inthe00s
The Pop Culture Information Society...

These are the messages that have been posted on inthe00s over the past few years.

Check out the messageboard archive index for a complete list of topic areas.

This archive is periodically refreshed with the latest messages from the current messageboard.




Check for new replies or respond here...

Subject: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/04/04 at 5:26 pm

I LOVED Rubber Soul which came out in 1965 and marked the start of the "Change"....I prefer the later years but love ALL ;)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: CeramicsFanatic on 10/04/04 at 6:49 pm

Latter years...or as you say..."Mature Hippie" years.  :D

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/04/04 at 7:04 pm


Latter years...or as you say..."Mature Hippie" years.  :D
Groovy, Karen ;)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Tanya1976 on 10/04/04 at 7:17 pm

Mature years. They were cooler, look so much better, and more innovative. Mark, Rubber Soul's my favorite Beatles album, too. How did you know?

Tanya

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/04/04 at 7:31 pm


Mature years. They were cooler, look so much better, and more innovative. Mark, Rubber Soul's my favorite Beatles album, too. How did you know?

Tanya
Great Minds, Sweetheart...Great Minds :-*

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: gemini61 on 10/04/04 at 7:35 pm

Although I love both, I chose the "Mature Hippie" years, since Abbey Road is probably my favorite.  :)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Tanya1976 on 10/04/04 at 7:36 pm

That pretty much sums it up, Mark!  ;)

However, I'm always stumped about my second best b/c I like Revolver (especially Tomorrow Never Knows) and Sgt. Pepper's (Oh, to be Lovely Rita) both. Great albums!

Tanya

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/04/04 at 7:45 pm


That pretty much sums it up, Mark!  ;)

However, I'm always stumped about my second best b/c I like Revolver (especially Tomorrow Never Knows) and Sgt. Pepper's (Oh, to be Lovely Rita) both. Great albums!

Tanya
George Martin once said that they could've easlily made Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour a double LP. I thought Revolver was great AND I just started listening to the British Imports whicha are quite different than the ones on Capitol :)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: mandamoo on 10/04/04 at 11:39 pm

Good poll Mark !  8)

As a Beatles fan, I voted 'both'  ;) :)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: bj26 on 10/05/04 at 7:06 am

I pretty much liked their jangle pop harmonic sound when they were real young, my 15 year old likes them then and the later stuff as well. At present, I liked them most up to about Revolver.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Paul on 10/05/04 at 7:12 am

Their early output was (and still is), quite simply, stunning...hard to imagine anything making such an impact as that nowdays...

That said, I did put down both eras, although some parts of the later stuff was lost on me a bit...



George Martin once said that they could've easlily made Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour a double LP. I thought Revolver was great AND I just started listening to the British Imports whicha are quite different than the ones on Capitol :)


(Ooo...you shouldn't have started me off, Mark...!!)

He also said that 'The White Album' would've made a great single LP (and I'm inclined to agree...somewhat self-indulgent...)

Early US Beatle albums were 'chopped up' versions of the British counterparts, the concept of which gave way to the 'Butcher' cover of 'Yesterday And Today' (hastily withdrawn)...horrendously rare - if you're lucky enough to have a reasonably good copy, you're easily talking five figures...!! Ironically, this LP was Capitol's final 'chop-up'...

'Magical Mystery Tour' was only released as a deluxe double EP here at the time (the LP version was only available as a Capitol import), it finally received a British LP release in 1976, but lost all of the EP's superb packaging on the way...shame...

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/05/04 at 9:42 am


Their early output was (and still is), quite simply, stunning...hard to imagine anything making such an impact as that nowdays...

That said, I did put down both eras, although some parts of the later stuff was lost on me a bit...



(Ooo...you shouldn't have started me off, Mark...!!)

He also said that 'The White Album' would've made a great single LP (and I'm inclined to agree...somewhat self-indulgent...)

Early US Beatle albums were 'chopped up' versions of the British counterparts, the concept of which gave way to the 'Butcher' cover of 'Yesterday And Today' (hastily withdrawn)...horrendously rare - if you're lucky enough to have a reasonably good copy, you're easily talking five figures...!! Ironically, this LP was Capitol's final 'chop-up'...

'Magical Mystery Tour' was only released as a deluxe double EP here at the time (the LP version was only available as a Capitol import), it finally received a British LP release in 1976, but lost all of the EP's superb packaging on the way...shame...
Okay Paul...now I have a question for you that has been driving me quite insane for years....stick with me, this IS hard to explain! I have TWO copies of Rubber Soul on Capitol. One is the Mono version and the other the Stereo version. There the song called "I'm Looking Through You" and on the mono LP it just has 8 or so "Strums and it's right to the singing (Forgive my obvious lack of knowledge on musical aterminology)...whereas the Stereo version starts with a couple then stops then continues with a few more before reaching the point where the mono one began....confused? I know I am!

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/05/04 at 9:45 am


Good poll Mark !  8)

Thanks, Amanda ;)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: schmartypantz on 10/05/04 at 10:15 am

I do Like ALL Beatles years, but pushed to  choose, I take the mature hippie years.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: CatwomanofV on 10/05/04 at 12:06 pm

Definately the mature hippies. Most of their earlier stuff was kind of on the bubblegumish side. (I have stated this once before on a different thread that) there is nothing wrong with bubblegum music. But, from the Sgt. Pepper Album on, their music really revolutionized R&R. Abbey Road was my first Beatles' album and I will always have a special place for it, but I think the White Album was INCREDIBLE!!!




Cat

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Paul on 10/05/04 at 12:55 pm



Okay Paul...now I have a question for you that has been driving me quite insane for years....stick with me, this IS hard to explain! I have TWO copies of Rubber Soul on Capitol. One is the Mono version and the other the Stereo version. There the song called "I'm Looking Through You" and on the mono LP it just has 8 or so "Strums and it's right to the singing (Forgive my obvious lack of knowledge on musical aterminology)...whereas the Stereo version starts with a couple then stops then continues with a few more before reaching the point where the mono one began....confused? I know I am!


There's quite a few distinctions between the mono and stereo versions of some Fabs' songs, Mark - this being one - there's also slight mono and stereo differences of 'Money', 'And I Love Her', 'Tomorrow Never Knows' and 'Don't Pass Me By'...I'm not 100% certain why this is, but I do know EMI were guilty of some botched mixing back in the day probably due to stereo being quite 'a new thing', even in the 60s...

And there was also a version of 'Penny Lane' which featured an extra trumpet fill right at the end of the song - this was used on the US promotional version of the single only, normal versions don't have it...once again, I couldn't begin to tell you why...!! Interesting, tho'...!

I warned you about starting me off...!!

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Tanya1976 on 10/05/04 at 1:19 pm

Mark, I have the British versions. I love them. I often wonder if they thought American audiences couldn't handle the British versions. As for the mono and stereo versions, you do get extras with the stereo versions, which is why I prefer them.

Tanya

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/05/04 at 1:36 pm




There's quite a few distinctions between the mono and stereo versions of some Fabs' songs, Mark - this being one - there's also slight mono and stereo differences of 'Money', 'And I Love Her', 'Tomorrow Never Knows' and 'Don't Pass Me By'...I'm not 100% certain why this is, but I do know EMI were guilty of some botched mixing back in the day probably due to stereo being quite 'a new thing', even in the 60s...

And there was also a version of 'Penny Lane' which featured an extra trumpet fill right at the end of the song - this was used on the US promotional version of the single only, normal versions don't have it...once again, I couldn't begin to tell you why...!! Interesting, tho'...!

I warned you about starting me off...!!
Thanks, Paul! I have heard that particular version on an American release called "Rarities" from the early 80's

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/05/04 at 1:43 pm


Mark, I have the British versions. I love them. I often wonder if they thought American audiences couldn't handle the British versions. As for the mono and stereo versions, you do get extras with the stereo versions, which is why I prefer them.

Tanya
Unfortunately I grew up with the Capitol versions :-\\ But ever since hearing the British ones..it's almost like hearing them for the first time again :)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: danootaandme on 10/05/04 at 2:08 pm

I gotta weigh in, being the Matriarch in all this.  I remember all this stuff and so I've got that nostalgia thing going on that doesn't allow me to prefer the earlier from the later.  I love it all, and consider myself a "defender of the faith" when it comes to the Fab Four, and, I will brag(in my own smug way) that I saw the Beatles at Suffolk Downs in Boston on their last tour. Age has
its advantages.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Paul on 10/05/04 at 2:34 pm


I gotta weigh in, being the Matriarch in all this.  I remember all this stuff and so I've got that nostalgia thing going on that doesn't allow me to prefer the earlier from the later.  I love it all, and consider myself a "defender of the faith" when it comes to the Fab Four, and, I will brag(in my own smug way) that I saw the Beatles at Suffolk Downs in Boston on their last tour. Age has
its advantages.


Madam, you are indeed a very, very fortunate one...the green veil of envy sweeps over me as I write...!!

That must've been fantastic...last tour as well...

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/05/04 at 3:20 pm


I gotta weigh in, being the Matriarch in all this.  I remember all this stuff and so I've got that nostalgia thing going on that doesn't allow me to prefer the earlier from the later.  I love it all, and consider myself a "defender of the faith" when it comes to the Fab Four, and, I will brag(in my own smug way) that I saw the Beatles at Suffolk Downs in Boston on their last tour. Age has
its advantages.
O how I WISH I was a bit older! Before my shop closed we had a British lady come in. She told me that when she was growing up in England she was at the right place at the right time....the Beatles had just done some promotional event and she literally bumped into them at the back exit. She says that they were all very nice and spoke with her for about 15 minutes. Before they left they each gave her thier autographs! I believe her :)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: bj26 on 10/05/04 at 3:24 pm


Their early output was (and still is), quite simply, stunning...hard to imagine anything making such an impact as that nowdays...

That said, I did put down both eras, although some parts of the later stuff was lost on me a bit...



(Ooo...you shouldn't have started me off, Mark...!!)

He also said that 'The White Album' would've made a great single LP (and I'm inclined to agree...somewhat self-indulgent...)

Early US Beatle albums were 'chopped up' versions of the British counterparts, the concept of which gave way to the 'Butcher' cover of 'Yesterday And Today' (hastily withdrawn)...horrendously rare - if you're lucky enough to have a reasonably good copy, you're easily talking five figures...!! Ironically, this LP was Capitol's final 'chop-up'...

'Magical Mystery Tour' was only released as a deluxe double EP here at the time (the LP version was only available as a Capitol import), it finally received a British LP release in 1976, but lost all of the EP's superb packaging on the way...shame...


Hey Paul, I believe the area where it all began in England was in Liverpool along the Mersey River. Must have been a lot of clubs and young people hang-outs.  The early groups mostly covered American 50s artists until a distinct sound evolved, i.e. the Liverpool sound. The rest is history when the British invasion set the States rockin to the new sound made famous by The Beatles, yeh yeh yeh!

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: danootaandme on 10/05/04 at 7:07 pm

It was a different atmosphere all together.  It wasn't unusual for a bunch of kids to hang around
the stage door and meet people.  A friend and I met Peter Townsend and Roger Daltry when
they were walking to the Music Hall for the next show, no bodyquards, no escorts, just them.
Another friend ran into Mick Jagger on their first tour in the US and hung out with them band for
an afternoon in Boston, she has a picture of Jagger, luckily 'cause I wouldn't have believed it either.  Now no matter how large or small, most have this prima donna thing going on and alot
of that down to earth quality is long lost. :-\\

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Tanya1976 on 10/05/04 at 8:42 pm

To have been there would have been a blast.

Tanya

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Paul on 10/06/04 at 7:17 am


Hey Paul, I believe the area where it all began in England was in Liverpool along the Mersey River. Must have been a lot of clubs and young people hang-outs.  The early groups mostly covered American 50s artists until a distinct sound evolved, i.e. the Liverpool sound. The rest is history when the British invasion set the States rockin to the new sound made famous by The Beatles, yeh yeh yeh!


Correct in most respects, bj26...most provincial cities had a burgeoning scene for the youngsters, not just the 'Pool - but these groups would've been unknown outside of their city limits...

In any area of showbiz back then, to even stand a chance of success, you had to go to London - it was the only place in the country where all the record companies, music publishers and showbiz agents were located...even the Beatles had to...

And that was part of the reason Decca rejected them in favour of a group called The Tremeloes - rather than sign a group from halfway up the country, they chose a more local group who could be reliably called into the studio at short notice...

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: danootaandme on 10/06/04 at 11:44 am



And that was part of the reason Decca rejected them in favour of a group called The Tremeloes - rather than sign a group from halfway up the country, they chose a more local group who could be reliably called into the studio at short notice...


I loved the Tremeloes, got their album here somewhere.  Here comes my baby........ :)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: CatwomanofV on 10/06/04 at 12:50 pm


It was a different atmosphere all together.  It wasn't unusual for a bunch of kids to hang around
the stage door and meet people.  A friend and I met Peter Townsend and Roger Daltry when
they were walking to the Music Hall for the next show, no bodyquards, no escorts, just them.
Another friend ran into Mick Jagger on their first tour in the US and hung out with them band for
an afternoon in Boston, she has a picture of Jagger, luckily 'cause I wouldn't have believed it either.  Now no matter how large or small, most have this prima donna thing going on and alot
of that down to earth quality is long lost. :-\\



I know this is getting off the topic a bit but this reminds me of a story that my brother-in-law once told me. As a teen he had a paper route in West Haven, Ct. He went to one house to collect and was invited in. To his surprised, the Doors were there. (They were going to preform in New Haven) They invited him to party with them, which of course, he did. They also told him not to tell anyone they were there. That must have been so cool.


Ok, back to topic. I LOVE the Beatles.  ;)




Cat

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: RockandRollFan on 10/06/04 at 9:11 pm





I know this is getting off the topic a bit but this reminds me of a story that my brother-in-law once told me. As a teen he had a paper route in West Haven, Ct. He went to one house to collect and was invited in. To his surprised, the Doors were there. (They were going to preform in New Haven) They invited him to party with them, which of course, he did. They also told him not to tell anyone they were there. That must have been so cool.


Ok, back to topic. I LOVE the Beatles.  ;)




Cat
THAT is a cool story...thanks for sharing, Cat :)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: danootaandme on 10/07/04 at 6:38 am

When I think back(once again off topic), a lot of these things happened when the bands were not
as popular as they were to become later on.  I hung out with friends who tended to listen to new
groups, their first tours, first albums, and met alot of people who didn't go one to bigger things. So
meeting them was more of a story later on, not when they actually happened.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: ElDuderino on 10/10/04 at 5:31 pm

I grew up with the Beatles. I remember watching Yellow Submarine on video when I was a kid over at my uncle's house.

I'd have to say Abbey Road and Sgt.Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band tie for my favorite Beatles album.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: hot_wax on 10/11/04 at 12:12 am

Good subject RockandRollfan,

It was a long eight or so years when the Beatles reigned supreme and I grew as they grew, and when they changed I changed, there was no be-fore's or afters only what was " in" ruled at that time. 

Sorry, unlike my likes and dis-likes of the two Elvis's to me there is only the Beatles... 62' to Abby Road.


Hot Wax 

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: danootaandme on 10/15/04 at 5:52 am


Good subject RockandRollfan,

It was a long eight or so years when the Beatles reigned supreme and I grew as they grew, and when they changed I changed, there was no be-fore's or afters only what was " in" ruled at that time. 

Sorry, unlike my likes and dis-likes of the two Elvis's to me there is only the Beatles... 62' to Abby Road.

Hot Wax 



Yeah, to understand you had to be there :)

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: bj26 on 10/15/04 at 7:16 am

I'm listening a lot to early albums, Hard Days Night & Introducing the Beatles. It's interesting to pick out who is singing what, mostly John sang lead on the older songs but eg. John and George do You really got a hold on me and John & Paul do Things we said today, while all three do I'll Be back, Please please me, etc.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Philip Eno on 09/24/06 at 4:41 am

Both, but with an edge on Matured Hippies.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: FussBudgetVanPelt on 09/30/06 at 8:22 am

Early Mops Tops

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Sister Morphine on 09/30/06 at 11:18 am

I liked both.  There were songs from each "era" that I really loved, so I can't choose just one.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: w on 09/30/06 at 7:03 pm

Davey, lives in central PA. One of my brother-inlaws used to deliver his mail. He said he seemed a very nice, down to earth kind of person.  w

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: w on 09/30/06 at 7:14 pm

Sorry about the last post it was meant for the Monkees post. Everytime I try to post there my puter keeps jumping in here. I'm going to have to go off and see if it's me or not.  w.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: ultraviolet52 on 11/06/07 at 11:35 am

I chose both. I just like their early years because they were so raw and the talent was so pure, then they got into their Help!, Rubber Soul, Revolver mode and introduced us to a more unique songwriting experience - then they blew us away with Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, White Album, Abbey Road, and Let it Be.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: Marian on 11/06/07 at 2:33 pm


Both, but with an edge on Matured Hippies.
There's probably a lot of homeless people who think they look like the Beat :Dles from that era.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: MrCleveland on 11/06/07 at 3:34 pm

They were more experimental during the Mature Hippy years.

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: AmericanGirl on 11/06/07 at 4:40 pm

I probably should've picked 'Both' as a HUGE Beatles fan.  But I voted for 'Early'.  That raw, early exhuberance, that unbridled energy, it's uncanny.  The 'Hard Day's Night' music always gets me going.

Naturally I love the later stuff, too.  Like Abbey Road - tasty!  :-*  :-*  But my favorite Beatles period for singles is the early years.  My favorite Beatles period album-wise is the middle, from mid '65 to mid '67, between around 'Help' and 'Pepper'.  Amazing stuff!  :D

Subject: Re: The Beatles 1962-1965 OR 1966-1970

Written By: runner69 on 11/12/07 at 10:49 pm

i thought that when they came out with revolver in 66 they were light years ahead of themselves.

Check for new replies or respond here...