The Beatles Bible - Topic: Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Duke_of_Kirkaldy on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Fri, 07 Sep 2012 12:54:59 +0100

Of all the songs the group gave away, I think they could've acceptably recorded about 5 or 6 of them for themselves: "Like Dreamers Do" (but only if it was on Please Please Me), "Bad to Me," "World Without Love," "It's for You," "That Means a Lot" (they were almost there, IMO), and "Sour Milk Sea."

IMDeWalrus on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Tue, 04 Sep 2012 00:50:57 +0100

mr. Sun king coming together said
I've always loved I'll Be On My Way. Why that was given away is beyond me. It's such a good song.

.

The only version I've ever heard of this song is on the LIVE AT THE BBC album... and it is a very good sounding song... those Lennon/McCartney harmonies are as appealing as ever.... I imagine they passed on recording it for official release because they were embarrassed by the "Junelight/moonlight" rhyme, which is pretty sickly. But I like it... it reminds me of some of George's early work, where the sound of ...

mr. Sun king coming together on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 14:32:41 +0100

I've always loved I'll Be On My Way. Why that was given away is beyond me. It's such a good song.

On the topic of That Means A Lot - if's not as bad as I made it out to be. I guess it's my crazy obsession with lyrics being at least half decent for a song to be good - and we can all agree these lyrics are crap.

meanmistermustard on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 14:25:41 +0100

I like A World Without Love, probably my fave song that they gave away - would love to hear Pauls demo (a fake is doing the rounds). Johns demo of Bad To Me is better than Billy J Kramers, theres a charm about it thats missing in the cover.

IMDeWalrus on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Fri, 31 Aug 2012 03:15:52 +0100

Into the Sky with Diamonds said
IMDeWalrus said, "The drum pattern is quite similar to "World Without Love" which Paul gave to Peter & Gordon."

Yessss. Interesting that two of us should make the same connection (see my Aug 28 post).

(Coincidence, IMDeWalrus, or had you seen my post?)

Actually I hadn't gone back to page one of this thread when I made this post last night -- but I see we're on the same track about this song.... I just remember the first time I heard it on ANTHOLOGY saying to my wife that it sounded to me like a better ...

The Strawberry on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Thu, 30 Aug 2012 23:56:19 +0100

I can't see it replacing Ticket to Ride, but I think it could of fit on Help! in between I've Just Seen A Face and Yesterday.

I've heard 2 versions on my Deluxe album. The fake stereo version, which I think is the one on the Anthologies, is better than the actual stereo version.

Into the Sky with Diamonds on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Thu, 30 Aug 2012 16:53:56 +0100

IMDeWalrus said, "The drum pattern is quite similar to "World Without Love" which Paul gave to Peter & Gordon."

Yessss. Interesting that two of us should make the same connection (see my Aug 28 post).

(Coincidence, IMDeWalrus, or had you seen my post?)

IMDeWalrus on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Thu, 30 Aug 2012 05:03:59 +0100

Getting back to the original question asked in this thread --- I don't think "That Means A Lot" is a bad song. True, the lyrics are pretty weak, but the overall sound of the track is interesting, actually, especially the end. The drum pattern is quite similar to "World Without Love" which Paul gave to Peter & Gordon.

I definitely wouldn't put "That Means A Lot" anywhere near as good as "Ticket To Ride" or most of the other tracks on HELP! But at least the first version from that "Sessions" clip on here sounds releasable to my ...

meanmistermustard on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:58:02 +0100

According to wiki "[WTB] had advance orders of a half million and sold another half million by September 1965, making it the second album to sell a million copies in the United Kingdom...".

Taking the advance orders of 500,000 and dividing it by 14 is 35,714 (and a bit left over - .285714... rounding down to 6 decimal places). But WTB was released on 22nd November 1963 and the chart is from last week December '63/first week of January '64 depending on date of chart publication which is 4 -> 5 weeks later and it would be based on weekly sales?.

Obviously ...

Von Bontee on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:53:38 +0100

Oh, ok then. LOL Britishes chart compilers!

mr. Sun king coming together on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:46:12 +0100

Oh, it makes zero sense to me either - I'm just explaining it.

Von Bontee on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:44:06 +0100

It makes NO sense to me! A million apples does not equal 75000 oranges, or ANY oranges.

mr. Sun king coming together on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:36:37 +0100

Simply put, it's sales divided by 14. With The Beatles sold over a million copies, so at least 75000 copies were included in the singles chart calculation. Based on British Population at the time, that makes sense.

Von Bontee on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:25:18 +0100

OK what now? "With The Beatles" made the singles chart??

meanmistermustard on Opinion on "That Means a Lot."

Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:07:32 +0100

Going way off track ive never understood how With The Beatles entered the singles charts in the UK (it made the top 20). I get that it was down to sales so if it sold enough then it could enter but surely if they halved the sales of a double a-side they would divided the sales of the album by 14 to equate for each song? Did With The Beatles sell that many copies? Or was it because it was treated as 1 entity?

(You can see it listed at number 14 in this pic along with at least 1 ep but maybe 2. The ...