Log In
Register
4.36am
6 December 2012
Offline
Oh, okay.
Also known as Egg-Rock, Egg-Roll, E-George, Eggy, Ravioli, Eggroll Eggrolli...
~witty quote~
5.00am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
I do, however, think the photo takes on a different sort of iconic twist when placed alongside the aborted Get Back cover shot. Those two photos placed alongside each other, as they did with the Red and the Blue take on a significance that wasn’t there to begin with. Two shots that show just how much the world, and their world, changed in seven years.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
vonbontee"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
4.15pm
26 July 2011
Offline mja6758 said
I do, however, think the photo takes on a different sort of iconic twist when placed alongside the aborted Get Back cover shot. Those two photos placed alongside each other, as they did with the Red and the Blue take on a significance that wasn’t there to begin with. Two shots that show just how much the world, and their world, changed in seven years.
I totally agree — by itself, the Please Please Me cover is pretty standard stuff for the day — four smiling happy pop stars grinning down over a railing. But John Lennon ‘s brilliant idea to have them strike exactly the same pose in 1969 makes it all much more interesting.
The cover photo on WITH THE BEATLES, on the other hand, was a radical departure from the accepted norm back in those days — and apparently the EMI execs were horrified when they first saw it. “Where are our smiling, happy Beatles?? No one will buy an album with this grim, moody picture on the cover!!” It wasn’t just in their music that The Beatles were always ahead of the curve.
I've got nothing to say, but it's okay..
GOOD MORNING!
GOOD MORNING!!
GOOD MORNING!!!
5.55pm
3 May 2012
Offline IMDeWalrus said
I totally agree — by itself, the Please Please Me cover is pretty standard stuff for the day — four smiling happy pop stars grinning down over a railing. But John Lennon ‘s brilliant idea to have them strike exactly the same pose in 1969 makes it all much more interesting.The cover photo on WITH THE BEATLES, on the other hand, was a radical departure from the accepted norm back in those days — and apparently the EMI execs were horrified when they first saw it. “Where are our smiling, happy Beatles?? No one will buy an album with this grim, moody picture on the cover!!” It wasn’t just in their music that The Beatles were always ahead of the curve.
That’s always made me laugh. I know they hadn’t quite become the biggest band in the world at this point but I’m sure the cover wouldn’t necessarily put people off, particularly not younger listeners, only entice them further I think.
Moving along in our God given ways, safety is sat by the fire/Sanctuary from these feverish smiles, left with a mark on the door.
(Passover - I. Curtis)
10.10pm
26 July 2011
Offline fabfouremily said
IMDeWalrus said
The cover photo on WITH THE BEATLES, on the other hand, was a radical departure from the accepted norm back in those days — and apparently the EMI execs were horrified when they first saw it. “Where are our smiling, happy Beatles?? No one will buy an album with this grim, moody picture on the cover!!” It wasn’t just in their music that The Beatles were always ahead of the curve.
That’s always made me laugh. I know they hadn’t quite become the biggest band in the world at this point but I’m sure the cover wouldn’t necessarily put people off, particularly not younger listeners, only entice them further I think.
I think that says a lot about the mindset of the record executives back in those days — 1963 was a very conservative time and the guys who controlled the “teen music scene” were not interested in any cover or publicty photos of their pop stars that didn’t show them wearing inane, toothy grins. In fact, most of The Beatles’ own publicity photos of that era all looked like that.
I looked up an article about the WITH THE BEATLES cover just now (http://www.norwegianwood.org/b…..vers2.html) and it says “Beatles’ publicist Tony Barrow noted in Beatles Monthly that ‘Brian Epstein was very disappointed with the photograph and the Beatles put tremendous pressure on him to support them and take the picture to EMI.’ The marketing executives at EMI thought that the picture was ‘shockingly humourless’. ‘Where is the fun? Why are they looking so grim? We want to project happy Beatles for happy fans.’ ”
All that changed after the album was released and shot directly to number one (in Britain) — and then when Beatlemania finally hit in the USA, the same photo was used on their debut album there (MEET THE BEATLES), and today it seems preposterous that anyone would have been worried in the first place.
I've got nothing to say, but it's okay..
GOOD MORNING!
GOOD MORNING!!
GOOD MORNING!!!
10.22pm
Members
18 March 2013
Offline Talking about the With The Beatles /Meet The Beatles album cover, here’s a cool edit I found:
INTROVERTS UNITE! Separately....in your own homes!
***
Make Love, Not Wardrobes!
***
"Stop throwing jelly beans at me"- George Harrison
10.30pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline So many aspects of their early years were considered shocking breaks with the conventions of the time that now look ridiculous in retrospect. The fuss about the “long” hair! They looked like girls! To quote BTO, You ain’t seen nothing yet! The idea that they didn’t need outside songwriters, forcing every other group to raise their game. The fact that musicians were making the front pages of the papers. It was rare for popular to feature on the front pages, and when they did it was usually for scandal (ie. Jerry Lee Lewis’ visit to the UK with his underage cousin-bride). The fact that the serious press took them seriously, and that this album was one of the reasons why. There is a reason why so few of the ’50s-early ’60s stars survived the impact of their earthquake. From this distance, and for those of us who didn’t live through it, the impact across the board is hard to comprehend because we only know the world they created. If Please Please Me kicked the door open, With The Beatles tore the walls down.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
vonbontee"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
1.42pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline I’m not sure underrated is correct. Carr & Tyler from New Musical Express have it as one of their top 4 Beatles albums in their book ‘The Beatles: An Illustrated Record’.
To quote: “This is the only LP from the primitive early ‘sixties that, well over ten years later, still retains all the freshness and breadth of musical vision that was instantly apparent on the day of issue. It was a simply staggering achievement from every point of view …”
So I’m not sure who is underrating it?
==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
1.49am
22 December 2013
Offline trcanberra said
I’m not sure underrated is correct. Carr & Tyler from New Musical Express have it as one of their top 4 Beatles albums in their book ‘The Beatles: An Illustrated Record’.To quote: “This is the only LP from the primitive early ‘sixties that, well over ten years later, still retains all the freshness and breadth of musical vision that was instantly apparent on the day of issue. It was a simply staggering achievement from every point of view …”
So I’m not sure who is underrating it?
I agree with the quote, this is definitely my favourite of the earlier (pre-psychedelic) albums. It’s the best representation of their early signature sound, in my opinion, a near perfect fusion between the energy of the high octane Cavern Club shows & the next level of musicianship achieved through becoming recording artists. From the opening “It Won’t Be Long , Yeah!…..” through to the final “That’s What I Want!” refrain of ‘Money’, this album succeeds in giving you the closest experience to actually being at the front row of one of their Cavern Shows, almost as though they knew that they were never going to play there again and wanted to go out in true authentic Beatle-style, excellent.
Ringo, in particular, shines throughout this one. On the first record, he almost sounds as though he’s restraining himself in places, he no doubt was still trying to impress George Martin with a more “conservative” approach to his drumming. But on ‘With The Beatles ‘, he freakin’ loses it! He’s hitting hard and furious throughout, the cymbals sound like they’re about to fall over in many places, it’s some of his best drumming ever, period. This album, for me, is when The Beatles first constructed a certain foundation rhythmically that would be present through all of their remaining works, and much of the credit has to go to Ringo for getting the party started.
Perhaps some the “underrated” talk stems from the fact that this album wasn’t issued in the United States as a cohesive record until long after The Beatles broke up. Myself, being in Canada, was fortunate to have the ‘Beatlemania – With The Beatles ‘ album which has the identical cover and track listing as the British version, but Capitol U.S. spread out the recordings into more than one compilation, which was most unfortunate for they got a very obscured view of one of the greatest Rock ‘N’ Roll albums ever produced by anyone in the U.S. On the song ‘Hold Me Tight ‘, I’m not sure why many are so down on it either, it’s certainly not Paul’s best vocal performance (not his worst either), but the song sounds great to my ears. It’s almost a rewrite of ‘I’ll Get You ‘ for it employs a lot of the same hooks and ploys, but much heavier and again, Ringo’s drumming is out of this world on it…:-)
The following people thank Billy Rhythm for this post:
vonbontee2.09am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline For me Hold Me Tight sucks, blows and, well is just unlistenable garbage (i’ll keep it clean). I hate the thing, hate, hate, hate. I’ve said it before but aside from Paul the others are just not interested enough to make it do anything, the rhythm track slows and speeds up whenever it damn well chooses, and it goes on for what seems an eternity. I find nothing to endure it to me and every time i hear it i hate it a little bit more.
Of all the songs the Beatles released this is the one i will skip without question if not playing the album thru and when doing that i have to grin and bear it even before it comes on.
18 months later Paul unleashed That Means A Lot : they re-recorded it when the first attempt didn’t work and tried again, thankfully they realised it wasn’t working so they ditched it, sparing me the hell of having to listen to it on Help ! – if only that had happened for Hold Me Tight on With The Beatles . Otherwise the album is amazing.
Yes im off-topic and repeating myself but its nice to completely trash the song every once in a while.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
vonbontee"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
2.33am
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline ^ And well worth a review to start the New Year off right 
I must say it is one of the tracks that doesn’t do much for me.
==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
5.24am
22 December 2013
Offline meanmistermustard said
For me Hold Me Tight sucks, blows and, well is just unlistenable garbage (i’ll keep it clean). I hate the thing, hate, hate, hate. I’ve said it before but aside from Paul the others are just not interested enough to make it do anything, the rhythm track slows and speeds up whenever it damn well chooses, and it goes on for what seems an eternity. I find nothing to endure it to me and every time i hear it i hate it a little bit more.Of all the songs the Beatles released this is the one i will skip without question if not playing the album thru and when doing that i have to grin and bear it even before it comes on.
18 months later Paul unleashed That Means A Lot : they re-recorded it when the first attempt didn’t work and tried again, thankfully they realised it wasn’t working so they ditched it, sparing me the hell of having to listen to it on Help ! – if only that had happened for Hold Me Tight on With The Beatles . Otherwise the album is amazing.
Yes im off-topic and repeating myself but its nice to completely trash the song every once in a while.
Haha, won’t get much of an argument from me on ‘That Means Alot’, it sounds like something that might’ve been useful as a Peter & Gordon B-Side, but ‘Hold Me Tight ‘ doesn’t quite belong in the same ilk, in my opinion. If ‘With The Beatles ‘ were to “simulate” a 1963 live performance by the group, ‘Hold Me Tight ‘ might be a brief diversion by them (as Paul croons away to his many female admirers) whilst Mal Evans rolls out the piano for George Martin to make a guest appearance on the next song, ‘You Really Got A Hold On Me ‘. Let me ask you this, is ‘Hold Me Tight ‘ such a big “let down” for you because it’s sandwiched inbetween two of their best 1963 (and quite possibly beyond) performances in ‘Roll Over Beethoven ‘ & ‘You Really Got A Hold On Me ‘? I mean, do those two (and the other tracks’ excellence) make the song look worse than it really is”?…:-)
11.17am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline 
Billy Rhythm said
meanmistermustard said
For me Hold Me Tight sucks, blows and, well is just unlistenable garbage (i’ll keep it clean). I hate the thing, hate, hate, hate. I’ve said it before but aside from Paul the others are just not interested enough to make it do anything, the rhythm track slows and speeds up whenever it damn well chooses, and it goes on for what seems an eternity. I find nothing to endure it to me and every time i hear it i hate it a little bit more.Of all the songs the Beatles released this is the one i will skip without question if not playing the album thru and when doing that i have to grin and bear it even before it comes on.
18 months later Paul unleashed That Means A Lot : they re-recorded it when the first attempt didn’t work and tried again, thankfully they realised it wasn’t working so they ditched it, sparing me the hell of having to listen to it on Help ! – if only that had happened for Hold Me Tight on With The Beatles . Otherwise the album is amazing.
Yes im off-topic and repeating myself but its nice to completely trash the song every once in a while.
Haha, won’t get much of an argument from me on ‘That Means Alot’, it sounds like something that might’ve been useful as a Peter & Gordon B-Side, but ‘Hold Me Tight ‘ doesn’t quite belong in the same ilk, in my opinion. If ‘With The Beatles ‘ were to “simulate” a 1963 live performance by the group, ‘Hold Me Tight ‘ might be a brief diversion by them (as Paul croons away to his many female admirers) whilst Mal Evans rolls out the piano for George Martin to make a guest appearance on the next song, ‘You Really Got A Hold On Me ‘. Let me ask you this, is ‘Hold Me Tight ‘ such a big “let down” for you because it’s sandwiched inbetween two of their best 1963 (and quite possibly beyond) performances in ‘Roll Over Beethoven ‘ & ‘You Really Got A Hold On Me ‘? I mean, do those two (and the other tracks’ excellence) make the song look worse than it really is”?…:-)
No, HMT is a let down because its s**t (in my opinion). Having Roll Over Beethoven and You Really Got A Hold On Me pre and post (respectively) results in a) getting me thru such crap (you can lose yourself in the sheer joy of ROB whilst having such a good song after means i can hold my breath knowing something so good is coming – a reward in a way for the suffering) and b) they don’t get pulled as the two tracks surrounding HMT are so strong. Two great tracks don’t make a poor track better, they just stand strong beside bearing the load.
Looking at the 8 originals 3 are very ordinary lyrically and recording-wise: Little Child & I Wanna Be Tour Man are good due to the sheer energy of them – proof that the 4 Beatles joy and exuberance can make filler very engaging (evident also in When I Get Home on the ‘AHDN ‘ LP). Hold Me Tight on the other hand splutters along for 2 1/2 minutes with Paul on the throttle trying to get it going whilst the others musical souls are just not in it – the backing calls of John and George are so half-hearted.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
12.01pm
17 October 2013
Offline Hi MMM
I get it, you really hate this song with a passion and no one can say you shouldn’t…. personal taste and all that.…………. I read that Paul and John have disparaged it themselves. But play it loud and it sounds better……….. However ‘bad’ it is I always ask myself could I have done as well or better? Could you?
I didn’t know that a decent band like Stackridge (I saw them a few times live in the early 70’s great sense of humour), would chose to cover a song like this.
Anyway just for you……
It’s not the worst song in the world……….That distinction goes to that song……”Little boxes on a hillside all made out of ticky-tacky’
1.43am
15 January 2014
Offline Sure, not all the songs of equality on this album. With the Beatles, however, has become my favourite album to listen to while I’m running. I think their cover songs are great, though to be honest I haven’t heard any of the originals except Roll Over Beethoven . I like playing tennis to these tracks as well. Not sure why, but it is nice for background music.
You know my name you know number too
You know my name you know my number
What's up with you?
3.10am
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline Beatles in the Blood said
I do not get the hate for this album, it’s definitely not their worst! There are too many underrated songs on here also, Don’t Bother Me , a great overlooked song, Please Mr. Postman and You’ve Really goy a Hold on Me. Fantastic covers. So, what are you’re thoughts on the album.
Hate? From where?
I won’t comment further except to say I always find it difficult to accept that ANY Beatles album is underrated.
Some of Ringo’s (like Time Takes Time and Vertical Man) maybe, the Beatles? – no, sorry, don’t think so.
==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
3.32am
Moderators
Members
Reviewers
20 August 2013
Offline trcanberra said
Some of Ringo’s (like Time Takes Time and Vertical Man) maybe, the Beatles? – no, sorry, don’t think so.
So, trc, are these some purchasing suggestions for when I get my next Amazon cards? 
They will stretch past George cds. 
Can buy Joe love! Amazon | iTunes
Check here for "how do I do this" guide to the forum. 
(2017) 
(2018)
6.52am
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline Ahhh Girl said
trcanberra said
Some of Ringo’s (like Time Takes Time and Vertical Man) maybe, the Beatles? – no, sorry, don’t think so.
So, trc, are these some purchasing suggestions for when I get my next Amazon cards?
They will stretch past George cds.
Heh – well, since you DO seem to like Ringo. I have also heard Ringo Rama is good, though haven’t listened to all of it yet. I’d rank them in the order above; so Time Takes Time best, then Vertical Man and finally Ringo Rama.
==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
2.59pm
6 February 2014
Offline Sadly, I am not too fond of this album. Don’t get me wrong, it’s good, but just not my favourite.
5.07pm
28 January 2013
Offline I think the only reason why this album is often underated is because compared to the later beatles albums they’re all much better. Abbey Road , White Album , and Sgt. Pepper are the most common favorite Beatle albums. I like the early Beatles more than the later Beatles because of their good relationships within the group. Plus Johns voice had a rocker tone which I prefer and I enjoyed their radio sessions an such. Well rant over I guess.
And if you saw my love, I'll love her to.
2 Guest(s)