The Smiley Smile Message Board

Non Smiley Smile Stuff => General Music Discussion => Topic started by: petsoundsnola on September 14, 2015, 07:28:47 AM



Title: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: petsoundsnola on September 14, 2015, 07:28:47 AM
1. Revolver
2. Rubber Soul
3. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
4. Abbey Road
5. A Hard Day's Night
6. The Beatles
7. With the Beatles
8. Help!
9. Magical Mystery Tour
10. Please Please Me
11. Beatles for Sale
12. Let it Be
13. Yellow Submarine


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: rab2591 on September 14, 2015, 07:33:46 AM
1. Magical Mystery Tour
2. Rubber Soul
3. Abbey Road
4. Revolver
5. Sgt. Pepper
6. White Album
7. With The Beatles
8. Please Please Me

The rest are kind of in limbo for me.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 14, 2015, 08:08:14 AM
13.  Yellow Submarine Soundtrack
12.  Beatles For Sale
11.  The White Album
10.  Please Please Me
09.  Let It Be
08.  Sgt. Pepper's
07.  With the Beatles
06.  A Hard Day's Night
05.  Help
04.  Rubber Soul
03.  Magical Mystery Tour
02.  Revolver
01.  Abbey Road


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: petsoundsnola on September 14, 2015, 08:10:07 AM
13.  Yellow Submarine Soundtrack
12.  Beatles For Sale
11.  The White Album
10.  Please Please Me
09.  Let It Be
08.  Sgt. Pepper's
07.  With the Beatles
06.  A Hard Day's Night
05.  Help
04.  Rubber Soul
03.  Magical Mystery Tour
02.  Revolver
01.  Abbey Road

Wow, when I first read this, I didn't realize you were ranking them from lowest to highest.  I thought, "Yellow Submarine at the top, WTF"?"  :-D


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 14, 2015, 08:22:13 AM
That would be pretty funny.  Yellow Submarine is the obvious choice because of the score and the two previously released tracks. 

Other than that, it's not an easy list to make. 


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 14, 2015, 09:29:57 AM

A Hard Day's Night
With The Beatles
Please Please Me
Help
Beatles For Sale
Rubber Soul
Abbey Road
Revolver
Sgt Pepper
Magical Mystery Tour
White Album
Let It Be

Not counting Yellow Sub.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Ovi on September 14, 2015, 09:52:46 AM
Abbey Road
Sgt. Pepper's
The White Album
Revolver
Rubber Soul

A Hard Day's Night
Help!
Beatles for Sale
With the Beatles
Let It Be

Please Please Me
Yellow Submarine


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: JK on September 14, 2015, 10:33:06 AM
1. Please Please Me, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Abbey Road
2. The rest


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Mike's Beard on September 14, 2015, 10:42:04 AM
1/ The White Album (even though it has some total shite on it)
2/ Abbey Road
3/ Magical Mystery Tour
4/ Help!
The rest until................................................................
...................................................................................
12/ Let It Be
13/ Yellow Submarine


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: pixletwin on September 14, 2015, 12:12:01 PM
1. Yellow Submarine Songtrack
2. Abbey Road
3. Revolver
4. White Album
5. Sgt. Peppers
6. Magical Mystery Tour
7. Rubber Soul
8. Hard Days Night
9. Let It Be (.... naked)  :o
10. Please Please Me
11. Beatles For Sale
12. HELP
13. With The Beates


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Please delete my account on September 14, 2015, 01:43:21 PM
1. Revolver
2. A Hard Day's Night
3. Rubber Soul
4. The Beatles
5. With the Beatles
6. Sgt Pepper
7. For Sale
8. Help
9. Please Please Me
10. Let It Be
11. Abbey Road.

Even if I though Yellow Submarine counted as a proper album, I'm not at all familiar with it.
I don't like their solo careers and Abbey Road to me sounds like a sample of their solo work..


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: alf wiedersehen on September 14, 2015, 03:11:31 PM
Abbey Road is possibly the worst "classic" album.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: the captain on September 14, 2015, 03:24:18 PM
I'll be the guy who goes ahead and sticks with the now-passe, previously gospel opinion regarding #1... (I do stand behind it, though. In fact, I might still stand behind the even-more-passe opinion that it's the best pop album of all time.) Really ranking is tough, so I'll do the Chad Ford/NBA Draft preview thing and go with tiers.

1. Pepper.
2. Revolver, Rubber Soul.
3. White, Abbey, MMT.
4. Help, Hard Day's, For Sale.
5. The rest.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 15, 2015, 05:15:14 AM
Abbey Road is possibly the worst "classic" album.

While I respect your opinion on Abbey Road, I'm just curious as to why you feel its the worst "classic" album. 


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Please delete my account on September 15, 2015, 07:53:40 AM
It's possible I've never been able to judge Pepper fairly. Perhaps it was at first too sophisticated for me as a child, then too over-familiar to me as an adult.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: alf wiedersehen on September 15, 2015, 02:07:10 PM
Abbey Road is possibly the worst "classic" album.

While I respect your opinion on Abbey Road, I'm just curious as to why you feel its the worst "classic" album. 

Just so we can stop using the annoying quotation marks, what I meant by that was, of all the albums that are now considered to be classic, Abbey Road is possibly the worst one.

Most of the songs simply aren't good. Hell, the whole second half is a bunch of songs they couldn't be bothered to finish, so they (ingeniously, I'll admit) glued them all together to make something greater than the sum of its parts. The quiet Beatle is the only one who contributes anything that can stand on its own. It's all pretty, sparkly production covering up lacking songwriting. I have the same complaint about most of Sgt. Pepper's.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: the captain on September 15, 2015, 02:55:19 PM

Most of the songs simply aren't good. Hell, the whole second half is a bunch of songs they couldn't be bothered to finish, so they (ingeniously, I'll admit) glued them all together to make something greater than the sum of its parts. The quiet Beatle is the only one who contributes anything that can stand on its own. It's all pretty, sparkly production covering up lacking songwriting. I have the same complaint about most of Sgt. Pepper's.

I dispute the premise that because the second-half songs aren't finished as standalone songs, that the result isn't great music. Certainly, a series of independent, standalone pop songs is one way to make music. But there is no one way, there are many "one ways." I love side two of Abbey Road so, so much. To me, it's tapas: each song is just enough to pique my interest, and then we move on. The production / arrangement tricks to combine it all makes it that much better. That is something to be praised, I think, not something to feel guilty about.

And Pepper, well I just love those songs (which are all standalone, a few segues notwithstanding). I've never understood people's criticism of those songs, a criticism that has built in the past decade or two. Personally I think it's just overreaction backlash from the album's first 25 or 30 years of almost universal praise. But those songs that some people criticize--"When I'm 64," "Fixing a Hole," "Lovely Rita," or whatever--I think they're great songs! I just love them all, every last one. I think that album is so full of color, of texture, of tunefulness, of arrangements, of production. Love it.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: alf wiedersehen on September 15, 2015, 04:55:31 PM
I dispute the premise that because the second-half songs aren't finished as standalone songs, that the result isn't great music.

Well, that is most certainly not what I said. I just don't happen to think most of those song fragments are good. Like most of the first side.


And Pepper, well I just love those songs (which are all standalone, a few segues notwithstanding). I've never understood people's criticism of those songs, a criticism that has built in the past decade or two. Personally I think it's just overreaction backlash from the album's first 25 or 30 years of almost universal praise. But those songs that some people criticize--"When I'm 64," "Fixing a Hole," "Lovely Rita," or whatever--I think they're great songs! I just love them all, every last one. I think that album is so full of color, of texture, of tunefulness, of arrangements, of production. Love it.

I like "Fixing a Hole", "She's Leaving Home" (although I think that one could use a different arrangement), "Lovely Rita", and "a Day in the Life". "Within You Without You" is fine. Once again, I think it's a lot of production instead of actual songwriting. But, hey, maybe that's where people's heads were at in that specific point in time: an increasing focus on production ("Whoa! Look at how cool I can make this guitar sound. And chicken noises!").

Also, that "greatest album of all time" denomination is whack, yo. I get it, it was big in 1967. The thing is, though, is it's not 1967 anymore. Most revolutionary album of all time? Maybe. I'll be waiting for the Rolling Stone list to tell me.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: the captain on September 15, 2015, 05:49:55 PM
I'm not sure what some of that actually meant.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: alf wiedersehen on September 15, 2015, 06:24:45 PM
I feel the same way about Abbey Road that I do Sgt. Pepper's. There are a few good songs on each, but I feel as though the production took precedent in the songwriting process.

The "chicken noises" comment was a reference to "Good Morning, Good Morning" and its use of a crowing rooster.

On Abbey Road, I don't think most of the songs on the first side are good, which is the same way I feel about the second side. I'm not saying the second side is worse because it's a medley.

Rolling Stone magazine is a big proponent of the Sgt. Pepper album, and they enjoy making lists. I'm sure the album will get the nod as #1 whenever they feel like getting around to making the "most revolutionary albums" list and we can all be satisfied.

I hear a lot of praise centering around the fact that Sgt. Pepper accomplished a great deal in 1967 and that's why it's the greatest, but it is no longer 1967 and we should not be listening to and rating it with 1967 ears.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on September 15, 2015, 06:47:35 PM
01  A Hard Day's Night
02  Abbey Road
03  Help
04  White Album
05  Please Please Me
06  Let It Be
07  Sgt. Pepper
08  With The Beatles
09  Revolver
10  Rubber Soul
11  Beatles For Sale
12  Magical Mystery Tour
13  Yellow Submarine

It's tough to rank 'em because I like them all. But, one thing has always been surprising to me and that has been the overwhelming praise of Rubber Soul and Revolver. I just don't get it, and I'm not trying to start anything. It's a lot like Brian Wilson's love of Phil Spector and specifically "Be My Baby". I appreciate and enjoy Spector's work very much, and "Be My Baby" is a great record. But it never knocked me out or blew me away like it did with BW and other music fans. With Rubber Soul and Revolver, they are usually at the top of polls, but those albums just don't get to me like the other Beatles' albums. I think Rubber Soul and Revolver are both consistently good albums, but, to me, they don't have the "high points" that the other albums have.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: rn57 on September 15, 2015, 06:51:07 PM
If I rank the US releases I'm bound to leave one or two out so will go with British.

1. Revolver
2. Help
3. Rubber Soul
4. White Album
5. Hard Days Night
6. Abbey Road
7. With The Beatles
8. Sgt Pepper
9. Beatles For Sale
10. Please Please Me
11. Let It Be
12. Yellow Submarine

Well...I punched up the Wiki discog page so might as well rank the US ones up to Let It Be and omitting Introducing:

1. Revolver
2. Rubber Soul
3. White Album
4. Meet The Beatles
5. Abbey Road
6. Hard Day's Night
7. Help
8. Yesterday and Today
9. Magical Mystery Tour
10. Sgt Pepper
11. Something New
12. Beatles '65
13. Beatles VI
14. Hey Jude
15. Second Album
16. Early Beatles
17. Let It Be
18. Yellow Submarine



Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on September 15, 2015, 07:10:24 PM
On Abbey Road, I don't think most of the songs on the first side are good, which is the same way I feel about the second side. I'm not saying the second side is worse because it's a medley.

You are using, though, what you consider to be the weakness of those Side B tracks in order to bolster your criticism of the album. However, if the songs were strung together ingeniously as you put it, then I fail to see what you are doing by bringing up the point.

Quote
Rolling Stone magazine is a big proponent of the Sgt. Pepper album, and they enjoy making lists. I'm sure the album will get the nod as #1 whenever they feel like getting around to making the "most revolutionary albums" list and we can all be satisfied.

Rolling Stone is hardly the only magazine to feel this way about Sgt. Pepper.

Quote
I hear a lot of praise centering around the fact that Sgt. Pepper accomplished a great deal in 1967 and that's why it's the greatest, but it is no longer 1967 and we should not be listening to and rating it with 1967 ears.

Who is "we" and how do you know that "we" are listening to and rating the album with 1967 ears?


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: alf wiedersehen on September 15, 2015, 07:23:38 PM
On Abbey Road, I don't think most of the songs on the first side are good, which is the same way I feel about the second side. I'm not saying the second side is worse because it's a medley.

You are using, though, what you consider to be the weakness of those Side B tracks in order to bolster your criticism of the album. However, if the songs were strung together ingeniously as you put it, then I fail to see what you are doing by bringing up the point.

The idea to string them together was smart because they are weak on their own.

Quote
Rolling Stone magazine is a big proponent of the Sgt. Pepper album, and they enjoy making lists. I'm sure the album will get the nod as #1 whenever they feel like getting around to making the "most revolutionary albums" list and we can all be satisfied.

Rolling Stone is hardly the only magazine to feel this way about Sgt. Pepper.

You'll notice I said "A big proponent", not "the big proponent."

Quote
I hear a lot of praise centering around the fact that Sgt. Pepper accomplished a great deal in 1967 and that's why it's the greatest, but it is no longer 1967 and we should not be listening to and rating it with 1967 ears.

Who is "we" and how do you know that "we" are listening to and rating the album with 1967 ears?

"We" are the people that listen to Sgt. Pepper. I know that "we" are listening to it and rating the album with 1967 ears because when I read praise for the album, it often talks about how revolutionary it was for its time. "Changed rock into an art form" and whatnot. It's a generalization. Certainly not true for everyone that loves it, but I do encounter that line of thought frequently.

It's the same for any album. I don't think we should be listening to something as though we're in the past. We should bring these things into the present and test if they're actually lasting instead of keeping them in a bubble. If it can maintain its stature within a modern context without saddling it with qualifiers of a past time, then it is indeed great art.

That's just what I think, anyway - like the rest of what I've said.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Alan Smith on September 15, 2015, 08:36:14 PM
1. Abbey Road - great songs with George knocking it out of the park, fantastic sonics (where for art thou analogue mastered vinyl reissue).  An utter pleasure. I will respectfully refrain from using the "C" word.

2. White Album - an iffy track or two, but nothing I actively avoid, love both the mono and stereo mixes - any set that kicks off with USSR, Dear Prudence, Glass Onion is high on my list (and it is).

3. Sgt Pepper - well, I quite like it although it didn't blow me away when i first heard it in the sleepy days of '85.  I have never warmed to either mix of She's Leaving Home, but you get that sometimes.  Whimsical, delightful and the best last track ever.

(MMT) - sure, but a personal fave, despite the dubious origins/is it an album definition.

4. Hard Days Night - possibly the only "early" Beatles album I enjoy.  Don't know why that is, but can't stop as I've got the rest of the list to go.

5. Revolver - a great album, but I think John's stuff ('cept TNK) was not as sharp as on 6. Rubber Soul, where I found Paul's stuff to be the weaker material.

7. Let It Be - should have been better, the good bits great, I rarely play it.

8. Help (I wish I've Just Seen a Face was on HDN)
9. With The Beatles (great cover art)
10. Please Please Me (nice enough)
11. Beatles For Sale (decidedly ok)

I might drag these out once every couple of years, but don't get motivated re repeat listens.

12. Yellow Submarine


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: alf wiedersehen on September 15, 2015, 09:26:27 PM
Don't worry, everyone. I've decided that Tommy is worse.

Here's what my ranking would look like:
1. AHDN
2. Revolver
3. The Beatles
4. Rubber Soul
5. With the Beatles
6. SPLHCB
7. Please Please Me
8. Magical Mystery Tour

Here's where things get a bit murky:
9. Beatles for Sale
10. Help!
11. Abbey Road
12. Let It Be


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Please delete my account on September 16, 2015, 01:04:17 AM
It kind of blows my mind that about half the voters have put Abbey Road in their top two. Maybe I'll have to listen to it some more. I never thought there to be much substance there. ("You Never Give Me Your Money" is great though.)

I think their most underrated album is Beatles For Sale. The covers are poor but the originals are awesome.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Ovi on September 16, 2015, 01:40:23 AM
(MMT) - sure, but a personal fave, despite the dubious origins/is it an album definition.

I don't think think it should be included in these type of lists. Otherwise we might as well include other compilations...


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: the captain on September 16, 2015, 04:46:21 AM
Bubbly - I wasn't clear: I guess I understood what you were saying, just not why you were quoting me, especially the bit about revolutionary for 1967, listening with those ears, or 1967. I was born a decade after it was released and became a focused music listener about a decade after that. I heard "it was twenty years ago today" when it was twenty years ago. So anything about how revolutionary it might have been to 1967 ears is a thought experiment for me, and not the basis of why I love it. And neither Rolling Stone (irrelevant by the time I paid attention) nor anything else tells me what to like. (Though I do love and will defend music criticism. I think it's extremely valuable, just not some authority. That's for another thread.) I listened to Pepper with a child's and teen's 1980s ears, with a teen and twentysomething's 1990s ears, and so on. But never '60s ears, as I've never had those. And the ears I've got and had are the ones that tell me it's the best Beatles album, and among the best of anyone's albums.

Your production argument just doesn't make sense to me, either, as the final result is rewarding. As long as that's the case, I don't think they have anything to apologize for. I think those songs are really good, and great production atop them is nothing to be ashamed of or apologize for. There are always different aspects that go into recorded music, and picking apart one or the other of them as a fatal flaw only seems justified to me when they are indeed fatal. Pepper feels alive and well to my ears, so I'm not going to bother with whether the songs would stand out as campfire songs on an acoustic guitar. The product as released is an amazing album.

Hope that makes sense.



Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 16, 2015, 05:18:57 AM
Abbey Road is possibly the worst "classic" album.

While I respect your opinion on Abbey Road, I'm just curious as to why you feel its the worst "classic" album. 

Just so we can stop using the annoying quotation marks, what I meant by that was, of all the albums that are now considered to be classic, Abbey Road is possibly the worst one.

Most of the songs simply aren't good. Hell, the whole second half is a bunch of songs they couldn't be bothered to finish, so they (ingeniously, I'll admit) glued them all together to make something greater than the sum of its parts. The quiet Beatle is the only one who contributes anything that can stand on its own. It's all pretty, sparkly production covering up lacking songwriting. I have the same complaint about most of Sgt. Pepper's.

Fair enough. 

But, IMO, all four fabs contributed stand alone songs to Side 1.  John had Come Together and I Want You (She's So Heavy).  Paul had Oh Darling and You Never Give Me Your Money.  Even Ringo delivered with Octopus's Garden. 



Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: JK on September 16, 2015, 05:40:56 AM
Bubbly - I wasn't clear: I guess I understood what you were saying, just not why you were quoting me, especially the bit about revolutionary for 1967, listening with those ears, or 1967. I was born a decade after it was released and became a focused music listener about a decade after that. I heard "it was twenty years ago today" when it was twenty years ago. So anything about how revolutionary it might have been to 1967 ears is a thought experiment for me, and not the basis of why I love it. And neither Rolling Stone (irrelevant by the time I paid attention) nor anything else tells me what to like. (Though I do love and will defend music criticism. I think it's extremely valuable, just not some authority. That's for another thread.) I listened to Pepper with a child's and teen's 1980s ears, with a teen and twentysomething's 1990s ears, and so on. But never '60s ears, as I've never had those. And the ears I've got and had are the ones that tell me it's the best Beatles album, and among the best of anyone's albums.

Your production argument just doesn't make sense to me, either, as the final result is rewarding. As long as that's the case, I don't think they have anything to apologize for. I think those songs are really good, and great production atop them is nothing to be ashamed of or apologize for. There are always different aspects that go into recorded music, and picking apart one or the other of them as a fatal flaw only seems justified to me when they are indeed fatal. Pepper feels alive and well to my ears, so I'm not going to bother with whether the songs would stand out as campfire songs on an acoustic guitar. The product as released is an amazing album.

Hope that makes sense.


I confess to having listened to Pepper with 1967 ears and I remember being blown away by the production, particularly the use of "phasing", which had just made its appearance. An engineer aboard the "Radio London" pirate ship, Russell Tollerfield, phased all sorts of stuff on the air, including "A Day In The Life"----imagine the closing chord fizzing with phasing... 

Whai I thought of the music? I don't know. I know what I like now (basically "Getting Better", "Lovely Rita" and "Good Morning, Good Morning"). For some reason "ADITL" depressed the hell out of me, still does. Give me the shimmering sounds of "Caroline, No" as an album closer any day. ;D


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 16, 2015, 06:19:57 AM
It kind of blows my mind that about half the voters have put Abbey Road in their top two. Maybe I'll have to listen to it some more. I never thought there to be much substance there. ("You Never Give Me Your Money" is great though.)

I think their most underrated album is Beatles For Sale. The covers are poor but the originals are awesome.

I actually like the covers on this album, even the usually panned Mr. Moonlight.  However, its too bad Leave My Kitten Alone got left off. 


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: petsoundsnola on September 16, 2015, 10:35:01 AM
It kind of blows my mind that about half the voters have put Abbey Road in their top two. Maybe I'll have to listen to it some more. I never thought there to be much substance there. ("You Never Give Me Your Money" is great though.)

I think their most underrated album is Beatles For Sale. The covers are poor but the originals are awesome.

No doubt.

No Reply, I'm a Loser, Baby's in Black, I'll Follow the Sun, Eight Days a Week, and I Don't Want to Spoil the Party are great tracks. 


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Please delete my account on September 16, 2015, 11:39:58 AM
It kind of blows my mind that about half the voters have put Abbey Road in their top two. Maybe I'll have to listen to it some more. I never thought there to be much substance there. ("You Never Give Me Your Money" is great though.)

I think their most underrated album is Beatles For Sale. The covers are poor but the originals are awesome.

I actually like the covers on this album, even the usually panned Mr. Moonlight.  However, its too bad Leave My Kitten Alone got left off. 

I actually like them too, except maybe "Honey Don't". I meant relatively poor by Beatles standards.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Please delete my account on September 16, 2015, 11:56:54 AM
It kind of blows my mind that about half the voters have put Abbey Road in their top two. Maybe I'll have to listen to it some more. I never thought there to be much substance there. ("You Never Give Me Your Money" is great though.)

I think their most underrated album is Beatles For Sale. The covers are poor but the originals are awesome.

No doubt.

No Reply, I'm a Loser, Baby's in Black, I'll Follow the Sun, Eight Days a Week, and I Don't Want to Spoil the Party are great tracks. 

And Every Little Thing!


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 16, 2015, 12:05:22 PM
I'm a big fan of Beatles for Sale.  It's a testament to how strong their catalog is that I have it ranked as my lowest non-Yellow Submarine album. 


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: alf wiedersehen on September 16, 2015, 01:12:07 PM
Bubbly - I wasn't clear: I guess I understood what you were saying, just not why you were quoting me, especially the bit about revolutionary for 1967, listening with those ears, or 1967. I was born a decade after it was released and became a focused music listener about a decade after that. I heard "it was twenty years ago today" when it was twenty years ago. So anything about how revolutionary it might have been to 1967 ears is a thought experiment for me, and not the basis of why I love it. And neither Rolling Stone (irrelevant by the time I paid attention) nor anything else tells me what to like. (Though I do love and will defend music criticism. I think it's extremely valuable, just not some authority. That's for another thread.) I listened to Pepper with a child's and teen's 1980s ears, with a teen and twentysomething's 1990s ears, and so on. But never '60s ears, as I've never had those. And the ears I've got and had are the ones that tell me it's the best Beatles album, and among the best of anyone's albums.

Your production argument just doesn't make sense to me, either, as the final result is rewarding. As long as that's the case, I don't think they have anything to apologize for. I think those songs are really good, and great production atop them is nothing to be ashamed of or apologize for. There are always different aspects that go into recorded music, and picking apart one or the other of them as a fatal flaw only seems justified to me when they are indeed fatal. Pepper feels alive and well to my ears, so I'm not going to bother with whether the songs would stand out as campfire songs on an acoustic guitar. The product as released is an amazing album.

Hope that makes sense.

The reason I mentioned the "revolutionary" thing was because I was throwing my own thoughts into the mix on the issue of acclaim and subsequent decrease in acclaim for Sgt. Pepper's. "Listening with 1967 ears" has nothing to do with when you were born. If you love the album for its music, that's fabulous. Most of the praise I see amounts to "put yourself back in time to 1967... isn't this album amazing!" Well, sure, it probably was amazing when it came out in 1967. However, it's not that time period anymore and people shouldn't have to do that to fully appreciate something. They should be able to listen to it and rate it now without that thought process. And it's esteem in recent times is on a downward slope, whatever that may mean for anybody who cares. I think the title of "most revolutionary album" instead of "greatest album" would be more fitting for it at this point.

The Rolling Stone thing was just a joke. I know how seriously people take their lists around here. Besides, what are the chances that Pepper's wouldn't at least make the top 3 of that Rolling Stone list?

Where we differ on the album is you think most of the songs are good. I do not. There is, of course, no shame in excellent production. I just wish they put as much work into the actual songs as they did into creating the production for each one. You can put all the icing you want on it, but as long as the cake is made of dirt and hair, it's not going to be a good cake.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: the captain on September 16, 2015, 03:15:03 PM
Yeah, I guess I was taking your post as some direct response, and I wasn't getting it as a response. No problems.

I really do think the songs are good, though! I think you're in the majority on this and I'm in the minority, but for whatever reason, I fully believe in those songs. Just love 'em to death.

On the "of its time" topic, though, while it wasn't what I meant to defend Pepper, I would say there is absolute value in being perfectly of your own time, even if you're irrelevant afterward. And an album like that could honestly be the best ever, if it was just so perfectly of its time. I think there's real value in that. That said, I also love the slow burners. I just have a strange approach, I think, where I think music is so many different things that there are many different ways to be great. That's also why I feel weird rating and ranking things.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Lonely Summer on September 16, 2015, 10:57:00 PM
1 - Rubber Soul
2 - A Hard Days Night
3- Meet the Beatles
4 - Sgt Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band
5 - Abbey Road
6- Revolver
7- Beatles VI
8- Beatles '65
9- Magical Mystery Tour
10- The Beatles


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: PhilSpectre on September 17, 2015, 12:44:23 PM
But, one thing has always been surprising to me and that has been the overwhelming praise of Rubber Soul and Revolver. I just don't get it, and I'm not trying to start anything. It's a lot like Brian Wilson's love of Phil Spector and specifically "Be My Baby". I appreciate and enjoy Spector's work very much, and "Be My Baby" is a great record. But it never knocked me out or blew me away like it did with BW and other music fans. With Rubber Soul and Revolver, they are usually at the top of polls, but those albums just don't get to me like the other Beatles' albums. I think Rubber Soul and Revolver are both consistently good albums, but, to me, they don't have the "high points" that the other albums have.

Agreed. Especially with Rubber Soul, yes, it's a good album, but for me it does have a few dull, gimmicky tracks like Girl, Michelle, and average stuff (for them) like Wait, Run For Your Life and most of side 2 in general really, In My Life excepted.

Revolver is very good indeed at times, but I listen to it mainly for Taxman, Eleanor Rigby, I'm Only Sleeping and Tomorrow Never Knows, the latter obviously one of their greatest tracks.

It has amused me that, in the last 25 or so, the Brit Pop crowd in the '90s and many polls seemed to go mad for these more 'conservative' albums while claiming Pepper and Mystery Tour as 'shallow' or 'self-indulgent'. I've long felt if you put Sgt Pepper together with the best tracks from MMT and you'd have the ultimate Beatles album certainly Beatles as sonic innovators with inspired song-writing. I mean, an album with Strawberry Fields, Penny Lane, A Day in the Life, Within You Without You, She's Leaving Home, I Am The Walrus and Blue Jay Way ...

As they are, I'd say I love Abbey Road and White Album the most. I never really 'got' the White Album until I got the remaster. The original CD release always sounded dull and muddy to me, while the remaster was truly a revelation. Songs and lyrics that were previously unclear and muffled were now pristine and understandable. From being one of my lower ranking Beatles albums, it probably now ties for number 1.

Am talking about the UK versions of these albums.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Peter Pumpkinhead on September 17, 2015, 02:35:53 PM
Please, let's concentrate on the original UK releases! Otherwise there's no comparability between listings.

And "Magical Mystery Tour" doesn't count as a regular Beatles-LP. Nowhere! Because it and was never conceived as such, for any market. It was originally a Double-Single/E.P. in Britain and Europe and a compilation album made by Capitol in the States a few weeks later. It just doesn't compare to the others in terms of context and artistic intention! It's as fruitless as ranking "Endless Summer", "Bona Drag" or "The Masterplan" with "Pet Sounds", "Your Arsenal" and "Definitely Maybe"!


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Lonely Summer on September 17, 2015, 10:52:34 PM
Please, let's concentrate on the original UK releases! Otherwise there's no comparability between listings.

And "Magical Mystery Tour" doesn't count as a regular Beatles-LP. Nowhere! Because it and was never conceived as such, for any market. It was originally a Double-Single/E.P. in Britain and Europe and a compilation album made by Capitol in the States a few weeks later. It just doesn't compare to the others in terms of context and artistic intention! It's as fruitless as ranking "Endless Summer", "Bona Drag" or "The Masterplan" with "Pet Sounds", "Your Arsenal" and "Definitely Maybe"!
The Beatles and Apple consider it a proper album - that's why it was available on cd long before the other American albums. I love the US albums, though, grew up with them. MMT was my first Beatles album, followed by Yellow Submarine, Abbey Road, Hey Jude, then A Hard Days Night, Help, The Early Beatles, and Beatles VI.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Please delete my account on September 18, 2015, 12:46:38 AM
Please, let's concentrate on the original UK releases! Otherwise there's no comparability between listings.

And "Magical Mystery Tour" doesn't count as a regular Beatles-LP. Nowhere! Because it and was never conceived as such, for any market. It was originally a Double-Single/E.P. in Britain and Europe and a compilation album made by Capitol in the States a few weeks later. It just doesn't compare to the others in terms of context and artistic intention! It's as fruitless as ranking "Endless Summer", "Bona Drag" or "The Masterplan" with "Pet Sounds", "Your Arsenal" and "Definitely Maybe"!

"Magical Mystery Tour", "Bona Drag" and "The Masterplan", unlike "Endless Summer" (the big odd one out in your list), all are predominantly made up songs unavailable on other albums. So they get filed alongside the albums proper and get listened to just as often. More often in some cases. The Beatles/Apple recognised the utility of the MMT album when the CDs came out, if not before. I only left it off my list because I forgot about it. I'd rank it quite high.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Peter Reum on September 18, 2015, 09:29:58 PM
Magical Mystery Tour
Revolver
Rubber  Soul
Hard  Days Night
Help
Abbey Road
Sgt. Pepper
Please Please Me

The rest of them are  not  of consequence  to me


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: SMiLE-addict on September 20, 2015, 07:28:50 PM
1 - Rubber Soul
1.25 - Sgt Pepper
1.25 - Revolver

... the middle ones are almost a tie, hard to rank them ...

12. Beatles for Sale (would be better if it had fewer covers)
13. Please Please Me


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: pixletwin on September 20, 2015, 07:46:42 PM
Please Please Me at the very bottom? Wow. That album was - the WHOLE dang thing - was recorded in one day. ONE. DAY.

Number 13? wow.

 :o


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Ram4 on September 21, 2015, 11:41:58 AM
Please Please Me at the very bottom? Wow. That album was - the WHOLE dang thing - was recorded in one day. ONE. DAY.

Number 13? wow.

 :o
Slight correction - 10 of the 14 songs were done in one day.  Still an amazing feat of course!

Rank the albums - very hard, it always depends on my mood.  But like most, Rubber Soul and Revolver are probably the top two overall.  I think A Hard Days Night is one of the best, certainly of the first 5 albums it's the best (all 13 songs are Lennon-McCartney originals, no weak Harrison song, and no weak Ringo sung song, high energy, great sound quality, the Mersey Sound at it's peak). 

I like With The Beatles over Please Please Me as their songwriting matured big time, they moved to 4 track, and John didn't have a cold!

Beatles For Sale is an enigma.  You have 8 superb originals, and 6 covers.  Rock and Roll Music, Honey Don't, Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby, Mr. Moonlight, Kansas City are all dated covers that could have been on Please Please Me - although they all sound great.  Words Of Love is the best cover, but I am a big Buddy Holly fan.  Had I Feel Fine and She's A Woman been included instead of two covers, it would have been much stronger.

Help! is very good, but it too has some covers that could have been passed on and some weaker original material for a change (Tell Me What You See, You Like Me Too Much).  Interesting to note that That Means A Lot was available and was passed on (I like it).  Act Naturally was a better choice than If You Got Trouble for Ringo.  Dizzy Miss Lizzy is a powerhouse vocal from John, but again, it was technically filler for lack of original material.  They could have used I'm Down or Yes It Is, but they wanted the fans to have value.

Sgt Pepper I love, but it's more art like Smile so I don't play it as much.  MMT to me is just a collection of singles and EP tracks, not a cohesive album.  White Album and Abbey Road are both great. 


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: SMiLE-addict on September 21, 2015, 12:57:07 PM
Please Please Me at the very bottom? Wow. That album was - the WHOLE dang thing - was recorded in one day. ONE. DAY.

Number 13? wow.

 :o
It's a good album, it's just that it happens to be the least good of all their albums IMO.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Ovi on September 21, 2015, 06:28:44 PM
Please Please Me at the very bottom? Wow. That album was - the WHOLE dang thing - was recorded in one day. ONE. DAY.

Number 13? wow.

 :o

What does that have to do with anything?


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Moon Dawg on September 24, 2015, 04:27:33 AM
 1. Revolver
 2. Rubber Soul
 3. A Hard Day's Night
 4. Abbey Road
 5. The Beatles
 6. Sgt. Pepper
 7. Magical Mystery Tour
 8. With the Beatles
 9. Beatles for Sale
 10. Help
 11.Please Please Me
 12. Let It Be
 13. Yellow Submarine


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Alex on September 24, 2015, 03:18:03 PM
1. Please Rut Me
2. Revolter
3. Tragical History Tour
4. Yellow Submarine Sandwich
5. Sgt. Rutter's Only Darts Club Band
6. With the Rutles
7. Let It Rut
8. The Triangular Album
9. Shabby Road
10. Hard Day's Rut
11. Rutles for Sale


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: feelsflow on September 24, 2015, 04:08:03 PM
(MMT) - sure, but a personal fave, despite the dubious origins/is it an album definition.

I don't think think it should be included in these type of lists. Otherwise we might as well include other compilations...

...or Singles.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Lonely Summer on September 24, 2015, 06:28:31 PM
1. Please Rut Me
2. Revolter
3. Tragical History Tour
4. Yellow Submarine Sandwich
5. Sgt. Rutter's Only Darts Club Band
6. With the Rutles
7. Let It Rut
8. The Triangular Album
9. Shabby Road
10. Hard Day's Rut
11. Rutles for Sale
You forgot my person favorite, Ouch! Although Rutter Saul is a favorite, too. And don't forget the Archeology series.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Moon Dawg on September 24, 2015, 06:47:32 PM
It kind of blows my mind that about half the voters have put Abbey Road in their top two. Maybe I'll have to listen to it some more. I never thought there to be much substance there. ("You Never Give Me Your Money" is great though.)

I think their most underrated album is Beatles For Sale. The covers are poor but the originals are awesome.

No doubt.

No Reply, I'm a Loser, Baby's in Black, I'll Follow the Sun, Eight Days a Week, and I Don't Want to Spoil the Party are great tracks. 


  Indeed. I Feel Fine/She's a Woman,  the concurrent non-LP single, would make a great addition minus Mr Moonlight and one of the other covers. Every Little Thing is one of the hidden gems in the Fab Four catalog.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Lonely Summer on September 25, 2015, 06:43:04 PM
It kind of blows my mind that about half the voters have put Abbey Road in their top two. Maybe I'll have to listen to it some more. I never thought there to be much substance there. ("You Never Give Me Your Money" is great though.)

I think their most underrated album is Beatles For Sale. The covers are poor but the originals are awesome.

No doubt.

No Reply, I'm a Loser, Baby's in Black, I'll Follow the Sun, Eight Days a Week, and I Don't Want to Spoil the Party are great tracks. 


  Indeed. I Feel Fine/She's a Woman,  the concurrent non-LP single, would make a great addition minus Mr Moonlight and one of the other covers. Every Little Thing is one of the hidden gems in the Fab Four catalog.
Mr. Moonlight is not one of my favorites, either, despite Lennon's exceptional lead vocal; but their takes on Rock and Roll Music, Honey Don't and Everybody's Trying to Be My Baby are outstanding.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 27, 2015, 02:54:55 PM
It kind of blows my mind that about half the voters have put Abbey Road in their top two. Maybe I'll have to listen to it some more. I never thought there to be much substance there. ("You Never Give Me Your Money" is great though.)

I think their most underrated album is Beatles For Sale. The covers are poor but the originals are awesome.

No doubt.

No Reply, I'm a Loser, Baby's in Black, I'll Follow the Sun, Eight Days a Week, and I Don't Want to Spoil the Party are great tracks. 


  Indeed. I Feel Fine/She's a Woman,  the concurrent non-LP single, would make a great addition minus Mr Moonlight and one of the other covers. Every Little Thing is one of the hidden gems in the Fab Four catalog.
Mr. Moonlight is not one of my favorites, either, despite Lennon's exceptional lead vocal; but their takes on Rock and Roll Music, Honey Don't and Everybody's Trying to Be My Baby are outstanding.

I know I'm in the minority, but I like Mr. Moonlight.  The Beatles version of Rock and Roll Music is also my favorite, with a close second being Chuck Berry.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on September 29, 2015, 01:29:04 AM
(MMT) - sure, but a personal fave, despite the dubious origins/is it an album definition.

I don't think think it should be included in these type of lists. Otherwise we might as well include other compilations...
It's a comp? I never knew. All songs are hot fresh. No addition of the previous albums' tracks. It does count as it must.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 29, 2015, 05:13:50 AM
(MMT) - sure, but a personal fave, despite the dubious origins/is it an album definition.

I don't think think it should be included in these type of lists. Otherwise we might as well include other compilations...
It's a comp? I never knew. All songs are hot fresh. No addition of the previous albums' tracks. It does count as it must.

It depends on who you ask.  MMT was originally a soundtrack EP with the six tracks from the MMT TV movie.  From the US release, they added Strawberry Fields Forever, Penny Lane, Hello Goodbye, Baby You're a Rich Man, and All You Need is Love. 

When the Beatles catalog was put on CD for the first time, each album used the original UK LP format, except for MMT which copies the US LP version.  To Beatles fans such as myself, being born in 1980, this has been generally accepted as a full LP.  But I can understand purists who were there at the time who don't consider MMT a true full length album. 


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on September 29, 2015, 05:38:44 AM
It depends on who you ask.  MMT was originally a soundtrack EP with the six tracks from the MMT TV movie.  From the US release, they added Strawberry Fields Forever, Penny Lane, Hello Goodbye, Baby You're a Rich Man, and All You Need is Love. 

When the Beatles catalog was put on CD for the first time, each album used the original UK LP format, except for MMT which copies the US LP version.  To Beatles fans such as myself, being born in 1980, this has been generally accepted as a full LP.  But I can understand purists who were there at the time who don't consider MMT a true full length album. 
Yes, I read that but I still don't understand. To me, album is a collection of newly recorded songs. They included singles - so what? It's a common practice to include singles in the album - to boost sales or what. They charted, yes, but as standalone songs, not as tracks of the album. Thus it's totally an official Beatles long-player.
I'm sure I'm missing other points; for now  this is all I've got to say on this issue.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 29, 2015, 05:41:16 AM
It depends on who you ask.  MMT was originally a soundtrack EP with the six tracks from the MMT TV movie.  From the US release, they added Strawberry Fields Forever, Penny Lane, Hello Goodbye, Baby You're a Rich Man, and All You Need is Love. 

When the Beatles catalog was put on CD for the first time, each album used the original UK LP format, except for MMT which copies the US LP version.  To Beatles fans such as myself, being born in 1980, this has been generally accepted as a full LP.  But I can understand purists who were there at the time who don't consider MMT a true full length album. 
Yes, I read that but I still don't understand. To me, album is a collection of newly recorded songs. They included singles - so what? It's a common practice to include singles in the album - to boost sales or what. They charted, yes, but as standalone songs, not as tracks of the album. Thus it's totally an official Beatles long-player.
I'm sure I'm missing other points; for now  this is all I've got to say on this issue.

I do agree with you in that I consider it a true Beatles LP.  Especially since I think the five tracks fit in well with the six soundtrack songs. 

But others don't because it wasn't an LP in the UK, just an EP. 

But I would not consider it a compilation since the five tracks that were added on were not featured on any other LP that came prior. 


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on September 29, 2015, 05:47:53 AM
The last bit is what I was trying to say (maybe it didn't come across well). It's not a compilation precisely for that reason.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: KDS on September 29, 2015, 05:49:16 AM
The last bit is what I was trying to say (maybe it didn't come across well). It's not a compilation precisely for that reason.

You got it.   ;D


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on September 29, 2015, 06:55:42 AM
Yes, I read that but I still don't understand. To me, album is a collection of newly recorded songs.

Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane were not newly recorded. They were recorded a year before the US Magical Mystery Tour album was released and they had been released as singles before the previous album.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: SenorPotatoHead on September 29, 2015, 07:58:03 AM
Revolver
Please Please Me
White Album
Sgt. Peppers
Rubber Soul
With The Beatles
Beatles For Sale
A Hard Days Night
Let It Be
Abbey Road
Help

* I don't count MMT or YS


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on September 29, 2015, 08:32:28 AM
Yes, I read that but I still don't understand. To me, album is a collection of newly recorded songs.

Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane were not newly recorded. They were recorded a year before the US Magical Mystery Tour album was released and they had been released as singles before the previous album.
Correct. that was a loose definition. But the main point still stands that it's not a compilation. I don't distinguish old Beatles fans and new, it doesn't matter here. Compilation entirely consists of old songs, kind of a track per album deal. to represent different eras etc.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on September 29, 2015, 09:08:51 AM
Yes, I read that but I still don't understand. To me, album is a collection of newly recorded songs.

Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane were not newly recorded. They were recorded a year before the US Magical Mystery Tour album was released and they had been released as singles before the previous album.
Correct. that was a loose definition. But the main point still stands that it's not a compilation. I don't distinguish old Beatles fans and new, it doesn't matter here. Compilation entirely consists of old songs, kind of a track per album deal. to represent different eras etc.

I agree - it's not a compilation. But none of the US versions of Beatles albums were compilations -- or very few of the pre-Pepper Capitol albums were -- and we don't count them.

I don't fault anyone for counting MMT - it was essentially sanctioned by The Beatles themselves when it was part of the 1987 CD collection. But I don't fault anyone for not counting it either since it wasn't issued as an LP by the band the first time around and I think it makes an interesting narrative to have The Beatles follow up Pepper with the White Album since, unlike MMT, White Album is practically the anti-Pepper.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: B.E. on February 13, 2019, 09:13:01 AM
1. The Beatles, 1968
2. Revolver, 1966
3. Rubber Soul, 1965
4. A Hard Day's Night, 1964

5. Abbey Road, 1969
6. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, 1967
7. Help!, 1965

8. Let It Be, 1970
9. Beatles For Sale, 1964
10. Please Please Me, 1963
11. With The Beatles, 1963
12. Magical Mystery Tour, 1967

13. Yellow Submarine, 1969


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: RangeRoverA1 on March 07, 2019, 05:04:49 PM
Sth. about Rubber Soul doesn't strike as above standard. Either U.K. or U.S. Many good songs, yet it lacks sth. as the album statement. Didn't catch what yet.


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Bygone on March 08, 2019, 01:35:09 AM
The golden six:
 
1. Abbey Road
2. "The White Album"
3. Magical Mystery Tour
4. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
5. Revolver
6. Rubber Soul

The rest I find not very interesting as albums


Title: Re: Rank the Beatles' Studio Albums
Post by: Summer_Days on March 20, 2019, 11:13:29 AM
1. A Hard Day's Night
2. Rubber Soul
3. Revolver
4. Abbey Road
5. The White Album
6. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
7. Let It Be
8. With The Beatles
9. Beatles For Sale
10. Help!
11. Please Please Me
12. Magical Mystery Tour

All are excellent.