This is the most underrated album! | Page 2 | With The Beatles | Fab forum

Please consider registering
Guest

Log In Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —

  

— Match —

   

— Forum Options —

   

Wildcard usage:
*  matches any number of characters    %  matches exactly one character

Minimum search word length is 4 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

This is the most underrated album!
23 May 2013
4.36am
Egroeg Evoli
Across the universe
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1665
Member Since:
6 December 2012
Offline
21

Oh, okay.

Do you want to know a secret? Read my username backwards. ~ ~ ~ - - - . . . - - - ~ ~ ~ Also known as Egg-Rock, Egg-Roll, E-George, Eggy...

☮ & <3

23 May 2013
5.00am
Ron Nasty
"Where have you been?" "I'm not telling you..."
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 3017
Member Since:
17 December 2012
Online

I do, however, think the photo takes on a different sort of iconic twist when placed alongside the aborted Get Back cover shot. Those two photos placed alongside each other, as they did with the Red and the Blue take on a significance that wasn't there to begin with. Two shots that show just how much the world, and their world, changed in seven years.

"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
23 May 2013
4.15pm
IMDeWalrus
Terrace BC Canada
Decca
Forum Posts: 90
Member Since:
26 July 2011
Offline
23

mja6758 said

I do, however, think the photo takes on a different sort of iconic twist when placed alongside the aborted Get Back cover shot. Those two photos placed alongside each other, as they did with the Red and the Blue take on a significance that wasn't there to begin with. Two shots that show just how much the world, and their world, changed in seven years.

 

I totally agree -- by itself, the Please Please Me cover is pretty standard stuff for the day -- four smiling happy pop stars grinning down over a railing.   But John Lennon's brilliant idea to have them strike exactly the same pose in 1969 makes it all much more interesting.  

The cover photo on WITH THE BEATLES, on the other hand, was a radical departure from the accepted norm back in those days -- and apparently the EMI execs were horrified when they first saw it.   "Where are our smiling, happy Beatles??   No one will buy an album with this grim, moody picture on the cover!!"   It wasn't just in their music that The Beatles were always ahead of the curve.

I've got nothing to say, but it's okay.. GOOD MORNING! GOOD MORNING!! GOOD MORNING!!!
23 May 2013
5.55pm
fabfouremily
Sitting in an English garden
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 2934
Member Since:
3 May 2012
Offline
24

IMDeWalrus said
I totally agree -- by itself, the Please Please Me cover is pretty standard stuff for the day -- four smiling happy pop stars grinning down over a railing.   But John Lennon's brilliant idea to have them strike exactly the same pose in 1969 makes it all much more interesting.  

The cover photo on WITH THE BEATLES, on the other hand, was a radical departure from the accepted norm back in those days -- and apparently the EMI execs were horrified when they first saw it.   "Where are our smiling, happy Beatles??   No one will buy an album with this grim, moody picture on the cover!!"   It wasn't just in their music that The Beatles were always ahead of the curve.

That's always made me laugh. I know they hadn't quite become the biggest band in the world at this point but I'm sure the cover wouldn't necessarily put people off, particularly not younger listeners, only entice them further I think.

''We're just knocked out. We heard about the sell out. You gotta get an album out, you owe it to the people. We're so happy we can hardly count.''

23 May 2013
10.10pm
IMDeWalrus
Terrace BC Canada
Decca
Forum Posts: 90
Member Since:
26 July 2011
Offline
25

fabfouremily said

IMDeWalrus said

The cover photo on WITH THE BEATLES, on the other hand, was a radical departure from the accepted norm back in those days -- and apparently the EMI execs were horrified when they first saw it.   "Where are our smiling, happy Beatles??   No one will buy an album with this grim, moody picture on the cover!!"   It wasn't just in their music that The Beatles were always ahead of the curve.

That's always made me laugh. I know they hadn't quite become the biggest band in the world at this point but I'm sure the cover wouldn't necessarily put people off, particularly not younger listeners, only entice them further I think.

I think that says a lot about the mindset of the record executives back in those days -- 1963 was a very conservative time and the guys who controlled the "teen music scene" were not interested in any cover or publicty photos of their pop stars that didn't show them wearing inane, toothy grins.   In fact, most of The Beatles' own publicity photos of that era all looked like that.  

I looked up an article about the WITH THE BEATLES cover just now (http://www.norwegianwood.org/b…..vers2.html)  and it says "Beatles’ publicist Tony Barrow noted in Beatles Monthly that 'Brian Epstein was very disappointed with the photograph and the Beatles put tremendous pressure on him to support them and take the picture to EMI.'   The marketing executives at EMI thought that the picture was 'shockingly humourless'. 'Where is the fun? Why are they looking so grim? We want to project happy Beatles for happy fans.' "  

All that changed after the album was released and shot directly to number one (in Britain) -- and then when Beatlemania finally hit in the USA, the same photo was used on their debut album there (MEET THE BEATLES), and today it seems preposterous that anyone would have been worried in the first place.

I've got nothing to say, but it's okay.. GOOD MORNING! GOOD MORNING!! GOOD MORNING!!!
23 May 2013
10.22pm
AppleScruffJunior
Sitting here, doing nothing but procrastinating
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1733
Member Since:
18 March 2013
Offline
26

Talking about the With The Beatles/Meet The Beatles album cover, here's a cool edit  I found:

INTROVERTS UNITE! Separately.....In your own homes.----Make Love, Not Wardrobes!
23 May 2013
10.30pm
Ron Nasty
"Where have you been?" "I'm not telling you..."
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 3017
Member Since:
17 December 2012
Online
27

So many aspects of their early years were considered shocking breaks with the conventions of the time that now look ridiculous in retrospect. The fuss about the "long" hair! They looked like girls! To quote BTO, You ain't seen nothing yet! The idea that they didn't need outside songwriters, forcing every other group to raise their game. The fact that musicians were making the front pages of the papers. It was rare for popular to feature on the front pages, and when they did it was usually for scandal (ie. Jerry Lee Lewis' visit to the UK with his underage cousin-bride). The fact that the serious press took them seriously, and that this album was one of the reasons why. There is a reason why so few of the '50s-early '60s stars survived the impact of their earthquake. From this distance, and for those of us who didn't live through it, the impact across the board is hard to comprehend because we only know the world they created. If Please Please Me kicked the door open, With The Beatles tore the walls down.

"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
30 August 2013
1.42pm
trcanberra
Canberra, ACT
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1667
Member Since:
29 August 2013
Offline
28

I'm not sure underrated is correct.  Carr & Tyler from New Musical Express have it as one of their top 4 Beatles albums in their book 'The Beatles: An Illustrated Record'.

To quote: "This is the only LP from the primitive early 'sixties that, well over ten years later, still retains all the freshness and breadth of musical vision that was instantly apparent on the day of issue.  It was a simply staggering achievement from every point of view …"

So I'm not sure who is underrating it?

3 January 2014
1.49am
Billy Rhythm
Shea Stadium
Forum Posts: 451
Member Since:
22 December 2013
Offline
29

trcanberra said
I'm not sure underrated is correct.  Carr & Tyler from New Musical Express have it as one of their top 4 Beatles albums in their book 'The Beatles: An Illustrated Record'.

To quote: "This is the only LP from the primitive early 'sixties that, well over ten years later, still retains all the freshness and breadth of musical vision that was instantly apparent on the day of issue.  It was a simply staggering achievement from every point of view …"

So I'm not sure who is underrating it?

 

 

I agree with the quote, this is definitely my favourite of the earlier (pre-psychedelic) albums.  It's the best representation of their early signature sound, in my opinion, a near perfect fusion between the energy of the high octane Cavern Club shows & the next level of musicianship achieved through becoming recording artists.  From the opening "It Won't Be Long, Yeah!….." through to the final "That's What I Want!" refrain of 'Money', this album succeeds in giving you the closest experience to actually being at the front row of one of their Cavern Shows, almost as though they knew that they were never going to play there again and wanted to go out in true authentic Beatle-style, excellent.

 

Ringo, in particular, shines throughout this one.  On the first record, he almost sounds as though he's restraining himself in places, he no doubt was still trying to impress George Martin with a more "conservative" approach to his drumming.  But on 'With The Beatles', he freakin' loses it!  He's hitting hard and furious throughout, the cymbals sound like they're about to fall over in many places, it's some of his best drumming ever, period.  This album, for me, is when The Beatles first constructed a certain foundation rhythmically that would be present through all of their remaining works, and much of the credit has to go to Ringo for getting the party started.

 

Perhaps some the "underrated" talk stems from the fact that this album wasn't issued in the United States as a cohesive record until long after The Beatles broke up.  Myself, being in Canada, was fortunate to have the 'Beatlemania – With The Beatles' album which has the identical cover and track listing as the British version, but Capitol U.S. spread out the recordings into more than one compilation, which was most unfortunate for they got a very obscured view of one of the greatest rock 'n' roll albums ever produced by anyone in the U.S.  On the song 'Hold Me Tight', I'm not sure why many are so down on it either, it's certainly not Paul's best vocal performance (not his worst either), but the song sounds great to my ears.  It's almost a rewrite of 'I'll Get You' for it employs a lot of the same hooks and ploys, but much heavier and again, Ringo's drumming is out of this world on it…:-) 

 

 

3 January 2014
2.09am
meanmistermustard
Moderator



Forum Posts: 9575
Member Since:
1 May 2011
Offline

For me Hold Me Tight sucks, blows and, well is just unlistenable garbage (i'll keep it clean). I hate the thing, hate, hate, hate. I've said it before but aside from Paul the others are just not interested enough to make it do anything, the rhythm track slows and speeds up whenever it damn well chooses, and it goes on for what seems an eternity. I find nothing to endure it to me and every time i hear it i hate it a little bit more. 

Of all the songs the Beatles released this is the one i will skip without question if not playing the album thru and when doing that i have to grin and bear it even before it comes on.

18 months later Paul unleashed That Means A Lot: they re-recorded it when the first attempt didn't work and tried again, thankfully they realised it wasn't working so they ditched it, sparing me the hell of having to listen to it on Help! – if only that had happened for Hold Me Tight on With The Beatles. Otherwise the album is amazing.

 

Yes im off-topic and repeating myself but its nice to completely trash the song every once in a while.

"Well, probably we'll sell less records, less people'll go to see the film, we'll write less songs, and we'll all die of failure" (John Lennon 8/64)
3 January 2014
2.33am
trcanberra
Canberra, ACT
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1667
Member Since:
29 August 2013
Offline
31

^ And well worth a review to start the New Year off right :)

I must say it is one of the tracks that doesn't do much for me.

3 January 2014
5.24am
Billy Rhythm
Shea Stadium
Forum Posts: 451
Member Since:
22 December 2013
Offline
32

meanmistermustard said
For me Hold Me Tight sucks, blows and, well is just unlistenable garbage (i'll keep it clean). I hate the thing, hate, hate, hate. I've said it before but aside from Paul the others are just not interested enough to make it do anything, the rhythm track slows and speeds up whenever it damn well chooses, and it goes on for what seems an eternity. I find nothing to endure it to me and every time i hear it i hate it a little bit more. 

Of all the songs the Beatles released this is the one i will skip without question if not playing the album thru and when doing that i have to grin and bear it even before it comes on.

18 months later Paul unleashed That Means A Lot: they re-recorded it when the first attempt didn't work and tried again, thankfully they realised it wasn't working so they ditched it, sparing me the hell of having to listen to it on Help! – if only that had happened for Hold Me Tight on With The Beatles. Otherwise the album is amazing.

 

Yes im off-topic and repeating myself but its nice to completely trash the song every once in a while.

 

 

Haha, won't get much of an argument from me on 'That Means Alot', it sounds like something that might've been useful as a Peter & Gordon B-Side, but 'Hold Me Tight' doesn't quite belong in the same ilk, in my opinion.  If 'With The Beatles' were to "simulate" a 1963 live performance by the group, 'Hold Me Tight' might be a brief diversion by them (as Paul croons away to his many female admirers) whilst Mal Evans rolls out the piano for George Martin to make a guest appearance on the next song, 'You Really Got A Hold On Me'.  Let me ask you this, is 'Hold Me Tight' such a big "let down" for you because it's sandwiched inbetween two of their best 1963 (and quite possibly beyond) performances in 'Roll Over Beethoven' & 'You Really Got A Hold On Me'?  I mean, do those two (and the other tracks' excellence) make the song look worse than it really is"?…:-)

3 January 2014
11.17am
meanmistermustard
Moderator



Forum Posts: 9575
Member Since:
1 May 2011
Offline

a-hard-days-night-ringo-8

Billy Rhythm said

meanmistermustard said
For me Hold Me Tight sucks, blows and, well is just unlistenable garbage (i'll keep it clean). I hate the thing, hate, hate, hate. I've said it before but aside from Paul the others are just not interested enough to make it do anything, the rhythm track slows and speeds up whenever it damn well chooses, and it goes on for what seems an eternity. I find nothing to endure it to me and every time i hear it i hate it a little bit more. 

Of all the songs the Beatles released this is the one i will skip without question if not playing the album thru and when doing that i have to grin and bear it even before it comes on.

18 months later Paul unleashed That Means A Lot: they re-recorded it when the first attempt didn't work and tried again, thankfully they realised it wasn't working so they ditched it, sparing me the hell of having to listen to it on Help! – if only that had happened for Hold Me Tight on With The Beatles. Otherwise the album is amazing.

 

Yes im off-topic and repeating myself but its nice to completely trash the song every once in a while.

 

 

Haha, won't get much of an argument from me on 'That Means Alot', it sounds like something that might've been useful as a Peter & Gordon B-Side, but 'Hold Me Tight' doesn't quite belong in the same ilk, in my opinion.  If 'With The Beatles' were to "simulate" a 1963 live performance by the group, 'Hold Me Tight' might be a brief diversion by them (as Paul croons away to his many female admirers) whilst Mal Evans rolls out the piano for George Martin to make a guest appearance on the next song, 'You Really Got A Hold On Me'.  Let me ask you this, is 'Hold Me Tight' such a big "let down" for you because it's sandwiched inbetween two of their best 1963 (and quite possibly beyond) performances in 'Roll Over Beethoven' & 'You Really Got A Hold On Me'?  I mean, do those two (and the other tracks' excellence) make the song look worse than it really is"?…:-)

No, HMT is a let down because its shit (in my opinion). Having Roll Over Beethoven and You Really Got A Hold On Me pre and post (respectively) results in a) getting me thru such crap (you can lose yourself in the sheer joy of ROB whilst having such a good song after means i can hold my breath knowing something so good is coming – a reward in a way for the suffering) and b) they don't get pulled as the two tracks surrounding HMT are so strong. Two great tracks don't make a poor track better, they just stand strong beside bearing the load. 

Looking at the 8 originals 3 are very ordinary lyrically and recording-wise: Little Child & I Wanna Be Tour Man are good due to the sheer energy of them – proof that the 4 Beatles joy and exuberance can make filler very engaging (evident also in When I Get Home on the 'AHDN' LP). Hold Me Tight on the other hand splutters along for 2 1/2 minutes with Paul on the throttle trying to get it going whilst the others musical souls are just not in it – the backing calls of John and George are so half-hearted. 

"Well, probably we'll sell less records, less people'll go to see the film, we'll write less songs, and we'll all die of failure" (John Lennon 8/64)
3 January 2014
12.01pm
Atlas
Ed Sullivan Show
Forum Posts: 160
Member Since:
18 October 2013
Offline

Hi MMM

 

I get it, you really hate this song with a passion and no one can say you shouldn't…. personal taste and all that.…………. I read that Paul and John have disparaged it themselves. But play it loud and it sounds better……….. However 'bad' it is I always ask myself could I have done as well or better? Could you?

I didn't know that a decent band like Stackridge (I saw them a few times live in the early 70's great sense of humour), would chose to cover a song like this.

 

Anyway just for you……

 

 

 

 

It's not the worst song in the world……….That distinction goes to that song……"Little boxes on a hillside all made out of ticky-tacky' 

19 January 2014
1.43am
YouKnowMyName
YouKnowWhere
Royal Command Performance
Forum Posts: 124
Member Since:
15 January 2014
Offline

Sure, not all the songs of equality on this album. With the Beatles, however, has become my favourite album to listen to while I'm running. I think their cover songs are great, though to be honest I haven't heard any of the originals except Roll Over Beethoven. I like playing tennis to these tracks as well. Not sure why, but it is nice for background music.

You know my name you know number too
You know my name you know my number
What's up with you?

19 January 2014
3.10am
trcanberra
Canberra, ACT
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1667
Member Since:
29 August 2013
Offline
36

Beatles in the Blood said
I do not get the hate for this album, it's definitely not their worst! There are too many underrated songs on here also, Don't Bother Me, a great overlooked song, Please Mr. Postman and You've Really goy a Hold on Me. Fantastic covers. So, what are you're thoughts on the album.

Hate? From where?

I won't comment further except to say I always find it difficult to accept that ANY Beatles album is underrated.

Some of Ringo's (like Time Takes Time and Vertical Man) maybe, the Beatles? – no, sorry, don't think so.

 

19 January 2014
3.32am
Ahhh Girl
sailing on a winedark open sea
Moderator


Forum Posts: 4827
Member Since:
20 August 2013
Offline

trcanberra said

Some of Ringo's (like Time Takes Time and Vertical Man) maybe, the Beatles? – no, sorry, don't think so.

 

So, trc, are these some purchasing suggestions for when I get my next Amazon cards? a-hard-days-night-ringo-4 They will stretch past George cds. :-) ahdn_george_08

19 January 2014
6.52am
trcanberra
Canberra, ACT
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1667
Member Since:
29 August 2013
Offline
38

Ahhh Girl said

trcanberra said

Some of Ringo's (like Time Takes Time and Vertical Man) maybe, the Beatles? – no, sorry, don't think so.

 

So, trc, are these some purchasing suggestions for when I get my next Amazon cards? a-hard-days-night-ringo-4 They will stretch past George cds. :-) ahdn_george_08

Heh – well, since you DO seem to like Ringo.  I have also heard Ringo Rama is good, though haven't listened to all of it yet.  I'd rank them in the order above; so Time Takes Time best, then Vertical Man and finally Ringo Rama.

 

13 February 2014
2.59pm
OneCoolCat
The Cavern Club
Forum Posts: 84
Member Since:
6 February 2014
Offline
39

Sadly, I am not too fond of this album. Don't get me wrong, it's good, but just not my favourite.

13 February 2014
5.07pm
BBCSessions1963
Strawberry Fields
Royal Command Performance
Forum Posts: 122
Member Since:
28 January 2013
Offline
40

I think the only reason why this album is often underated is because compared to the later beatles albums they're all much better. Abbey Road, White Album, and Sgt. Pepper are the most common favorite Beatle albums. I like the early Beatles more than the later Beatles because of their good relationships within the group. Plus Johns voice had a rocker tone which I prefer and I enjoyed their radio sessions an such. Well rant over I guess. 

And if you saw my love, I'll love her to.
Forum Timezone: Europe/London

Most Users Ever Online: 597

Currently Online: Ron Nasty, Sugarplum fairy
35 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

meanmistermustard: 9575

mr. Sun king coming together: 6916

parlance: 5073

Ahhh Girl: 4827

mithveaen: 4651

Zig: 4009

Annadog40: 3968

Mr. Kite: 3521

Ron Nasty: 3017

fabfouremily: 2934

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 88

Members: 2571

Moderators: 4

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 3

Forums: 34

Topics: 3170

Posts: 132585

Newest Members: HenryTheHorse, Dower, AsGSnak, celmackrobi, tiszalina

Moderators: Ahhh Girl (4827), meanmistermustard (9575), Zig (4009), Joe (3447)

Administrators: Joe (3447), Ellie (1)

Members Birthdays
Today: None
Upcoming: Mizz M