U.S. Revolver?

I would pull When I'm Sixty-Four and Lovely Rita and insert SFF/PL. The result would be awesome I think.

 

I wanted to pull WI64 also, but, unfortunately, it's integral to the album.

 

No, "GMGM" needs to stay where it is. Part of the song's appeal is how well it segues into "Reprise" - isolate it as a B-side or "MMT" track and that's gone.

I never have understood why so many dislike/dismiss "GMGM" - it's a great song, and the guitar solo RAWKS!!!

 

It's not that I dislike it - it's a great hangover song. Just going head to head with other Pepper songs, it's the most lightweight, I feel.

I'd even get rid of the Reprise if it would add a better song, but people would riot.

I guess we should just leave the album alone...

 

That'd be me - I'd lead the pitchfork crowd! I'm the guy who sometimes cuts off "SPLHCB" after "Reprise" because he doesn't really care about "Day in the Life" anymore!

Not sure how "GMGM" is more "lightweight" than "Rita" or "Getting Better" or "64", honestly...

 

Nope!

UK all the way !

 

It's the one flaw of that record!

 

I first heard "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver" on cassette, which have different running orders than the LPs or CDs, and even after all these years, I still think of "Rubber Soul" starting with "Norwegian Wood", and "Revolver" starting out with "Good Day Sunshine". I still insist the the cassette running order of "Revolver" (which had more straightforward guitar songs on side one, and more unusually-arranged songs on side two--a few years ago I posted it here) is the better one.

 

It could have been set aside for a later very special compilation, The Best of Paul's Granny Music.

 

In thinking about this whole thing for the last 30-35 years, I think one's feeling of "being hosed" is directly correlated to when one found out about the UK albums.

In prior discussions, I have found people who knew about the UK versions in the early '70s. I never knew anyone personally who knew about them in the '60s, but I'm sure people like that exist. I found out about the UK versions around 1980.

In other words, it's hard to feel like you've been hosed, when you don't know you're being hosed.

 

As I alluded earlier, I became a Beatles fan in 1979 when I was 12. I knew about the UK versions no later than 1980 when I got the "Illustrated Record" book - might've been 1979 as well, but I can't recall exactly when I obtained it.

I have no memory of what impact this information made on me at the time - I don't think I really cared, honestly - but I do know that I was aware of the UK/US differences fairly early in my time as a Fabs fan.

FWIW, my first "non-US" Fabs pickup was the Canadian "Twist and Shout" album. In May 1980, we visited relatives in Detroit and took an afternoon schlep to Canada. I was so excited to see something other than the usual US albums on the shelf!

 

Same here, got the Illustrated Record in 1979 when I was ten - the cover was the painting of band in 1963 gathered round a chair with Paul holding a cigarette.

The UK albums were laid out plain as day within the book - full page photo of the covers, chronologically throughout the course of the book, with track-listing opposite and evaluation following.

But at no time did I think to myself that 'Darn, I needed to get these UK albums', any more than I needed to go around speaking in an English accent or use British money and measurements. (They did actually try to make us go metric when I was in the 3rd grade, but no one could see the point in switching).

The songs were all available on US albums, and that was the whole point - having the music.

And at that point, the next step in Beatle fandom/collecting was getting bootlegs; that took precedent over getting the UK albums.

Though that eventually happened (getting the UK vinyls) without really trying.

 

Not all of the songs were on the US albums - at least not the ones we could get easily! I didn't hear "Misery" and "There's a Place" until "Rarities" came out in spring 1980!

I know they were on "Introducing the Beatles" but that was long out of print by 1979.

I do wish I could remember what I thought of the existence of the UK versions back then. I suspect I probably wanted them but I couldn't afford them even when I could find them.

I was such a Beatles fiend as a kid that I'd buy redundant material - like I'd buy commonly available singles of songs I already had, or I'd get 8-tracks of albums I already owned.

Why? I have no idea. It made SOME sense when I bought cassette versions - I could play those in my Dad's car.

But 8-tracks? I could only play those at home, and they were inferior to vinyl in every way. Yet I still bought 4 or 5 of them - money I should have put toward solo Beatles albums!

The stupidity of youth!

 

I was aware of "Misery" and "There's a Place" before 1980, since my sister had a copy of Introducing the Beatles (probably a fake one) starting around 1974, and she played it a lot then.

So I knew for a few years beforehand that The Early Beatles was a poor man's version of Introducing the Beatles, but it wasn't until 1980 that I found out both of those two LPs were poor man's versions of UK Please Please Me.

 

I got 'Introducing' around 1980. Maybe it was one of the 'reissues' (pirated?). It was new in a department store. There seemed to be lots of them around then.

The only Capitol releases I didn't get when it came out (in the late 70s/early 80s) was RnR Music, the Reel Music ones, and 20 Greatest Hits. I had all the material but one track, so I didn't hear 'I'm Down' for a while there. The garish 50s-inspired RnR cover didn't help.

 

Very soon after I became a fan in spring 1979, one of my friends told me his mom had a copy of "Introducing". I tried to get him to get her to give it or sell it to me, but I failed - I think she believed it was a collector's item and didn't want to give it away to some snot-nosed kid.

37 years later, I wonder if she was right. I assume she bought the album in 1964, so it's more likely she bought a legit copy, but IIRC, counterfeits of "Introducing" started to appear pretty quickly, so it still might've been a fake.

I mourn for potential revenue I might've gained if she'd given me the album - if real, it might've been a rare variant and I'd be rich rich rich!

But knowing me as a kid, it's more likely I would've done nothing to preserve the condition of the album and it'd be worth $2 right now!

 

You got it new in a department store in 1980 and you wonder if maybe it was a counterfeit???

I got my vinyl "Let It Be" at the now-defunct Kemp Mill chain in spring 1979 - it might've been the first studio Fabs album I bought with my own money.

Why did I get that one? Because Kemp Mill had it in the cut-out bin and it was cheaper.

A red Apple, I'm 99% sure it was a fake, but it's long gone - I ditched most of my Fabs vinyl when I got the CDs - so I'll never know!

I got "R&R Music" very early - I got it as a 12th birthday present in 1979. Not sure why I got that one - can't recall if I specifically requested it or just the friend saw "Beatles" and picked from there.

Of the "non-studio album" Fabs releases available during my "prime Beatlemania" period of 1979-1980, I got all of them. "1962-66" was the first new album I got in 1979 - as mentioned, I inherited a bunch from my stepmother - and I grabbed "1967-70" on cassette in late 1979. I think I got "Love Songs" on cassette around the same time frame, and I got "Rarities" soon after its release in 1980. I'd already owned "Hollywood Bowl" from 1977.

I never bothered with "Reel Music" or "20 Greatest" - by the time those came out, I was using my money for other bands. If they'd been out in 1979-80, though, I'm sure I would've pursued them!

 

I was well aware that this wasn't an actual full album at the time. I don't remember exactly how I knew, but I was a Beatle freak and I knew other people who were as well. Even if you didn't know, the title was a dead giveaway. It was so obviously just a super-cheesy play on the title of the headlining song.

 

No. Total ripoff

 

I have to go along with the other posts as far as what was added to Y&T....I think it would have been interesting to see what Dave Dexter Jr would have done if he was still in charge of the project
at that time and not Bill Miller.
Sure we've heard the story for years that Capitol asked for new tracks to fill out their new album they had planned, but they had tracks that had not been included on any album yet....

Paperback Writer & Rain were just issued a few weeks prior to Y&T and when did Capitol ever pass up the chance to include the current 45 on their latest album.....
Plus they had a recent b-side.... "I'm Down" from the Help sessions. These tracks still kept the Y&T theme intact since "I'm Down" was going back to the Help sessions which "Yesterday" &
"Act Naturally" were also from....

Sure I get it, this would have meant Capitol would have had 14 tracks for Revolver and maybe that would have been the first Capitol Lp to match the UK version....
It all makes for a good story now,but while I love the Y&T album , knowing where those 3 Lennon tracks come from they sound out of place ....
I like the UK Revolver much better than the US...the 2 Lennon tracks at the end of the US version just does nothing for me....
Capitol should have paid some extra royalties and included all 14 tracks......

Here's my Y&T tracklisting...
Side 1
Drive My Car
Rain
Nowhere Man
I'm Down
Yesterday
Act Naturally

Side 2
Paperback Writer
If I Needed Someone
We Can Work It Out
What Goes On
Day Tripper

 

not to mention the Beatles Second Album on Capitol

 

I first got the US "Revolver" in 1969. I was 5 years old and was a Beatles fanatic already!
Like other Americans, I was used to the US track list. It was more great Beatles music to me.
I got a UK import LP around 1979 or so.
It became the ONLY way to listen to this album. Always will be.
Any other reasons other than nostalgic preferring the US version makes no sense to me.

It would have been nice if Capitol included "Paperback Writer" and "Rain". At least that would have made sense as it would have been in line with their previous chopped up albums. But that would have meant 13 songs, and Capitol would NOT have that! 11 songs per LP only! 12 if forced to!
Capitol were cheap and only cared about squeezing as much product out of them for maximum sales. They didn't care who's songs were lifted from the finished recordings when they asked for them to fill out "Yesterday & Today".
It's good Capitol had to acquiesce to the Beatles demands to stop chopping their albums up.

 

Again, the problem with this is that it only includes two tracks new to the US audience - everything else had already been on US singles.

I can't imagine that sales would have been as strong like this. Y&T needed some new tracks.

 

I really could care less.

 

That's true. Can Anyone who was around at the time remember buying Y&T because they either had the singles and needed the three songs or, didn't bother buying those singles so it was a fresh album to them?

I know it's a U. S. Revolver thread but I'm the OP