|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 11, 2011 9:28:39 GMT -5
In a low voting round, out goes Rubber Soul (with BFS, they were probably my favourites).
Come on chaps, we're nearly done!
With The Beatles (and Meet The Beatles US) Revolver Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Abbey Road
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 11, 2011 10:32:03 GMT -5
In a low voting round, out goes Rubber Soul (with BFS, they were probably my favourites). Come on chaps, we're nearly done! With The Beatles (and Meet The Beatles US) Revolver Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Abbey Road Which RS vectis? You've always had U.K. and U.S. Or are both out in a command decision by you?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 11, 2011 10:36:17 GMT -5
Here are the remaining covers for Round 21! I have deleted both U.K. and U.S. Rubber Soul in yet another album cover tourney controversy! With The Beatles or Revolver Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Abbey Road
|
|
JCV
Very Clean
Posts: 545
|
Post by JCV on Nov 11, 2011 12:10:18 GMT -5
Abbey RoadJCV
|
|
|
Post by Snookeroo on Nov 11, 2011 12:17:05 GMT -5
I have to decide between MEET THE BEATLES and WITH THE BEATLES. Both have that great photo. Too bad the above image has that annoying "Gold Record Award" on it. That takes away from the photo. However, I like the way the ablum title is done on the top of MTB. I also kind of like that the guys are "lightened up" on MTB.
On the spot decision - With The Beatles goes for me.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 11, 2011 12:18:57 GMT -5
I'd always regarded Rubber Soul as a single choice as the UK and US sleeves were so similar.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 11, 2011 12:19:51 GMT -5
Revolver
Sorry Klaus! Those photos coming out of the scketched hair is creeping me out.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 11, 2011 12:21:27 GMT -5
I'd always regarded Rubber Soul as a single choice as the UK and US sleeves were so similar. Ah, I guessed right for the images above. Does Snooks need to re-think his vote if With The Batles and Meet The Beatles are likewise one?
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Nov 11, 2011 18:53:51 GMT -5
The "or" between the Rubber Soul versions and the With the Beatles and Meet the Beatles albums made me think they were one choice.
I quit voting a few choices back. This time this blog has gone too far!!
|
|
|
Post by Blackguard on Nov 11, 2011 19:03:17 GMT -5
Goodbye to Revolver. Reason being is Klaus Voormann worked in his own image.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Nov 11, 2011 23:57:12 GMT -5
Abbey Road It's just four guys crossing the street.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 12, 2011 2:04:47 GMT -5
I quit voting a few choices back. This time this blog has gone too far!! This has been the most controversial tourney ever here!
|
|
|
Post by anyoneanyhow on Nov 12, 2011 13:21:49 GMT -5
Sgt Pepper
There's a randomness to the audience selection, plus the black and white photos really dont work. And the always looked like two-dimensional cutouts to me.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Nov 12, 2011 13:41:02 GMT -5
I quit voting a few choices back. This time this blog has gone too far!! This has been the most controversial tourney ever here! I'm just kidding with "This time you've gone too far" comment but I do think getting it down to the top five might have been best. Now you'll get people saying the cover for Sgt Pepper sucks. Okay, get rid of Revolver.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 12, 2011 16:53:13 GMT -5
This has been the most controversial tourney ever here! I'm just kidding with "This time you've gone too far" comment but I do think getting it down to the top five might have been best. Now you'll get people saying the cover for Sgt Pepper sucks. Okay, get rid of Revolver. LOL, I was kidding too, a little hyperbole, but this has been the longest tourney in the history of this Board! It is fun to prod dear vectis too but he has run a fun game.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 12, 2011 18:36:22 GMT -5
That's it. Feelings now fatally hurt. I intend to abscond and leave it unfinished with 4 left on the board.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 12, 2011 18:36:38 GMT -5
Heh.
|
|
|
Post by coachbk on Nov 13, 2011 0:02:16 GMT -5
WITH THE BEATLES/MEET THE BEATLES
The others are more creative covers. MEET THE BEATLES may have a little more meaning in the US, since it was our introduction to the group, but it wasn't intended that way so that takes away a bit of the appeal.
|
|
wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Nov 13, 2011 3:53:46 GMT -5
Meet the Beatles. It's basically the same sleeve as 'With the Beatles' but with all the cheesy writing and that hopeless gaudy, tacky logo.
I said it back in about round three, but I think it was a mistake to have two 'Rubber souls' competing against each other -- ditto 'With / meet the Beatles'. It ended up splitting the vote and Vectis has, probably rightly, ended up culling both the Rubber Soul sleeves in one go. The same will probably happen with 'With / meet the Beatles' which is a shame because 'With the Beatles' is a potential winner.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 13, 2011 7:58:24 GMT -5
It is so long ago now that it has oozed out of my rapidly decaying memory, but I don't recall intending to have the two Rubber Souls and WTB/MTB as 4 distinct choices (contrast AHDN). But never mind, we're nearly there.
|
|
wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Nov 13, 2011 9:03:23 GMT -5
But never mind, we're nearly there. Said with an air of weary relief.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 13, 2011 9:10:28 GMT -5
And then some...
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 13, 2011 12:10:46 GMT -5
Ah vectis, it has been a merry tourney! And.....[gulp].....my efforts to provide images of each album for the voter's ease in reference may have caused the Rubber Soul controversy! Here is vectis' original line-up in Round 1: OK, here goes. I did toy with the idea of including the Veejay album - it does have EMI tracks on it - but I figured that the logic would mean that I would also have to include the various incarnations of the Kaempfert and Decca audition albums, because tracks from them have appeared on EMI Beatles albums. So I have stuck with Beatles albums released by EMI, with recognised individual release trade dress.
RULES: vote for a single entry to be eliminated. In the event of more than one entry tied with the most votes, all tied entries will be eliminated. IMPORTANT: please give your reasons - a vote without a reason WILL NOT BE COUNTED!!!!!
Please Please Me With The Beatles (and Meet The Beatles US) The Beatles Second Album A Hard Day’s Night (UK) A Hard Day’s Night (US) Beatles For Sale Something New The Beatles’ Story Beatles 65 Help! The Early Beatles Beatles VI Rubber Soul Yesterday... And Today Revolver A Collection Of Beatles Oldies Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band Magical Mystery Tour The Beatles Yellow Submarine Abbey Road Hey Jude (The Beatles Again) Let It Be From Then To You (UK) From Then To You (US) 1962-66 1967-70 Rock ‘n’ Roll Music Live At The Hollywood Bowl Love Songs Rarities (UK) – also trade dress for The Beatles Collection Rarities (US) The Beatles Ballads Rock’n’ Roll Music (budget) The Beatles Box (World Records box set) Reel Music 20 Greatest Hits Past Masters Live At The BBC Anthology 1 Anthology 2 Anthology 3 Yellow Submarine Songtrack 1 Let It Be... Naked Love Remastered (trade dress) Clearly we had two AHDN(they are different) but less clear if With The Beatles was to be separate from Meet The Beatles. Clearly vectis only listed Rubber Soul in the singular. In the spirit of With The Beatle/Meet The Beatles, I included the U.K. RS cover for those who grew up with it and the U.S. RS cover for Yanks. It seems that only AHDN was clearly to be distinct. I included the U.S. HELP! too and it appears I took a liberty there too. Sorry vectis if I added to what has been the most divisive, controversial tourney in the history of the Internet. Still loads of fun and it is not close to being over! It started on like May 27th! ;D
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Nov 13, 2011 12:47:06 GMT -5
"IMPORTANT: please give your reasons - a vote without a reason WILL NOT BE COUNTED!!!!!"
Oops. I didn't give a reason for voting off Revolver earlier.
I guess because we had Meet the Beatles when I was a kid. My brother brought Sgt Pepper home from Nam and Abbey Road was the first album I ever bought. I have no nostalgia for Revolver. I didn't get to know it until the CDs came out in the eighties.
It doesn't seem as much like a classic album cover to me.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Nov 13, 2011 13:08:01 GMT -5
I'm happy again now I've got someone to blame.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Nov 13, 2011 13:32:10 GMT -5
I agree with JSD about this being loads of fun. It's refreshing to not have to rehash for the zillionth time why I don't like "She's Leaving Home." Being an amateur art critic has been a blast.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Nov 14, 2011 8:08:22 GMT -5
Abbey Road It's just four guys crossing the street. It's actually become a ton more than that, especially taking into account the "Paul Is Dead Clues".
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Nov 14, 2011 13:55:35 GMT -5
The Meet the Beatles cover shows you why there is such a variance in the size of John, George and Paul's heads--they were photographed different distances from the camera. I have known that for a long time, but the With the Beatles (an annoying title) with the background all black with no variations of light does not show them in context. It looks like Paul has this little peanut head. So to me there is a huge difference between the two. For that reason, With the Beatles gets my vote to be eliminated.
This reminds me of the discussion about relative heights of the three tallest Beatles. Conventional wisdom (which is often not so wise) says that they were all the same height--around 5'11" or so. We know from many photos that this is not the case.
They always point out that the "new" Paul was taller than John and George. The truth is that John and George stopped wearing Beatle boots around 1966. Paul had always intermittantly wore the boots and stopped doing so in 1964 for the most part. Even in the 1963 photo on the back of Meet the Beatles Paul is th only one not wearing boots. The best way to see their true height is the Sgt. Pepper photos. There they are all have the same type of shoes on --they were part of the Sgt. Pepper outfit. Conclusion the two inch height "increase" was actually from showing their true relative heights.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 14, 2011 15:54:52 GMT -5
The Meet the Beatles cover shows you why there is such a variance in the size of John, George and Paul's heads--they were photographed different distances from the camera. I have known that for a long time, but the With the Beatles (an annoying title) with the background all black with no variations of light does not show them in context. It looks like Paul has this little peanut head. So to me there is a huge difference between the two. For that reason, With the Beatles gets my vote to be eliminated. This reminds me of the discussion about relative heights of the three tallest Beatles. Conventional wisdom (which is often not so wise) says that they were all the same height--around 5'11" or so. We know from many photos that this is not the case. They always point out that the "new" Paul was taller than John and George. The truth is that John and George stopped wearing Beatle boots around 1966. Paul had always intermittantly wore the boots and stopped doing so in 1964 for the most part. Even in the 1963 photo on the back of Meet the Beatles Paul is th only one not wearing boots. The best way to see their true height is the Sgt. Pepper photos. There they are all have the same type of shoes on --they were part of the Sgt. Pepper outfit. Conclusion the two inch height "increase" was actually from showing their true relative heights. Great post in a couple ways, RTP! Your reference to Paul looking like he had a "peanut head" on With The Beatles made me laugh! Now there was a twist. Remember, on Beatles Love Songs in 1977, it was charged that the famous Richard Avedon photo was manipulated to make Paul look more prominant because he was the only one left at Capitol Records then! ;D Second, yeah I always thought that John, Paul and George were the same height but then it seems like Paul got taller! But Paul doesn't seem 5'11" today, he seems smaller. I would like to see official height measurments of John, Paul and George like they do in boxing and sports!
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Nov 14, 2011 16:34:07 GMT -5
The Meet the Beatles cover shows you why there is such a variance in the size of John, George and Paul's heads--they were photographed different distances from the camera. I have known that for a long time, but the With the Beatles (an annoying title) with the background all black with no variations of light does not show them in context. It looks like Paul has this little peanut head. So to me there is a huge difference between the two. For that reason, With the Beatles gets my vote to be eliminated. This reminds me of the discussion about relative heights of the three tallest Beatles. Conventional wisdom (which is often not so wise) says that they were all the same height--around 5'11" or so. We know from many photos that this is not the case. They always point out that the "new" Paul was taller than John and George. The truth is that John and George stopped wearing Beatle boots around 1966. Paul had always intermittantly wore the boots and stopped doing so in 1964 for the most part. Even in the 1963 photo on the back of Meet the Beatles Paul is th only one not wearing boots. The best way to see their true height is the Sgt. Pepper photos. There they are all have the same type of shoes on --they were part of the Sgt. Pepper outfit. Conclusion the two inch height "increase" was actually from showing their true relative heights. Great post in a couple ways, RTP! Your reference to Paul looking like he had a "peanut head" on With The Beatles made me laugh! Now there was a twist. Remember, on Beatles Love Songs in 1977, it was charged that the famous Richard Avedon photo was manipulated to make Paul look more prominant because he was the only one left at Capitol Records then! ;D Second, yeah I always thought that John, Paul and George were the same height but then it seems like Paul got taller! But Paul doesn't seem 5'11" today, he seems smaller. I would like to see official height measurments of John, Paul and George like they do in boxing and sports! Paul may have lost a few millimeters as he has "matured". As for their true relative heights, just look at the pictures from Sgt. Pepper. They are all wearing the same style shoe/slipper if you have seen them. The front and back covers make it clear--Paul is noticebly taller than George and even more so compared to John. Based on the cover (and other photos) if Ringo was around 5'7" then John was 5'9 1/2", George was 5'10" and Paul was at least 5'11" if not 5'11 1/2".
|
|