Yes, I did mention that fact actually. "The Bells Of Rhymney" and "Chimes Of Freedom" are great songs/versions anyway; but the original collection ended up being too focussed on their debut album, I think.
Spanish Harlem Incident. Another Dylan's song, with some of the same condiments of the previous tracks. Bass by Chris Hillman and drums by Mike Clarke make a solid rhythm section. Good song.
It may be that Columbia were seeing the diminishing chart returns of The Byrds' singles at that time ("5-D" #44, "So You Want to Be a Rock and Roll Star" #29, "My Back Pages" #30 and "Have You Seen Her Face" #74) and figured they better strike while the iron was hot to get a Greatest Hits album out. "Have You Seen Her Face" would have been the most recent single at the time, so they may felt the writing was on the wall as far as The Byrds' potential as a hit single band (and indeed it was). "Set You Free This Time" was apparently the original A side, and it entered the Billboard Hot 100 a week before "It Won't Be Wrong" did. But it only made it as high as #79. At some point, the single was reserviced to radio stations with "It Won't Be Wrong" as the plug side. It ended up charting higher, and I certainly remember it getting a significant amount of AM radio play (whereas I never heard "Set You Free This Time" on the radio). But regrettably, "Wrong" could only rise as high as #63 — a grave injustice as it was a great song. Perhaps the initial touting of "Free" as the A-side hurt its chances.
I also think what informed the song selection was that they didn't want to focus on Gene Clark material; so no She Don't Care About Time or Set You Free this a Time instead of Bells of Rhymney or Chimes of Freedom. Ironically Gene re-joined the band a couple of months after this album came out.
Well, from a commercial point of view it seemed to be a good decision, since Greatest Hits reached #6 (the same position as their debut, which was their highest charting album). If the buyer is just looking for the most well known songs and is decided to buy just one record by the Byrds, then I guess Greastest Hits is the album to get (or at least it was back in 1967). I guess that's a good sample to push the listener to look for more, if the music is well received by his/her ears.
"Spanish Harlem Incident" is OK. It sounds distinctively Byrds-ian, but on the other hand it just kind of sits there on the album.
It is one of their less-celebrated tracks, but it's solid and furthers the Byrds/Dylan connection — which in retrospect may not be entirely a good thing. As I examined the track listing of this album the other day, I wondered if there could possibly be another major 60s rock group with such a high percentage of songs (58%) written by someone other than a group member on their debut LP.
SHI is a good, solid Dylan song, well played and sung but is a little less spectacular than the opening salvo of tracks. Nevertheless, I never skip it and usually find myself singing along.
Wasn't that uncommon: The Rolling Stones 9/12 covers The Yardbirds -100% covers The Kinks 9/14 covers Grateful Dead 7/9 covers
Also, The Turtles' first two albums both consisted of four originals and eight covers. And there were only three originals on their third album.
Thanks for all the responses. It's only fair to point out a couple of things: Most of the bands listed didn't develop their writing chops until a little deeper into their careers (or in some cases — The Animals, for example — they almost never did). By contrast, The Byrds had an outstanding songwriter in Gene Clark right out of the gate, as evidenced by all his songs from the Preflyte era that they either never recorded, or recorded but did not release. It was the success with a Dylan tune (which originally, none of them particularly wanted to do) that forced them into the Dylan straitjacket, to the detriment of Gene Clark. Bands such as The Stones, The Animals (and to an extent The Yardbirds) started out as faithful copyists of American blues, R&B or rock 'n' roll. Until they gradually disabused themselves of the notion, at least some of their more purist members felt it would be a betrayal to do the kind of pop music that required songwriting (either from within or from outside writers). I guess The Kinks and The Zombies are the two most surprising bands cited above, given the consummate skill their members soon evinced in the songwriting department. But both started out playing for dances and the like, where the more familiar was prized by audiences and the less familiar was not. When it came time to record an album, they naturally fell back on their live repertoire for content.
I quite like SHI. Pleasant fun singalong. Not a highlight, but they can't all be. To me, this record works as an album- I enjoy every song and think this one fits quite nicely.
And of course, their "first album" was a live set, recorded at a time during which the blues/R&B/rock stuff was expected. By the time they got around to their second album (and first studio one), it was 100 percent originals (albeit a couple of them based heavily on existing songs but rewritten!).
One more thought on the Byrds/Dylan connection: I wonder how many of the Dylan songs on Mr. Tambourine Man (as well as "Lay Down Your Weary Tune" and "The Times They Are a-Changin'" from the next album) were actually in The Byrds' live repertoire, vs. how many were selected purposefully for the albums. I'm pretty sure I've seen accounts of them doing "Chimes of Freedom" during their famed Ciro's residency, but I'm not sure about the others.
Kika Hjort and Jimmi Seiter's books have a bunch of set lists and the Dylan songs were always a substantial part of the set list throughout 1965. In the UK, both of their biggest hits were Dylan songs. By Monterey, they only pulled out one in the set list.
Surely the Byrds could have included more original songs written by Clark in their debut. But I guess that the fact that the rest of the band members still weren't accomplished songwriters didn't help for that purpose, beyond the success of covering Dylan which was certainly another strong factor. Clark was certainly their best songwriter and it's a shame the band had to lose him. Funny enough, I think their best songwriting effort was Younger Than Yesterday, which was the only album with no Clark's contributions among the first five.
You Won't Have To Cry. Co-written by Clark and McGuinn. A fine, quite upbeat song with an exuberant intro; but not one of the highest points of the album in my opinion.
A great early (mainly) Gene Clark song that has a lot of chord changes. Not a simple song you throw out at a jam night. Love the high harmony that Crosby adds for that classic Byrds vocal blend.
Fairfield Hall Croydon August 5, 1965: The Times They Are a Changing, Don't Doubt Yourself Babe, All I Really Want To Do, Chimes of Freedom, Bells of Rhymney and We'll Meet Again; Finsbury Park Astoria, August 14, 1965; I'll Feel a Whole Lot Better, The Chimes of Freedom, Bells of Rhymney, All I Really Want To Do, Mr. Tambourine Man, Don't Doubt Yourself Babe, The Times They Are a Changing
You Won't Have to Cry Starts out with a cool approach chord into a an E 7th bluesy chord. Gene sings a pickup and the verse that follows is basically an R and B variant. At :19, Gene uses what is called a secondary dominant chord....a chord that is outside of the key but fits great because it is the dominant to the chord that follows which is the B chord. Your ear is drawn to the B chord. Gene is brilliant the way he uses secondary dominants. When the verse returns at :37, the vocal harmonies don't change from the previous line giving the verse a different flavor and a chorus like effect. At 1:05, instead of going to the B chord that would lead to the E chord (B is the dominant of E), Gene goes straight to the E chord instead for a sound of finality to the verse. Great chord use. The bridge that follows starts with a D chord that is borrowed from the parallel minor of the song (E minor). The chord matches the lyrics perfectly a gives it a somber tone. The verse returns and the song ends on the E and resolves nicely. A brilliant Gene/Roger song. More evidence of Gene's adventurous harmonic approach and bold tonal relations. No chorus (R and B influence) in the song but the way the verse changes you get the impression of one. Cool stuff.
Thanks for that detailed technical review! The song seems to be more complex than the appreciation it gets from me. I like it well enough, but I never felt it was an outstanding track.
One of the great songs of the decade, or ever, really. Absolutely perfect in every way, from the killer 12-string riff to the solo you can't get out of your head to the gorgeous harmonies.
Band politics was certainly a big reason. McGuinn was the leader, and he wanted to sing lead on a certain amount of songs, but at that point he wasn't writing much and his primary talent was in arranging the work of others. The covers were there to give him something to sing lead on. More Clark songs would have meant less McGuinn lead vocals, and he likely wouldn't have stood for that.
