Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Fifty years ago this week, Rubber Soul was released in the UK and US. But the differences between the two editions were striking, and are worth a discussion. Robert and Richard examine the differences, as well as the context of the times and what might have been.
Songs include: “I’m Looking Through You” and “The Word.”
Christmas is coming and the Something About The Beatles 2016 calendar is here
ATTENTION CHICAGO AREA SATB LISTENERS: With your support, we may be able to make possible something we can all be thankful for: Something About The Beatles on terrestrial radio (and regularly scheduled besides…).
MeTV FM is a fabulous new radio station, playing loads of forgotten hits from back in the day. They’re also very Beatle-centric – that makes them the perfect radio home for Something About The Beatles. We have been advertising on them, but what would be fantastic is if we could get all of you to show your interest in such a venture.
Do you want to hear Something About The Beatles weekly, on the radio? Then shoot them an email – let them know that you love the show, and that you appreciate the sponsorship of Rode Brothers Fine Wood Flooring.
That’s the kind of support that makes things happen – can we count on you?
Great show as always guys, I love the podcast. Can you make an episode about The Beatles and The Beach Boys? That would be really enjoyable and theres a lot of material to discuss.
Great show as always guys, I love the podcast. Can you make an episode about The Beatles and The Beach Boys? That would be really enjoyable and theres a lot of material to discuss.
The British release is a pure masterpiece, one of the top 10 albums of all time, presented as the band and George Martin intended. The American version was another butchering (no pun intended) by Capitol Records to spread out the Beatles output over as many releases as feasible to milk it for as much $$$ as possible.
I grew up listening to my sisters Capitol albums as a wee lad. I was used to RS opening with “I’ve Just Seen a Face” when I bought the original CDs back in ’87. It was weird at first, but I quickly got over it with the realization that this was the way it was meant to be artistically.
The British release is a pure masterpiece, one of the top 10 albums of all time, presented as the band and George Martin intended. The American version was another butchering (no pun intended) by Capitol Records to spread out the Beatles output over as many releases as feasible to milk it for as much $$$ as possible.
I grew up listening to my sisters Capitol albums as a wee lad. I was used to RS opening with “I’ve Just Seen a Face” when I bought the original CDs back in ’87. It was weird at first, but I quickly got over it with the realization that this was the way it was meant to be artistically.
Just went back and listened to the mono CD (UK)’If I Needed Someone’… followed up with a YouTube stereo version of The Hollies cover. Needless to say, The Hollies production was sloppy, sounding one step above a late 60’s American garage band. Only the vocals saved it from a third-rate rating.
As for the “Rubber Soul” track, Geo. Martin’s production stands out, for me, and George’s vocals and guitar work turn a good song into a great number. (for the record: I never listened to any version of “Rubber Soul” until the late 90’s.—Just was tied up with other things.)
Just went back and listened to the mono CD (UK)’If I Needed Someone’… followed up with a YouTube stereo version of The Hollies cover. Needless to say, The Hollies production was sloppy, sounding one step above a late 60’s American garage band. Only the vocals saved it from a third-rate rating.
As for the “Rubber Soul” track, Geo. Martin’s production stands out, for me, and George’s vocals and guitar work turn a good song into a great number. (for the record: I never listened to any version of “Rubber Soul” until the late 90’s.—Just was tied up with other things.)
First heard U.S. version so I prefer that, as well as the false start “I’m Looking Through You”. Also, Robert Rodriguez, “Run For Your Life” starts with an acoustic guitar so it does fit into the rest of the album. I always thought it was a solid final track.
Took a while for me to like “You Won’t See Me”. Being Canadian the first version I heard was Anne Murray’s. Hadn’t gotten deep into the Beatles yet. Pretty good actually, her “Day Tripper” was more of a funky piano saxophone thing that at least was a departure from the Beatles’ version.
Did I say otherwise?
RR
First heard U.S. version so I prefer that, as well as the false start “I’m Looking Through You”. Also, Robert Rodriguez, “Run For Your Life” starts with an acoustic guitar so it does fit into the rest of the album. I always thought it was a solid final track.
Took a while for me to like “You Won’t See Me”. Being Canadian the first version I heard was Anne Murray’s. Hadn’t gotten deep into the Beatles yet. Pretty good actually, her “Day Tripper” was more of a funky piano saxophone thing that at least was a departure from the Beatles’ version.
Did I say otherwise?
RR
Hi. Great show.
About the sound or stereo quality rather, am I the only one wondering why in the early years they spread the sound picture so wide. What’s to stop them mixing left and right less severely, if you understand what I mean?
Claus
Hi Claus,
Thanks for the kind words! The best – and most likely – explanation for the hard stereo panning is laid out here: http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/the-beatles-rubber-soul-stereo-mix-why-the-return-to-hard-pan-l-r.244567/
One would think that such total separation would not be most people’s idea of an enjoyable listening experience, but if what is set forth here is accurate, it would explain everything.
Sorry for this very late comment, Very late because I’ve been brooding over your reply. Now I see I wasn’t being clear in the first place. From your steve hoffman link I understand that if you place something in the centre of the stereo sound picture, that something will be raised in volume when played back on mono equipment. So be it.
Yet what I was asking was not for a middle, left and a right channel. I understand that the first two albums are on two track tape only. So there are two blocks, so my qestion in the first place should have been:
WHEN MIXING FOR STEREO THE COULD NEVER HAVE BEEN A CENTER CHANNEL SINCE IT WAS TWO TRACKS. BUT ALTERNATIVELY, WHY DIDN’T THEY MOVE THE LEFT AND RIGHT BLOCK CLOSER TO EACH OTHER. Nothing would be artificially amplified since there would be only 2 channels albeit panned something like 25 procent to center. Thanks, Claus.
Hi. Great show.
About the sound or stereo quality rather, am I the only one wondering why in the early years they spread the sound picture so wide. What’s to stop them mixing left and right less severely, if you understand what I mean?
Claus
Hi Claus,
Thanks for the kind words! The best – and most likely – explanation for the hard stereo panning is laid out here: http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/the-beatles-rubber-soul-stereo-mix-why-the-return-to-hard-pan-l-r.244567/
One would think that such total separation would not be most people’s idea of an enjoyable listening experience, but if what is set forth here is accurate, it would explain everything.
Sorry for this very late comment, Very late because I’ve been brooding over your reply. Now I see I wasn’t being clear in the first place. From your steve hoffman link I understand that if you place something in the centre of the stereo sound picture, that something will be raised in volume when played back on mono equipment. So be it.
Yet what I was asking was not for a middle, left and a right channel. I understand that the first two albums are on two track tape only. So there are two blocks, so my qestion in the first place should have been:
WHEN MIXING FOR STEREO THE COULD NEVER HAVE BEEN A CENTER CHANNEL SINCE IT WAS TWO TRACKS. BUT ALTERNATIVELY, WHY DIDN’T THEY MOVE THE LEFT AND RIGHT BLOCK CLOSER TO EACH OTHER. Nothing would be artificially amplified since there would be only 2 channels albeit panned something like 25 procent to center. Thanks, Claus.
Just listened to this show and I’m curious about the claim that Lennon borrowed the chords for “In My Life” from “Only You”. I don’t see a relationship. Can you clarify?
Also, I’ve been trying to find the quote in question from Lennon. I can’t seem to find that either. Can you tell me where you found it?
Hi Aaron,
The problem with absorbing SO much information through the years is that it’s really hard to pinpoint the random stuff at a moment’s notice. I’m pretty sure the Lennon quote was from a magazine. But maybe this will help with the songs.
When “Only You,” “In My Life” and WITNOTW are played in A, they vary only slightly:
OY: A-C#7-F#m-A7-D-E7-F#7-B7
IMY: A-E-F#m-A7-D-Dm-A
WITNOTW: A-C#7-F#m-A7-D-Dm-A
Notice that the last two sequences vary only by a single chord?
Just listened to this show and I’m curious about the claim that Lennon borrowed the chords for “In My Life” from “Only You”. I don’t see a relationship. Can you clarify?
Also, I’ve been trying to find the quote in question from Lennon. I can’t seem to find that either. Can you tell me where you found it?
Hi Aaron,
The problem with absorbing SO much information through the years is that it’s really hard to pinpoint the random stuff at a moment’s notice. I’m pretty sure the Lennon quote was from a magazine. But maybe this will help with the songs.
When “Only You,” “In My Life” and WITNOTW are played in A, they vary only slightly:
OY: A-C#7-F#m-A7-D-E7-F#7-B7
IMY: A-E-F#m-A7-D-Dm-A
WITNOTW: A-C#7-F#m-A7-D-Dm-A
Notice that the last two sequences vary only by a single chord?