|
Post by coachbk on Jul 18, 2010 20:55:02 GMT -5
Let me add too that THE WHITE ALBUM I also heard for the first time 1975 or 76 and it was the only Beatles album that I did not absolutely love the first time I heard it. There were several songs I did not like. That never happened with any other Beatles album.
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Jul 18, 2010 20:58:52 GMT -5
low basso - read my posts just above; that'll give you a good idea of my feelings t the time.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 18, 2010 23:07:40 GMT -5
I first heard Abbey Road and Let It Be in the summer of 1976 as my dad bought me LIB and my brother AR from a very cool record store in Montreal, Canada as we were there attending the Summer Olympics. We were gone two weeks and couldn't play these albums until we got home. I looked at these two wrapped albums longingly every day on the road until we got home!
Both albums blew me away at the sage old age of 13! I loved them both equally because they were so different.
To this day I buy AR as a gift for friends or family who express a newly formed interest in listening to The Beatles. I figure this is a good one for the newly Beatles' curious to start with because it is recorded so well and the band is singing and playing so well that it sounds contemporary, making it an easy transition for these newbies.
The Red and Blue albums were too damn expensive to give folks who may not end up fans! My stepsons got Red, Blue, AR, White and SPLHCB but I made the classic mistake of pushing them too hard on Beatles. I should have given them the albums and stepped back rather than try to enjoy the music with them. In 1975, I would have hated The Beatles if my parents had tried to push them on me.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jul 19, 2010 6:43:03 GMT -5
To anyone around at the time did you see the end of the band coming circa 1968? Definitely not. Apple started, the four of them (apparently) mentoring new acts, the monster Hey Jude, the monster white album followed immediately by Let It Be, then quietness as a group in 1969 although we could see from the music press that they were all involved in solo activities - and that seemed fine, it wasn't as if there was no precedent - then the immaculate Abbey Road, then Let It Be (which was a disappointment: overpackaged and underrecorded), then WHACK! Gone. No warning whatsoever to fans, even at the end, let alone 18 months earlier.
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Jul 19, 2010 8:59:15 GMT -5
To anyone around at the time did you see the end of the band coming circa 1968? Definitely not. Apple started, the four of them (apparently) mentoring new acts, the monster Hey Jude, the monster white album followed immediately by Let It Be, then quietness as a group in 1969 although we could see from the music press that they were all involved in solo activities - and that seemed fine, it wasn't as if there was no precedent - then the immaculate Abbey Road, then Let It Be (which was a disappointment: overpackaged and underrecorded), then WHACK! Gone. No warning whatsoever to fans, even at the end, let alone 18 months earlier. I'm guessing you meant "Get Back" instead of "Let It Be." And to that list the "Ballad Of John And Yoko/Old Brown Shoe" and it wasn't that much of a gap between Beatle releases. The "overpackaged" LIB is something the rest of the world didn't get to experience. I've seen the book--reproduced in a bootleg I have--and that would have been an unwieldy product. Do you recall how long it was before the "standard" issue became the one you'd see in the stores? JcS
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jul 19, 2010 11:47:26 GMT -5
I actually meant Yellow Submarine (the LP followed the white album within an incredibly short period of time - 3 weeks or something?).
But, yes, there were the two singles after Christmas 68 and before Abbey Road (plus a moderate amount of solo product, albeit much of it not very mainstream), so they hardly disappeared off the radar.
I have no idea how long it was before the album became available without the box and book, having bought the set on the day of release (and having had the box fall to bits on, er, the day of release...). I don't think it was straight away, though, or even close to that - I think there was a respectable interval before we found out that, had we waited, we could have bought the album on its own and not wasted our money on the shite box.
I know someone who still has a mint shrinkwrapped Let It Be box. I do mention that he might like to give it to me but, unfortunately, he is very well aware that he has something which is not of insignificant value.
|
|
JCV
Very Clean
Posts: 545
|
Post by JCV on Jul 19, 2010 11:55:03 GMT -5
ABBEY ROAD, Side 2JCV
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Jul 19, 2010 13:17:55 GMT -5
ABBEY ROAD, Side 2
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Jul 19, 2010 14:18:01 GMT -5
I actually meant Yellow Submarine (the LP followed the white album within an incredibly short period of time - 3 weeks or something?). Not much more than that; TB came out on November 22, 1968, and YS was released on January 13, 1969. JcS
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Jul 19, 2010 14:29:49 GMT -5
Just about every song on Abbey Road works for me. Whereas I gotta be in the right mood for Let it Be.
And has McCartney ever explained why -- if he hated the Spector mushiness on "Long & Winding Road" so much -- why he pretty much stays faithful to the Spector version in his live show?
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Jul 24, 2010 14:53:38 GMT -5
I voted for Let It Be. Those 5 tunes are classics each, which is more than almost any other side of any other album.
Abbey Road is thoroughly great, but side 1 is better. I have to be in a certain mood to enjoy side 2. It certainly works in context of the LP as a whole, but taken on its own, there is 1 indisputable classic ('Here Comes The Sun', duh!) and maybe another ('You Never Give Me Your Money'). The rest is fragments. A nice patchwork, but still fragments.
|
|