. How many bands could have a similar claim?

PS Thanks for letting me prattle on.

 

It does seem like it was sort of a low key, under the radar release (maybe all the hoopla surrounding the "Butcher cover" fiasco had something to do with it). I remember my mum saying neither herself or any of her friends owned Yesterday And Today; she didn't even remember seeing the album before when I bought it. Not unlike with her recollections of owning the UK Revolver, I also remember mum saying, when perusing the Y & T tracklisting, "Funny, I seem to remember "Drive My Car" being on Rubber Soul." But it wasn't on her copy, at least- hers was the Canadian T-2442 mono (by the time I discovered that LP you couldn't play the opening tracks on either side thanks to a crack in the vinyl and there was also a big ol' scratch through "The Word" as well- the record was barely playable but as I recall mum kept it 'cos it was the first Beatles record she bought- her older siblings had the other ones). Still, where th' hell was she getting these recollections of the UK versions from????

 

The only thing I like better about the US Revolver is that Doctor Robert is missing, which to me was the only retrograde track on the album. That said, when I've made playlists of the record without it, something feels off.

(I don't DISLIKE Dr. Robert, but to me it sounds like a gussied up Rubber Soul track, whereas all the other songs on Revolver have jumped way ahead.)

 

Actually, the covers of the Capitol albums (at least as they were issued in the '60's) really were more rigid (physically) than the EMI albums. As was the practice with the major US labels in those days, Capitol used printed paper labels glued to a gray cardboard base, while EMI appears to have used somewhat thinner paperboard with the labels printed directly on them. The one departure I have in my collection for the US albums is my original, day one issue of Abbey Road, which was in the 'EMI' paperboard style.